Finally inheriting the title after 70 years.
[B] applause! It is an item of regalia. I wonder whose it could possibly be?
[R] Not an ear-ring.
[T] It is unique!
[R] Not an ear-ring.
[T] It is unique!
[R] applause! Not a sceptre.
[C] The audience returns to embogglement. Not a "naval piercing", which sounds like a hazard female crew members might face on the high seas.
[S] Not a Prince Albert.
[C] The audience returns to embogglement. Not a "naval piercing", which sounds like a hazard female crew members might face on the high seas.
[S] Not a Prince Albert.
[SM] Yes, the Sovereign's Orb. Have this genuine replica in real gold-coloured metal and diamond-look acrylic, which plays "Colonel Bogey" when you wind it up by the cross.
[absence] Yes A highly speculative yes, that
[wordy] No. A geek in the audience sniggers and claps, but no-one else gets it
[p?] Nope.
[wordy] No. A geek in the audience sniggers and claps, but no-one else gets it
[p?] Nope.
[computery] Yes! An inspired guess; loud applaus from the audience, and even a couple of whoops.
[peripheral] No. Applause abruptly stops, hint hint. Besides, that would be a physical object so it would probably be mineral.
A winner
[Computer games] Yes, that was the AOTC. Please go to Steam and fill out a pre-order bonus add-on form for your exclusive premium-content custom baton.
[T] Yes, metallic.
[R] Does not need processing, having already had all the processing it needs.
[R] Does not need processing, having already had all the processing it needs.
[B] On the Earth, but not on earth.
[T] (Sends Mycroft off to investigate. Mycroft returns, shaking his head.) Not art.
[SM] Not a particle collider.
[T] (Sends Mycroft off to investigate. Mycroft returns, shaking his head.) Not art.
[SM] Not a particle collider.
[SM](The audience is amused by the idea of a moistened bint holding this thing aloft.) Not Excalibur.
[C] Umm...broadly similar, depending on how "size" is defined.
[SM] The Ukrainians have not attacked it.
[SM] The Ukrainians have not attacked it.
[SM] As far as I can tell, he has never done a video about it. I'm sure he could, though, and one day he might.
The laser display overheated ...
So here is the mystery voice to tell listeners the subject on the card.
This is basically ANIMAL, so have at it there.
This is basically ANIMAL, so have at it there.
[Simons Mith] Not alive. Not a crustacean, either.
[Tuj] Doesn't begin with 'P'.
[Raak] Not water-dwelling.
[Boolbar] Cannot fly.
[Tuj] Doesn't begin with 'P'.
[Raak] Not water-dwelling.
[Boolbar] Cannot fly.
[Rosie] Yes. The audience wake up.
[Raak] Yes. Some claps breaks out in the audience.
[Simons Mith] No sitableupon, at least not in intended use.
[Tuj] Yes! Audience claps vigorously.
[Raak] Yes. Some claps breaks out in the audience.
[Simons Mith] No sitableupon, at least not in intended use.
[Tuj] Yes! Audience claps vigorously.
Does it have a misleading name?
[e.g. the disgraceful lack of toad in the toad in the hole, the misleading provenance (and lack of pork content) of so-called Hamburgers etc. Don't even get me started on Rocky Mountain oysters.]
[Radox the Green] Not soup.
[Simons Mith] After reference to Mycroft, the answer is "No".
[Boolbar] Yes! Spontaneous hoots break out.
[Tuj] Yes, it could have been enjoyed by Napoleon, and may well have been. More muted applause is heard as the audience try and work this out.
[Raak] Yes you can eat it in a restaurant, as long as it's on the menu. Some shouts from the audience.
[Chalky] Doesn't have to be kept cool, but Raak's restaurant probably does store it there. Audience is generally approving.
[Simons Mith] After reference to Mycroft, the answer is "No".
[Boolbar] Yes! Spontaneous hoots break out.
[Tuj] Yes, it could have been enjoyed by Napoleon, and may well have been. More muted applause is heard as the audience try and work this out.
[Raak] Yes you can eat it in a restaurant, as long as it's on the menu. Some shouts from the audience.
[Chalky] Doesn't have to be kept cool, but Raak's restaurant probably does store it there. Audience is generally approving.
[Rosie] Yes! whoops and hollers. A small protest by two Vegans based on a mistranslation starts in a corner.
[Simons Mith] Mycroft says NO.
[CdM] Not, it's fresh.
[Raak] Yes! Swine it is. Applause and such.
[Simons Mith] Mycroft says NO.
[CdM] Not, it's fresh.
[Raak] Yes! Swine it is. Applause and such.
[Radox the Green] Not pig's trotters.
[Simons Mith] Not bacon.
[Ra(a)k] Mycroft says "This is a dead python. It is not."
[Simons Mith] Not bacon.
[Ra(a)k] Mycroft says "This is a dead python. It is not."
[Rosie] Yes! It is most commonly found on a plate and eaten with knife and fork.
[Raak] No. Attention is drifting, some of the audience are arguing about the relative merits of jerked beef and jerked pork.
[Radox the Green] Not sweet and sour pork. Audience restive.
[Raak] No. Attention is drifting, some of the audience are arguing about the relative merits of jerked beef and jerked pork.
[Radox the Green] Not sweet and sour pork. Audience restive.
[Simons Mith] Good suggestion, but not quite what is the AOTC. The audience are appreciative.
[Rosie] That's even better than the previous. But it's not the AOTC. Audience holds its breath.
[Raak] No, not salami. Some disgusted looks from the epicureans in the audience.
[Chalky] No, nobody has suggested "sausage" yet. (And if I were you, I wouldn't).
[Raak] No, it doesn't come in a can. Shouts of rage from the epicureans.
[Rosie] That's even better than the previous. But it's not the AOTC. Audience holds its breath.
[Raak] No, not salami. Some disgusted looks from the epicureans in the audience.
[Chalky] No, nobody has suggested "sausage" yet. (And if I were you, I wouldn't).
[Raak] No, it doesn't come in a can. Shouts of rage from the epicureans.
Has the AOTC been processed in some manner?
