I once read in Scientific American that some college students had tried to calculate whether you actually got less wet by running in the rain to make it inside quicker, or whether you got equally wet no matter how fast you went. To make calculations simpler, the assumed a constant rate of rain and no wind. Under those conditions, at any given time, a given volume of air always contains the same number of raindrops (which are assumed to be of equal size). Instead of an irregularly shaped human being, they based their calculations on a cuboid of about the same size, say, to make calculations easier. (I don’t remember the dimensions they used, but, since I’m more used to the metric system, I’ll assume 2×0.5×0.5 meters, which gives an area of 1 square meter for each vertical face). Lets assume that each liter (0.001 cubic meter) of air contains 1 raindrop, and that each raindrop is 1 ml, which comes out to 1 liter of rain per cubic meter of air. If we say that our cuboid person has to go 100 meters in the rain, he will go through 100 cubic meters of air and get 100 liters of water on him, regardless of how fast he goes. So, their conclusion was that it doesn’t matter how fast you go. You always get equally wet.
Now, we know instinctively and by experience that that’s not right. There’s a reason people start running to get inside when it rains. So what’s wrong with the calculation?
pschearer Premium Member over 3 years ago
What?! The cat isn’t staying?
Imagine over 3 years ago
The self-closing mechanism costs extra.
Darth_Walrus_1975 over 3 years ago
Needs more work on it.
rekam Premium Member over 3 years ago
“Harm can come to a young lad.” (The Goon Show)
Aussie Down Under over 3 years ago
What goes up must come down.
LiamG.P over 3 years ago
I laughed, actually
Ivy Valory Premium Member over 3 years ago
Fump … back to the drawing board.
LookingGlass Premium Member over 3 years ago
Close but, no CEEgar!!
Gent over 3 years ago
Now try running away from a hungry predator while holding that heavy thing.
Enter.Name.Here over 3 years ago
The creation of the dumbell, both the weight lift tool and the user.
Straker UFO over 3 years ago
Wasn’t this gag done before in one of the early B.C. strips?
BigDaveGlass over 3 years ago
Needs work, I would put a peg through the shaft for starters….
Doug K over 3 years ago
Maybe the “fump” in the head will give him another (better) idea – knock some sense into him).
… or … he could become the “Carrot Top” of his time.
Skeptical Meg over 3 years ago
Agree… umbrella is a pretty funny word.
jagedlo over 3 years ago
It was a good idea in theory, the execution just needed some work!
Ron Dunn Premium Member over 3 years ago
The “fump” strikes again.
Purple People Eater over 3 years ago
I once read in Scientific American that some college students had tried to calculate whether you actually got less wet by running in the rain to make it inside quicker, or whether you got equally wet no matter how fast you went. To make calculations simpler, the assumed a constant rate of rain and no wind. Under those conditions, at any given time, a given volume of air always contains the same number of raindrops (which are assumed to be of equal size). Instead of an irregularly shaped human being, they based their calculations on a cuboid of about the same size, say, to make calculations easier. (I don’t remember the dimensions they used, but, since I’m more used to the metric system, I’ll assume 2×0.5×0.5 meters, which gives an area of 1 square meter for each vertical face). Lets assume that each liter (0.001 cubic meter) of air contains 1 raindrop, and that each raindrop is 1 ml, which comes out to 1 liter of rain per cubic meter of air. If we say that our cuboid person has to go 100 meters in the rain, he will go through 100 cubic meters of air and get 100 liters of water on him, regardless of how fast he goes. So, their conclusion was that it doesn’t matter how fast you go. You always get equally wet.
Now, we know instinctively and by experience that that’s not right. There’s a reason people start running to get inside when it rains. So what’s wrong with the calculation?
Michael G. over 3 years ago
“The wet head is dead!”
vaughnrl2003 Premium Member over 3 years ago
Lesson learned. Umbrellas are dangerous. Stick to slickers. (Do people have “slickers” any more?)
Nyckname over 3 years ago
Meanwhile, that high pitched sound you hear is Wiley, who was caught outside.
jango over 3 years ago
That’s using his head!
ChessPirate over 3 years ago
[BUMB!] “Er… Shoot!”
KEA over 3 years ago
inventing slapstick
Alberta Oil Premium Member over 3 years ago
And after all these years that closing mechanism still is not perfect
michael3114 over 3 years ago
I call it a dumbbell.
harf59 over 3 years ago
“Honey, the forecast calls for rain. You’d better bring your hilarious with you.” I don’t see it catching on.
TysonJason over 3 years ago
He Just needed one extra bolt
raybarb44 over 3 years ago
Needs work…..
JasonRivera over 3 years ago
It’s a one wheel if he got one more wheel
GaryR1 over 3 years ago
Needs to have a little more development, that’s all.
cuzinron47 over 3 years ago
The good news is it will fair much better in high winds.
Snolep over 3 years ago
Looks like something I would do.
zeexenon over 3 years ago
Works for me, Axle.
sarahbowl1 Premium Member over 3 years ago
They underestimate his invention abilities, don’t they!
Buckeye67 over 3 years ago
Back to the drawing board.
JesseLouisMartinez over 3 years ago
So do I
WCraft Premium Member over 3 years ago
Must be tough for a really long rain storm; holding that thing up…
R.R.Bedford over 3 years ago
A the old bumbershoot gag, now if I ever see a bumber I know enough to shoot it.
paullp Premium Member over 3 years ago
Something new — a comic that comes with its own comment.