You don't think it has anything to do with the fact that the butter side is heavier do you? Just speculating...but I'm not the scientific type.
I think you've probably hit the nail on the head. There are two commonly-adopted solutions:
That makes perfect sense to me... 
But what if the cat would rather have margerine?
According to the Buttered_cat_paradox, the cat is not supposed to be able to eat the spread.
Attached but not attracted to the cat- er- ing perhaps .
The buttered side of the toast would have better aerodynamic qualities. Think of it as a heat shield during re-entry.
So that's why the shuttle lands that way up.
You don't think it has anything to do with the fact that the butter side is heavier do you? Just speculating...but I'm not the scientific type.
Agreed. I can't imagine the heavily-buttered and goodness-knows-what-have-you-Dagwood side wanting to keep flipping over. But it probably couldn't, even if it wanted to, because by that time it has reached the floor, and anyway the aforementioned 'space-shuttle aerodynamic re-entry theory' means that the heavy side remains face down.
Why don't we call this 'Morphy's Law' in honour of all toast-eating chess players who take the time to ponder these incredibly important scientific phenomena?
Is butter heavier than bread?
For example: The planet Saturn is big and massive but if you could find a bathtub of water large enough - it would float. So - if - you had a big tub of butter would the bread sink or float. If it sinks then bread is heavier and the buttered side would be the "light side" of bread. Then the bread side of the butter would be hea-vy.
Not sure if the planet/bread analogy is comparable. Adding anything to one side of a slice of bread surely would make it heavier on that side. It's not the same principle as a buoyant object floating in a liquid... but is interesting nevertheless. I was also thinking in terms of the slice having margarine plus jam, peanut butter, or some other heavier substance on it as well. The piece of bread in a large tub of butter would eventually sink as it absorbs more and more butter (assuming the butter is melted of course) due to its porous nature. But we digress...
Not sure if the planet/bread analogy is comparable. Adding anything to one side of a slice of bread surely would make it heavier on that side. It's not the same principle as a buoyant object floating in a liquid... but is interesting nevertheless. I was also thinking in terms of the slice having margarine plus jam, peanut butter, or some other heavier substance on it as well. The piece of bread in a large tub of butter would eventually sink as it absorbs more and more butter (assuming the butter is melted of course) due to its porous nature. But we digress...
A don't know that this is true. Even if we can agree that the jam and peanut butter are more dense than the melted butter (which I'm not sure is the case), as the bread is absorbing the melted butter air is being displaced. Presumably some of this air will escape sideways through the crust, and more through any uncovered portion of the surface of the bread but surely an air bubble will also invariably form and become trapped under the peanut butter and jam which will add quite a bit of bouancy.
If you only cut the table legs to ½ of their height the toast will do ¼ turn instead of a half turn and will land on its edge. I'd expect this to result in butter side down ~50% of the time, maybe more because of the rotational momentum. Slightly less than ½ of the length might mitigate this a little more effectively.
Doubling the table's height seems like it might work better, but you'd of course need sufficient clearance by way of vaulted ceilings in order for it to work. It would also require the chair legs to be lengthened which begs the question of whether I'd do a half turn or a full turn when I inevitably fell out of the chair....
1. put the toast butter-side-down on the table
paul211 wrote:
I would use a small plate; this may reduce the number of toast drops on the floor.
or break the plate as well?
2. strap the toast (butter-side-up) onto the back of a cat
paul211 wrote:
Not sure where you put the cat on the table, but I guess it does not really matter. Just curious what would cause the cat to drop from the table?
I would push it off. It has no business being there.
...
When you're right, you're right!
Surely the butter-side-down toast would cushion the plate's landing.
Surely the butter-side-down toast would cushion the plate's landing.
Only if it lands perfectly horizontally or the floor is not too hard - but it's an idea for a new line in unbreakable, butter toasted, crockery.
We all know that iron sinks, well the specific gravity or iron is 7.7 or seven times heavier than water.
So does Hornbeam (aka ironwood)!
I think you are condoning cruelty to animals artfizz and I am going to report you to the authorities 
The cat is certainly non-consentual in the butter/toast experiment and who will pay for the medical bills if it breaks a leg or something?
I think you are condoning cruelty to animals artfizz and I am going to report you to the authorities
The cat is certainly non-consentual in the butter/toast experiment and who will pay for the medical bills if it breaks a leg or something?
Let's see if I've got this straight: you're proposing to let the cat stay on the table?
We have two cats. By putting a piece of buttered toast on each of their backs, they can feed off each other.
You don't think it has anything to do with the fact that the butter side is heavier do you? Just speculating...but I'm not the scientific type.