It's not preserved; it doesn't have to be kept cool; and it is not ham or salami (or any kind of sausage). I feel like I must be missing something obvious, but I am stuck.
Lard?
Not preserved: check. Doesn't have to be kept in the fridge (but likely would be in a restaurant kitchen): check. Eaten with a knife and fork: er...
[Raak] Not prosciutto, but some appreciation from the audience.
[Rosie] Not a slice of bacon. Someone in the audience has produced a foldable diagram of a pig and is attempting to make a point by pointing at it.
[Radox the Green] Yes, it does have a foreign name. Cries of "Sacre bleu !" and some laughter from the audience.
[CdM] Mycroft is consulted and states, "Between the fridge and the plate there is preparation. It's called 'cuisine' in the places I patronise, and may be classed as having been ... 'processed'."
[Chalky] Back on the right track, but not right yet. Some audience applause.
[Raak] Not lard - I think you realised that...
[Simons Mith] No. Hoots from the epicureans.
[Rosie] Not a slice of bacon. Someone in the audience has produced a foldable diagram of a pig and is attempting to make a point by pointing at it.
[Radox the Green] Yes, it does have a foreign name. Cries of "Sacre bleu !" and some laughter from the audience.
[CdM] Mycroft is consulted and states, "Between the fridge and the plate there is preparation. It's called 'cuisine' in the places I patronise, and may be classed as having been ... 'processed'."
[Chalky] Back on the right track, but not right yet. Some audience applause.
[Raak] Not lard - I think you realised that...
[Simons Mith] No. Hoots from the epicureans.
[Omnes] The reply to Radox above should be interpreted as an AOTC that is not in English. So it's not spare ribs, not a meat pie floater, but could be a kebab (although it isn't).
[Chalky] Not a confit.
[Raak] Refrigeration is a bit of a red herring when taken to such lengths. I have known this to come from the pig within a day or so, though not in the UK, but modern practice will presumably demand tracing the chain of cold between slaughter and serving.
[Tuj] No, it isn't Spanish.
[Raak] Refrigeration is a bit of a red herring when taken to such lengths. I have known this to come from the pig within a day or so, though not in the UK, but modern practice will presumably demand tracing the chain of cold between slaughter and serving.
[Tuj] No, it isn't Spanish.
[Tuj] No, it isn't French.
[Raak] No, not offal.
Audience beginning to discuss restaurants in the neighbourhood.
[Raak] No, not offal.
Audience beginning to discuss restaurants in the neighbourhood.
[Simons Mith] Lovely pun, if you refer to beef Wellington, but not that at all.
[Raak] Often served with the dish, but no alcohol is used in cooking or preparing it.
[CdM] JA! it is German. The audience cheer and some ejaculations of "Herr Ober!" and Bier oder Wein, eins muss sein" are heard.
[Radox the Green] Very good! If it wasn't for being Italian and made out of veal, that could well have been the answer. Hint: the AOTC does have a veal version as well. The audience are terribly excited.
[Raak] Often served with the dish, but no alcohol is used in cooking or preparing it.
[CdM] JA! it is German. The audience cheer and some ejaculations of "Herr Ober!" and Bier oder Wein, eins muss sein" are heard.
[Radox the Green] Very good! If it wasn't for being Italian and made out of veal, that could well have been the answer. Hint: the AOTC does have a veal version as well. The audience are terribly excited.
[Chalky] I was thinking the same, but then I saw in Wikipedia that "wurst" does include some non-sausage meat products.
Calling Dr Raak
[Raak] Could I ask a major favour? I have a mathematical problem I think I've solved, but I need someone with a mathematical head to give a thumb-up or a thumbs down, and maybe to insert a few equations translating some of my prose into mathematical language. Would you be willing to help out? I know you've done the odd bit of recreation mathing in the past - there was your paper on Culture orbitals for example. This is another in that vein. I have found your professional email address online, but I wouldn't just fire off a random message without checking first.
[Raak] Not made from the head of a pig.
[Chalky] Yes! A schnitzel it is. I was actually looking for "Schweineschnitzel" as schnitzels can be veal, but that will do.
[Chalky] Yes! A schnitzel it is. I was actually looking for "Schweineschnitzel" as schnitzels can be veal, but that will do.
Your order of a finely beaten baton fried in chapelure is now presented to you.
maths!
[Raak] Sent. Thank you ever so. It's just an HTML file - should read okay on most browsers. I haven't done anything especially fancy.
[Rosie] Human? YES
[Raak] An individual? YES
[Tuj] Alive? YES
[Bismarck] Domestic or Domesticated? BOTH
[SM] Legged? YES
[Raak] An individual? YES
[Tuj] Alive? YES
[Bismarck] Domestic or Domesticated? BOTH
[SM] Legged? YES
... the business end
[Raak] British? YES
[Tuj] A known player of Mornington Crescent? YES! * Audience whoops and cheers*
[Rosie] A politician? NO
[Tuj] A known player of Mornington Crescent? YES! * Audience whoops and cheers*
[Rosie] A politician? NO
... easy does it
[Raak] Appeared on ISIHAC? NO
[Rosie] One of us? YES! * much laughter from the Audience *
[Rosie] One of us? YES! * much laughter from the Audience *
[Rosie] Misleading moniker? YES!
* Audience goes wild *
[Tuj] Does it begin with P? NO
* Audience unwilds *
* Audience goes wild *
[Tuj] Does it begin with P? NO
* Audience unwilds *
Done
[Tuj] Not me
* points at him *
[Rosie] YES! 'Tis you my friend
* Audience cheers as a leek-shaped baton changes hands *
* points at him *
[Rosie] YES! 'Tis you my friend
* Audience cheers as a leek-shaped baton changes hands *
Fame at last
I'm rather flattered.
Well, the next one is probably a bit more difficult.
It's ABSTRACT
(Simons Mith) An idiom? Can be used as an idiom. So a sort of qualified YES.
(Tuj) Pinitial? Not in any language that I know, so NO.
(Tuj) Pinitial? Not in any language that I know, so NO.
(Tuj) The AOTC contains no reference to time but it is nevertheless time-dependent. Hope that makes some sort of sense.
(SM) Related to fiction? NO, it's part of reality.
