Possumblog

I have one. I'm starting kind of an outdoors games for small woodland creatures. You know, lumberjack contests, that sort of thing. I've got kind of a supply question - do you know the average tonnage of lumber that can be thrown a given distance by small furry mammals?

In short, how much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

Good question Mr. Dan. I was going to ask about my cold medications but woodchucks are much more interesting.

Thank you for your question, Skinnydan. As you know, med school also requires a good deal of lumberjacking and marmot chasing, so I am quite familiar with this conundrum.

In short, the question is moot, being that woodchucks cannot chuck wood. Chimpanzees are much more adept at this, although they do tend to get very upset and chuck not only wood, but other things. Unpleasant things. Such as, for instance, Helen Thomas.

Possibly the best animal for this task are a flock of bikini-clad Swedish girls. They can't really chuck wood very well, but, you know, who cares.

That's just the sort of answer I've come to expect around here. It seems the University of Equatorial Guinea Medical School and Hamster Training Facility taught you well.

I suppose the question wasn't worth much either, so...

Hmm--I sense disappointment in your reply, Dan. I must confess that I am much more of a practical person, and theory was never my strong point in school.

However, in order to keep from harming my reputation, I will attempt in my own poor way to tease out a more nuanced answer.

a) We will assume that woodchucks can chuck wood.

b) We will further assume an average weight for adult woodchucks to be 6.8 pounds, and that the average foreleg length is 4.23 inches, extended. (Based on Johnson's Taxonometrical Guide to North American Mammals.)

c) We will further assume only adult North American woodchucks will be used in this exercise.

d) We will further assume that woodchucks can comfortably lift 54.6% of their body weight, if the hind limbs are adequately braced.

First, the weight of wood (or, in fact, any material) that can be lifted by each woodchuck is 54.6%(6.8 pounds)= 1,461 pounds. Now then, with a lever arm of 4.23 inches, we multiply that times the weight: 1,461lbs(4.23in)=7,980in/lbs.

If we now assume that each woodchuck can utilize his forelimbs in an unimpeded fashion to make full use of the available thrust, for any given distance (x), the time available to throw the weight is equal to (x)7,980in/lbs (t, where t is equal to 4.1milliseconds/gram) and divide by 4.23.

Therefore, a North American woodchuck--IF IT COULD CHUCK WOOD, which it can't--could chuck approximately 600 board feet of lumber/foot/second.

Dr. Possum must have skipped school the day they covered math and science.

(1 + F) = +/- sqrt(1.0457/1.012)

therefore,

F = 0.016513844105 or -2.016513844105

or about 10 feet.

Mr. Anderson, I will NOT be mocked! Certainly, I might not have the best grasp of theoretical timber tossing, but FACTS, sir, do not lie! The answer stands!

And Vachon, I think you forgot to carry the 5.

On second thought, I reverse my earlier comment. THIS is really the sort of answer I've come to expect.

However, I have to admit it was a trick question. Woodchucks, despite their misleading name, have a genetic allergy to all wood cellulose. Woodchucks cannot actually chuck wood due to their hypersensitive histamine reaction.

Beavers are the woodworking members of the animal family for a good reason - there's no need to keep any Benadryl around. Plus they're non-union.

Although Wally and Eddie Haskell often bother them, and cause them to lose track of time or break a lamp or something.

I thought the answer to Dan's question was "African or European?"

Oh, you silly girl, with your low math skills--we're not trying to calculate the airspeed velocity of a sparrow carrying a coconut!

I didn't know there were either European or African coconuts.

Well, that's why people come here--to learn such things! Don't feel bad about it. But there is a great world of knowledge out there, and even more so when you have an active imagination.

But what if it is inactive or inattentive?

As we have all come to know by know, that depends on what your definition of "is" is.