(Tuj) Film? Not that I've heard of, though I know bugger all about films. According to Google there is a film of this name so the answer, strictly, is YES.
(Bis) Sky involved? Could be, so YES.
(Tuj) Film? Not that I've heard of, though I know bugger all about films. According to Google there is a film of this name so the answer, strictly, is YES.
(Bis) Sky involved? Could be, so YES.
Does it appear in the Bible?
[Rosie] I'd a feeling that might happen, but figured a qualifier wouldn't be too useful
(Raak) NO, not blue sky, literal or metaphoric.
(Tuj) In the Bible? Almost certainly, so YES. But again, I am not fully acquainted with The Book.
(RtG) Weather phenomenon? NO.
(Tuj) In the Bible? Almost certainly, so YES. But again, I am not fully acquainted with The Book.
(RtG) Weather phenomenon? NO.
(Raak) Fire and brimstone? NO.
(Tuj) In the mind? *a few audience members show signs of amusement* . NO. This objectively exists.
(Bis) Heaven? *audience further engrossed*. NO
(Tuj) In the mind? *a few audience members show signs of amusement* . NO. This objectively exists.
(Bis) Heaven? *audience further engrossed*. NO
The place, somewhere in the Earth's surface, where (mathematicians assure us) the horizontal wind velocity is zero?
YES - BISMARCK HAS IT! The AOTC is actually The Night but that's near enough or we'll be here, er, all night. I hand you the illuminated baton - you can switch it off when the light improves.
I reckon this is a THHGTTG "Thumb" in disguise. Anyway, the next card has something that is ABSTRACT but could be argued to be MINERAL. If you look over there, you can see Nadine Dorries performing a mime of the subject in a monokini, as the Mystery Voice announces the answer to the audience.
Sandwich Light Vessel? Nope, just some Tupperware
[Tuj] No. We are p-empty.
[Rosie] Not stoning of any kind.
[Chalky] No Midas touch here.
[Raak] Not a rock of any kind, nor a roll.
[Rosie] Not stoning of any kind.
[Chalky] No Midas touch here.
[Raak] Not a rock of any kind, nor a roll.
The massed choirs of the Mothers' Union will now sing the shipping forecast to the tune of "Deutschland über alles".
[Rosie] No. Please pay attention.
[Simons Mith] Not a phrase, saying, meme, idiom, slang expression or quotation, except insofar as any arrangement of words as the AOTC be a phrase, saying, etc.
[Tuj] Not geographical. Some of the audience shows signs of appreciation.
[Raak] That's a miss.
[Simons Mith] Not a phrase, saying, meme, idiom, slang expression or quotation, except insofar as any arrangement of words as the AOTC be a phrase, saying, etc.
[Tuj] Not geographical. Some of the audience shows signs of appreciation.
[Raak] That's a miss.
North Utsire, South Utsire...
[Simons Mith], [Rosie] - not IN THE SLIGHTEST geographical.
[Raak] On the scale of perfect insulation to superconductivity, the AOTC is not to be found.
[Raak] On the scale of perfect insulation to superconductivity, the AOTC is not to be found.
Dogger, Cromarty and Forth...
[CdM] Yes. <>[Simons Mith] If you really want to pursue the mineral side, then yes, there is a reference to metal, though not music.
Dogger, Cromarty and Forth...
[CdM] Yes.
[Simons Mith] If you really want to pursue the mineral side, then yes, there is a reference to metal, though not music.
[Simons Mith] If you really want to pursue the mineral side, then yes, there is a reference to metal, though not music.
North-west backing slowly, showers,
[Simons Mith] No. Not meteorological either.
[Raak] No. No P's, remember.
Hint: The metal is not explicit in the AOTC. It's sort of inferred.
[Raak] No. No P's, remember.
Hint: The metal is not explicit in the AOTC. It's sort of inferred.
Nine hundred and ninety, good.
[CdM] Yes - may contain traces of brass or white metal, but it's largely iron and steel.
[Chalky] No CGI.
[Chalky] No CGI.
German Bight and Tyne and Fisher
[Raak] Cold if not working, otherwise quite hot.
[Simons Mith] Some people no doubt get turned on by the AOTC, but it isn't anything to do with emotions.
[Simons Mith] Some people no doubt get turned on by the AOTC, but it isn't anything to do with emotions.
Force eight, cyclonic, raining, poor.
[Raak] No. (The iron does form a machine of a specific type.)
Is it hypothetical?
By which I mean something like a thought experiment or philosophical concept
A nice day is fairly sure.
[Chalky] No.
[Boolbar] Yes.
[Simons Mith] A collection of machines is implied.
[Projoy] There is a connection to the arts (or one of them).
[Boolbar] Yes.
[Simons Mith] A collection of machines is implied.
[Projoy] There is a connection to the arts (or one of them).
Wasn't that something, give them a big hand.
[Boolbar] No printing.
[Simons Mith] Not telegraph, in fact not any sort of media.
[Simons Mith] Not telegraph, in fact not any sort of media.
Are these metal doohickeys, whatever they are, Preserved for the Nation or otherwise protected?
And now over to the Open Newt-fishing Championships at Rutland Water.
[Simons Mith] No, they are in use. There are a few in museums.
With only the ripple of the water and the occasional twig snapped by the camouflaged men and women engaged in this ancestral sport, one can hear the peeps and squawks of the unsuspecting newts.
[Rosie] The metal objects ARE steam engines, at least some of them are. The two remaining audience members offer polite applause. Now what is the abstract thing associated with this discovery?
Does the abstract thing apply equally to those members of the AOTC that are not steam engines?
Beclad in waders and an intense expression, Mrs Fortescue pounces and the net comes up in with not one newt but two! Perfect position and movement of the net has certainly won points from the judges.
[Raak] No. [Simons Mith] See previous answer.
Omnes: Shush!
[Rosie] No.
[Raak] That is getting a lot closer. No, but the audience likes it.
[Boolbar] No, other the evocation of travel that comes with trains.
[Raak] That is getting a lot closer. No, but the audience likes it.
[Boolbar] No, other the evocation of travel that comes with trains.
We interrupt that fascinating duel between man and amphibian to bring you an update on the age of President Biden - 29,522 days, 16 hours, and 32 minutes. These figures may change.
[Raak] [Raak bis] Well, given the slow progress on this one I was considering whether I should accept that as an answer. However I have said that there is no 'p' in the answer and therefore I have to refuse. But you're very close. Alternatively, you are very far away, it depends on your point of view.
We now proceed to our afternoon program of static, lull, and intermission.
[Raak] No.
[Raak] Not either.
[Simons Mith] Remind me to use that in the future. No.
[Raak] Not either.
[Simons Mith] Remind me to use that in the future. No.
Our next program, 'Obviously', where all those topics we all know stand to reason will be aired, will come this time on location from the top of the Clapham omnibus, and we'll be answering listener questions. This will be followed at six-thirty by News and Bother with Maureen Lipman.
[Raak] No.
[Simons Mith] No.
[Projoy] No.
Hint: the 'trainspotting' guess could have been accepted. What do aficionados do, or what is the content of their leisure activity?
[Simons Mith] No.
[Projoy] No.
Hint: the 'trainspotting' guess could have been accepted. What do aficionados do, or what is the content of their leisure activity?
This question comes from a Mrs Trellis of North Wales. She writes, "Dear Obviously, it seems quite clear that the demistrile under Hardinge's Loop conditions leads only to a stalemate. Why does nobody seem to realise this?" Well obviously Mrs Trellis, that isthe solution to more than one tricky position in the second quadrant. But since Hardinge was once a member if the Socialist Party, his games have been unanalysed for some decades.
[Projoy] Not lists of trains.
[Bismarck] Aficionados spot trains, I suppose, and the content of their leisure activity is trains, the spotting of.
A Mr R.S. of Westminster writes: "Dear elector, the past three years have been one of growing prosperity for the UK. Crime has dropped, business confidence has grown, and we are now sending refugees to Rwanda. Surely it stands to reason that you want this to continue?" We reply:to Mr R.S. that it's not quite as obvious as all that!
[Raak] Not graffiti. But you're right to say that the content of their activity is spotting trains. We're just looking for the right way of putting it. Hint - film name.
It's 8:05, which means it's time for a timecheck. It's 8:05 and 8:06 is forecasted to occur within forty seconds. Let's wait and see how that turns out, hey?
[Raak] Yes. Genteel applause.
[Rosie] Hi, Rosie, nice to see you back in the game. Please look a page or so above for the answer to your question.
[Rosie] Hi, Rosie, nice to see you back in the game. Please look a page or so above for the answer to your question.
Model trains?
Can trains be supermodels? I am trying not to picture a 4-4-2 Atlantic strutting down a catwalk
What a surprise, it's 8:06. Different day, same time, but you can't step in the same stream twice unless you run quickly. Now an interview with an elephant that has forgotten! In this case to turn up for the interview. Hello, Nelly, are you there? [Silence.]
I'm going to hand this over to VAR owing to the closeness of 'trainspotting' before, if someone doesn't get this soon.
[Raak] No, we had that one.
[Chalky] No.
[Simons Mith] Not model trains.
[Raak] No, we had that one.
[Chalky] No.
[Simons Mith] Not model trains.
[Raak] Not really.
[Projoy] Yes, there is a link.
[Projoy] Not intentionally but by extension, possibly
[Projoy] Yes, there is a link.
[Projoy] Not intentionally but by extension, possibly
And that's it folks, this program is now closed owing to further notice.
[Rosie] Nope.
Anyway the entity known as Raak is declared the winner for getting "Trainspotting", whether or not it has a 'p' in it. The AO(T)C was "Closely Observed Trains", but the direction you were coming from, allied to how close "trainspotting" actually was, as well as the usual quantity of lines drawn and etceteras, means that VAR has forced my hand. Take this telescopic baton and go on to better things.
Anyway the entity known as Raak is declared the winner for getting "Trainspotting", whether or not it has a 'p' in it. The AO(T)C was "Closely Observed Trains", but the direction you were coming from, allied to how close "trainspotting" actually was, as well as the usual quantity of lines drawn and etceteras, means that VAR has forced my hand. Take this telescopic baton and go on to better things.
[Tuj] The less misleading answer is no, not unique. (A pedant in the audience gets to his feet and begins, "Actually..." The chair cuts him off with, "We've read that Wikipedia article too, and yes, you have a point, but the answer stands.")
[Bismarck] Not that Wikipedia article.
(Addendum to previous) But on the other hand it is a definite specific thing.
(Addendum to previous) But on the other hand it is a definite specific thing.
The very original of it that the pedant above tried to bring up might indeed float. But the thing is otherwise not something that can float or sink.
Is it smaller than a toaster?
And, if Bismarck is declaring this a double round: Are you regretting your selection yet?
[B] Yes! Partly, it does represent an animal.
[B] No! It is not made of wood.
[T] It could be smaller or larger than a toaster.
[T] Not yet. Maybe if we're still on this by Christmas.
[B] No! It is not made of wood.
[T] It could be smaller or larger than a toaster.
[T] Not yet. Maybe if we're still on this by Christmas.
To get past the awkwardness of the uniqueness thing, I retroactively declare that we are looking for the unambiguously unique, physical, original object, which indeed in part represents a human, was created in a known year, etc. Clue: not many people have seen the original, and I can find no information about whether it even still exists.
[T] Is not everything art, rightly considered? No, not art, although much artifice went into making it.
Is it the photograph of the Tiananmen Square protestor and tanks?
Hail Radox! I note that the aforementioned Wikipedia has a "List of photographs considered the most important", though I'd think we're a few weeks away from recourse to that.
[T] Not Tiananmen.
[all] Not on Wikipedia's "List of photographs considered the most important".
[all] Not on Wikipedia's "List of photographs considered the most important".
Does the Mineral part of the AOTC refer to the photograph itself, or is there something mineral in the photograph we should identify?
[S] The MINERAL refers to the photograph itself, although there are things in it that are also mineral.
What springs to mind is either the photo of the Montparnasse train crash, although it doesn't have anybody on it, and the Conan Doyle 'fairies at the bottom of the garden' photo, but that has a whole person, not part of one, so I'm going to ask if the photo was taken before 1930?
[S] Not taken before 1930.
Hint:this thing is not for the purpose of being a record of anything.
Hint:this thing is not for the purpose of being a record of anything.
[P] Not Miss Napalm 1972. Remember, this was not created to be a record of something.
[RtG] Not a record sleeve, or anything else to do with "records" in that sense.
[RtG] Not a record sleeve, or anything else to do with "records" in that sense.
If not medical, how about scientific?
Very deliberately composed, but not art, and not a record of anything... Yet well-known and memeworthy. That combination's a stumper.
Sorry, I missed Boolbar and Simons:
[B] The person's face is visible. (Knowing murmurs from the audience.)
[SM] Not scientific (but approving murmurs from the audience).
[B] The person's face is visible. (Knowing murmurs from the audience.)
[SM] Not scientific (but approving murmurs from the audience).
Fanfares! Streamers! Orgies in the aisles! It is indeed Test Card F. Have this chalkboard and stuffed clown to make your very own!
[SM] It is not, but that's on me for not having any previous knowledge of a landform called Lord Hereford's Knob.
[b] It...certainly protrudes from it, but no, more localised than that.
[b] It...certainly protrudes from it, but no, more localised than that.
(That being said, there are nevertheless books, films and poems about it, or in which it features.)
[blamelewis] Aye! It is indeed Arthur’s Seat. Take these bagpipes and a sturdy pair of hiking boots, and either play to the wind or chuck them off the top, I guess.
[Tuj] Not aware of any of them going by Arthur.
[Raak] Not an individual.
[Projoy] 25 more guesses.
[Simons] Possibly, but it's not a regular part of the human diet. Also lots of people would be quite cross.
[Raak] Not an individual.
[Projoy] 25 more guesses.
[Simons] Possibly, but it's not a regular part of the human diet. Also lots of people would be quite cross.
[Bismarck] Not carnivorous
[Raak] Not a primate
[Simons] What do you call a rabbit without a tail? No in either case!
[Raak] Not a primate
[Simons] What do you call a rabbit without a tail? No in either case!
Wow, whoops!
...and on we go! Can you figure out this ABSTRACT next please?
There are connections, strongest mineral, but they're probably safer not mentioned.
The trackside officials gather to discuss Simons Mith's reaction time
[R] No!
[B] No! *mutters, booing, some of the audience leave*
[B] No! *mutters, booing, some of the audience leave*
[R] No! Well, not that I'm aware of - that's the trouble with conceptual art, in theory someone could have declared it to be so...
[B] No!
[B] No!
[g] I'd say ephemeral Yes!, time-bound No!
This is certainly debatable, and indeed the audience are doing so amongst themselves.
This is certainly debatable, and indeed the audience are doing so amongst themselves.
[RTG] No!
[g] No! or, by a certain reading of that sentence, Yes! *the audience mutter amongst themselves about different meanings of the word 'act'*
[R] No!
[g] No! or, by a certain reading of that sentence, Yes! *the audience mutter amongst themselves about different meanings of the word 'act'*
[R] No!
[B] No!
[R] I think No! is the clearest answer here, though there's certainly an interpretation of that question which could yield a Yes!.*the audience, clearly a pleasantly diverse group of thinkers, politely interlocute about the meanings the words "assembly" and "together" can have*
[R] I think No! is the clearest answer here, though there's certainly an interpretation of that question which could yield a Yes!.*the audience, clearly a pleasantly diverse group of thinkers, politely interlocute about the meanings the words "assembly" and "together" can have*
The audience cease conversation and offer applause and vocal encouragement
[P] No! Does not physically exist.
[g] Yes! This would have no existence of any sort without the internet.
[RTG] No!
[g] Yes! This would have no existence of any sort without the internet.
[RTG] No!
10 questions ago you were warm, getting warmer, now it's cold, freezing cold
[S] No!
[R] No!
Hint: just because "The Morniverse" itself wasn't the answer, doesn't mean the AOTC doesn't come from this corner of the internet.
[R] No!
Hint: just because "The Morniverse" itself wasn't the answer, doesn't mean the AOTC doesn't come from this corner of the internet.
Is that... the finish line?
[R] No!
[P1] No! *a large proportion of the audience goes ooh!*
[SM] No! Either I've forgotten it, or that's before my time...
[P2] No! *a smaller number of oohs from the audience, but also some eye-rolling ;)*
[P1] No! *a large proportion of the audience goes ooh!*
[SM] No! Either I've forgotten it, or that's before my time...
[P2] No! *a smaller number of oohs from the audience, but also some eye-rolling ;)*
[C] No! *a few audience members over-excitedly swoon*
[SM] No!
[P] No! So the answer would be... "not the answer"? I think what I've set is much more straightforward than that, but time will tell :D
[SM] No!
[P] No! So the answer would be... "not the answer"? I think what I've set is much more straightforward than that, but time will tell :D
Just passing through on my way to save something or other, and understanding the absolute necessity of the internet to satisfy this question, how about the list of all words used in this game as AOTCs?
The tape is breasted!
[S] No!
[P] Yes! Because...
[SM] YES!
*balloons and streamers shower down from the ceiling onto the audience as Simons is handed the very AOTC that's been being hunted, in one of its many (but typically mineral) forms*
[P] Yes! Because...
[SM] YES!
*balloons and streamers shower down from the ceiling onto the audience as Simons is handed the very AOTC that's been being hunted, in one of its many (but typically mineral) forms*
The Major Oak?
It's wooden, alive, quite large, not a Christmas tree, in the UK, nor a bush.
The remaining stump from the vandalised tree on Hadrian’s Wall?
(Is it still alive? I’ll defer to the arborists.)
[old] Yes.
[intervention] No. Mutters from the audience over misleading answering, but the answer certainly isn't Yes.
[descendant] No.
[intervention] No. Mutters from the audience over misleading answering, but the answer certainly isn't Yes.
[descendant] No.
I would love this to be the National Forest, which was on those brown signs as you went up the A38 north of Birmingham and could be seen as miles and miles of hedges and fields. But given the reaction to my Major Oak bid just before, I'll go for Sherwood Forest.
Winner's comments
This was of course impossible without the help of some merry Morningtonians whom I would like to thank, and some unfeasibly good archery. So I accept this baton in the shape of an arrow and let us go on to what may be a quick round before Christmas. This one is:
MINERAL.
[R] Yes, man-made.
[C] Depends which dimensions you are talking about, both are true, and both false. Which Boolean operator that is, I don't know.
[T] It's electrically powered.
[S] Audience murmurs as the board displays "No".
[C] Depends which dimensions you are talking about, both are true, and both false. Which Boolean operator that is, I don't know.
[T] It's electrically powered.
[S] Audience murmurs as the board displays "No".
[S] Applause as it is revealed that one of the words on the card does indeed rhyme with "ite" or "ites".
I have been informed that the Boolean operator referred to above is the UM operator, where any input can give any output.
I have been informed that the Boolean operator referred to above is the UM operator, where any input can give any output.
[G] Yes! Audience goes wild for goldfinch.
[R] Also yes, but now no longer relevant.
So, goldfinch, take this multicoloured bayon, and, obeying the filter signals, turn right to greater things!
[R] Also yes, but now no longer relevant.
So, goldfinch, take this multicoloured bayon, and, obeying the filter signals, turn right to greater things!
Oh heck, just what I wanted for Christmas. And what’s this? *rustling of wrapping paper* oh! It’s MINERAL
[SM] Very much depends, but suffice to say that kind of undertaking would require significantly more than paper and sticky tape.
[T] Above the Earth's crust. Unless viewed from its antipodal point, of course, but let's not worry about that kind of pedantry.
[SM] Yes! Not in the UK.
Also, was probably a bit hedged with the station question. It was (part of) a ‘station’ of some kind.
Also, was probably a bit hedged with the station question. It was (part of) a ‘station’ of some kind.
[immortal?] No.
[Squid] Yes! Some of nature's fascinatingest animals, and this is a fascinating squid
[Squid] Yes! Some of nature's fascinatingest animals, and this is a fascinating squid
I failed to see what could possibly be more fascinating than the Grimaldi scaled squid, named after Prince Albert of Monaco, who was a fan and of whom it formed much of the after-dinner conversation. Lettuce carry on. Is it benthic?
[Psquid] No.
[Benthic] Yes, as a broad category
Fascinatingness vs Lepidoteuthis grimaldi - in deference to Prince Albert of Monaco I'll accept a draw
[Benthic] Yes, as a broad category
Fascinatingness vs Lepidoteuthis grimaldi - in deference to Prince Albert of Monaco I'll accept a draw
I just learned of the existencd of the Antarctic neosquid, no doubt after having ingested a red pill. Is that it?
Opposite to the icy Antarctic, you say. Could it be Vampyroteuthis infernalis, the vampire squid from hell?
[Vampyroteuthis infernalis] Good guess, but you picked the wrong opposite. There are several possibilities.
The purpleback flying squid (Sthenoteuthis oualaniensis)?
Flying squid. Two words that seem to go together as well as "bunch" and "water".
Squids aren't my forte, but it seems clear that those who name them lack nothing in creativity!
[Bismarck] Agreed, but I think equal credit ought to go to the squids themselves.
[Gonatus fabricii] No
[Gonatus fabricii] No
Wait, we’ve had the colossal squid, but have we had the giant squid – Architeuthis dux?
(autocorrect suggested “colossal squirrel”, and I shall lose some sleep over that mental image.)
The internationally-flavoured Dana octopus squid, Taningia danae? Bioluminescent photophores fitted as standard.
A winner?
I reckon you should give that to goldfinch. All the Magnapinnidae unknown from specimens which are well under a meter long, under the famous photograph doesn't doesn't have a species name attached to it yet.
Actually yes, I think that would be fair. On Wikipedia, I've just found that 'Magnapinnidae' jumps directly to the particular species in question.
So I shall hereby pass on this very, very long, writhing, sucker-covered, er, baton.
So I shall hereby pass on this very, very long, writhing, sucker-covered, er, baton.
[riddle] no.
I’ll add that it is a thing that exists and has properties, rather than a concept. It has ANIMAL/MINERAL connections but is neither.
I’ll add that it is a thing that exists and has properties, rather than a concept. It has ANIMAL/MINERAL connections but is neither.
[Wilhelm scream] Yes! It is the Wilhelm scream! (crowd goes wild in a way I’m reasonably sure isn’t a stock sound effect.)
Okay well let’s just check it’s not the crocodile which prompted the aforementioned scream?
Current? No (to my knowledge, of course)
Crowned? No (of any close descent)
Capsica? No (do I need to caveat this "to my knowledge"?!)
Crowned? No (of any close descent)
Capsica? No (do I need to caveat this "to my knowledge"?!)
Plato? YES!!
CdM has it! And what he now has is possession of the Platonic ideal of a baton.
Those early shots in the dark really looked like they might hit.
CdM has it! And what he now has is possession of the Platonic ideal of a baton.
Those early shots in the dark really looked like they might hit.
Cup, cap, crap, claptrap, clamp, chomp, crisp? No, at both extremities.
Universe? No.
Five more years? No.
Universe? No.
Five more years? No.
Channeling the ghost of INJ
Anarcho-syndicalism? No.
A work of writing? No.
Recipe? No.
A clarification: I believe my "yes" answer to "Created by humans?" is the least misleading but I suppose proponents of this -ism might dispute my answer.
A work of writing? No.
Recipe? No.
A clarification: I believe my "yes" answer to "Created by humans?" is the least misleading but I suppose proponents of this -ism might dispute my answer.
Religious? Interesting question. I’m going to go with: No—but it is potentially religion-adjacent, for a broad definition of religion.
Idealism? No.
Anti-? No.
Spiritual? Another interesting question. The best answer is No, though I'd caution that "spiritual" admits of multiple definitions. The AOTC is spiritual-adjacent, however
Crackpot? If you presented the AOTC to random people on the street, most would agree with that descriptor. If you asked those with more specialised knowledge, some would certainly still agree; the majority would disagree with the AOTC without (I think) necessarily being so pejorative. I hope that helps. :)
Anti-? No.
Spiritual? Another interesting question. The best answer is No, though I'd caution that "spiritual" admits of multiple definitions. The AOTC is spiritual-adjacent, however
Crackpot? If you presented the AOTC to random people on the street, most would agree with that descriptor. If you asked those with more specialised knowledge, some would certainly still agree; the majority would disagree with the AOTC without (I think) necessarily being so pejorative. I hope that helps. :)
I'd have loved this to be Dianetics, but it doesn't end in ISM. Is it anything to do with geography or geology?
Veganism? No.
AI? No. (*a few glances exchanged in the audience, but no actual applause*)
Dianetics? No.
Geography? No.
Geology? In some sense maybe Yes, but that's unlikely to be helpful.
Related to Art? No.
AI? No. (*a few glances exchanged in the audience, but no actual applause*)
Dianetics? No.
Geography? No.
Geology? In some sense maybe Yes, but that's unlikely to be helpful.
Related to Art? No.
Recap
We know that this is an ISM and refers to to something that was invented by humans, and that's about as far as we've got.
We do know that it doesn't begin or end with p, c, or anti. It has nothing to do with geography, geology, art, literature, or astronomy. It's not veganism, idealism, creationism, or dianetics, nor is it named after a person. There is a possible tenuous link to religion/spirituality, although all the guesses so far have not led anywhere. Normal people will think that the AOTC is crazy, those with more specialised knowledge will think that it doesn't work, although it still has its supporters.
We do know that it doesn't begin or end with p, c, or anti. It has nothing to do with geography, geology, art, literature, or astronomy. It's not veganism, idealism, creationism, or dianetics, nor is it named after a person. There is a possible tenuous link to religion/spirituality, although all the guesses so far have not led anywhere. Normal people will think that the AOTC is crazy, those with more specialised knowledge will think that it doesn't work, although it still has its supporters.
Recap. Mostly correct, although you only know that it doesn’t begin with C or end with P. I struggled with my answer to “invented by humans?”, so I’ll attempt a clarification. If we think of, say, a continuum of isms from Marxism (clearly invented by humans) to magnetism (clearly not), I think this is a bit closer to Marxism. But it is something that humans have thought of that could conceivably be fact—and if it were fact, it would be more like magnetism.
Economics? No.
Aliens? No.
Contain the name of a being? No. (Well, technically yes, but that’s essentially coincidental).
Politics? No.
Economics? No.
Aliens? No.
Contain the name of a being? No. (Well, technically yes, but that’s essentially coincidental).
Politics? No.
One more clarification. B’s recap stated “those with more specialised knowledge will think that [the AOTC] doesn’t work”. I’d say,rather, that they’d think it isn’t true.
Is it associated with a particular group of people?
...who'd be identifiable beyond just being "AOTC-ists", that is
1.6 billion? I think that the adjacent spiritual/religious concept quite probably has more than that number of adherents. The AOTC is a more technical notion (and term), which would be unfamiliar to (most of?) those adherents. I think. The adjacent spiritual/religion-adjacent concept might be a helpful route to the answer.
Governmental? No.
Associated with a particular group? For the AOTC itself, I'd say No. But the adjacent spiritual/religion-adjacent concept is certainly associated with various identified groups.
Governmental? No.
Associated with a particular group? For the AOTC itself, I'd say No. But the adjacent spiritual/religion-adjacent concept is certainly associated with various identified groups.
Corporeal? The best and least misleading answer is No. (There is a pedantic sense in which the answer is Yes, because “anything to do with” is pretty broad and vague.)
Solipsism? No—but the audience awakes from its torpor and there is *some applause, mixed with a little laughter* .
-ism scale
On my Marx-Magnet scale©, I'd probably put the various isms that have been suggested in the following order, with Idealism/Solipsism/AOTC being fairly close to each other. All three are invented by humans but could in some sense be fact.
Marxism ... Veganism ... Hypnotism ... Spiritualism ... Creationism/Btheism ... Idealism/Solipsism/AOTC ... ... Magnetism
Marxism ... Veganism ... Hypnotism ... Spiritualism ... Creationism/Btheism ... Idealism/Solipsism/AOTC ... ... Magnetism
Idea about the nature of the entire universe? Yes! *sustained applause*
To do with logic? No.
Relate to death? The best answer is No, though an indirect argument could be made for Yes.
To do with logic? No.
Relate to death? The best answer is No, though an indirect argument could be made for Yes.
University Philosophy? I'm not an expert in university philosophy curricula, but I'll speculate as follows: the AOTC would show up somewhere in the curriculum but is unlikely to make an appearance in an Introduction to Philosophy subject. The AOTC has an entry in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and Britannica.
Plato's cave? No.
Has anyone said Existentialism yet? No.
Is Existentialism the AOTC? No. (I'd put that more in the vicinity of Spiritualism on the M-m scale.)
Does it entail a belief in predestination? You just had to ask that, didn't you? No.
Plato's cave? No.
Has anyone said Existentialism yet? No.
Is Existentialism the AOTC? No. (I'd put that more in the vicinity of Spiritualism on the M-m scale.)
Does it entail a belief in predestination? You just had to ask that, didn't you? No.
Enjoying this? Yes and No. Whenever an AVMA takes this long, I worry that either I have made it too hard or that I have inadvertently misled people with a less than perfect answer.
Old Greek? The idea of the AOTC can in some sense be traced back to the very earliest days of recorded philosophy, which of course includes quite a few old Greeks. That said, I don't think the AOTC is associated with a particular OG who was a "major proponent". (It's not like, say, stoicism, where—if you know about the topic—you'd immediately link it to Epictetus.)
Simulation hypothesis? No.
Old Greek? The idea of the AOTC can in some sense be traced back to the very earliest days of recorded philosophy, which of course includes quite a few old Greeks. That said, I don't think the AOTC is associated with a particular OG who was a "major proponent". (It's not like, say, stoicism, where—if you know about the topic—you'd immediately link it to Epictetus.)
Simulation hypothesis? No.
Vitalism? No.*applause of the kind that indicates that even though the answer is in some sense completely wrong, it is also absolutely the right kind of guess*reveal
Deism? No.
Deism? No.
Clarification: While "vitalism" (at least as I understand it) is indeed in some sense completely wrong, it is nonetheless oddly close to the AOTC. Raak is definitely thinking along the right lines. Also, the "O, rocks!" quote is not a clue of any kind.
Human exceptionalism? No. *audience laughter*
Buddhism? No. The AOTC, as already noted, is not religious but is a concept that is spiritual/religion-adjacent. The adjacent spiritual/religious idea is present in Buddhism.
Buddhism? No. The AOTC, as already noted, is not religious but is a concept that is spiritual/religion-adjacent. The adjacent spiritual/religious idea is present in Buddhism.
Panpsychism? Yes!! It is indeed the belief that there is (some sort of) consciousness present in everything. Here, have this sentient baton.
Ooohh goody!
That was not an easy one to find! I only got it because of the subject being recently treated on the "In Our Time" podcast. So thanks to Melvyn Bragg and his guests.
The next round is now starting, hold on to the straps. The sentient baton suggests ABSTRACT.
The next round is now starting, hold on to the straps. The sentient baton suggests ABSTRACT.
Small print
There are links to Animal and Vegetable, and on the Marx-Magnet scale© CdM it's towards magnetism, although it isn't an -ISM.
Fun physics? No.
Fun life? No, although humans have and have had a great interest in the AOTC. It's not an occupation, either.
Earthbound? So far as anyone knows, only on Earth.
Fun life? No, although humans have and have had a great interest in the AOTC. It's not an occupation, either.
Earthbound? So far as anyone knows, only on Earth.
Death ? Like life, it is necessary for this concept. Audience are aware and expectant.
Ologious? No.
Ologious? No.
Observable? There are observations of this occurring.
Economic? No.
Aristotelian? Didn't know him personally, but the concept was almost certainly around then.
Economic? No.
Aristotelian? Didn't know him personally, but the concept was almost certainly around then.
Sentiments? No.
Lifespan? No. Audience wakes up, though.
Lifestart? No, but the audience murmurs approval and emits some applause.
Lifespan? No. Audience wakes up, though.
Lifestart? No, but the audience murmurs approval and emits some applause.
Biology? Arguments start among the audience. Life and death and so forth are all biological, but this is not usually considered to be a biological process.
Rebirth? No, but the audience really like it. Appreciation is shown.
Rebirth? No, but the audience really like it. Appreciation is shown.
It's not metamorphosis, enlightenment is nice but completely off beam, "renaissance" is a good try but "the Renaissance" is totally wrong. The audience are collecting tomatoes to throw.
Not cryonics, not rejuvenation, but definitely Resurrection! (We started this around Easter, so it seemed appropriate.) Congratulations to CdM, who gets to take this stone baton and roll it away. Don't forget to like, subscribe, or leave a review.
Wooden sculpture? No. No.
Part of a plant that looks like part of an animal? No.
Venus flytrap? No.
Part of a plant that looks like part of an animal? No.
Venus flytrap? No.
Fixed location? Interesting question. If I wanted to be tricky, I'd give a straightforward and honest answer of No. But a more helpful answer is: Yes, when understood in the context of the AOTC.
Vegetable that resembles non-vegetable? Resemble is a tricky word. I’d say more No than Yes as the word is typically used, but—stretching the meaning of resemble to its broader senses—you could plausibly say Yes.
As a ps to my answer to Tuj, the absence of a fixed location in general is certainly useful information as well.
As a ps to my answer to Tuj, the absence of a fixed location in general is certainly useful information as well.
One word? No. The AOTC as written is four words including the definite article, but I will accept any suitable identifying phrase.
Is it alive? No. But be careful about your assumptions.
Associated with a particular season? No. * a certain tension in the air intimates that the audience almost wants to applaud but knows it shouldn’t*
Legible? No.
Associated with a particular season? No. * a certain tension in the air intimates that the audience almost wants to applaud but knows it shouldn’t*
Legible? No.
Connected to a celebration? *considerable audience laughter*. I think I have to say No, though some might argue the point.
Relevant to archaeology? No.
Vegetable part edible? Yes. (And remember the whole thing is vegetable, not just part of it.)
Was it art? *more laughter* Not in the conventional sense, No.
After your good start I am surprised this is taking so long. As a hint, you could always explore the animal connection further.
Relevant to archaeology? No.
Vegetable part edible? Yes. (And remember the whole thing is vegetable, not just part of it.)
Was it art? *more laughter* Not in the conventional sense, No.
After your good start I am surprised this is taking so long. As a hint, you could always explore the animal connection further.
Fake ewes? No. Though, in some kinda sorta weirdly literal sense, kinda sorta yes. But really, No.
If it wasn't for "the" in third place, I'd have said the King Edward potato. Is it named after a person?
Named after a person? Strictly speaking, No. But Yes would actually be a more helpful answer.
“The” is not in third place. I said it wasn’t “The X of Y”. For free, I’ll tell you “The King Edward potato” exactly corresponds to the AOTC, though I’ll mention again that other descriptions would be perfectly acceptable.
The King Edward potato? No. I’ll also remind you that the AOTC is unique
“of”-inclusive? No.
“The” is not in third place. I said it wasn’t “The X of Y”. For free, I’ll tell you “The King Edward potato” exactly corresponds to the AOTC, though I’ll mention again that other descriptions would be perfectly acceptable.
The King Edward potato? No. I’ll also remind you that the AOTC is unique
“of”-inclusive? No.
Vegetable = vegetable? Yes.
The Liz Truss lettuce? Yes! Have this unconventionally shaped baton. It’s slightly brown on the edges, but still perfectly usable.
The Liz Truss lettuce? Yes! Have this unconventionally shaped baton. It’s slightly brown on the edges, but still perfectly usable.
Thank you, though this baton is somewhat rotten on the inside. No similarity to any person, living or half-dead, is to be inferred. So let's relaunch with MINERAL with some VEGETABLE connotations.
It is a mechanical device.
It is unique.
It has a certain charm, but it is not classed as Art.
It is not a building, though it was built.
It is unique.
It has a certain charm, but it is not classed as Art.
It is not a building, though it was built.