Yes, it's another round of that classic guessing game - Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, Abstract [or any combination thereof]. This effort - '03/'04 should address any queries, but then again, may just serve to confuse and baffle which some might say is the point of the game. Patience, integrity and a decent search engine may be useful ....
Scientific achievement? Yes. *some laughter from exactly the same cynics who we’re laughing previously* Bravery? No. New medal for each recipient? Yes. *applause for the question*
Well, technically, my card says "Sverige Riksbank", which is why it has 12 words as advertised, not 13. But, YES, Raak now has a gold baton with his name inscribed on the edge.
Your Royal Highness, members of the Nobel committee, jealous also-rans, ladies and gentlemen. To begin a brief informal sketch of the work that led to this award, consider the topos of Liesenring-Schmethold operators over a symplectic manifold equipped with the Swale cohomology on its cotangent bundle...(contd. p.94)
[d] I think you could say that any geological formation is primarily underground, even Mount Everest. If the question is whether it is entirely underground, the answer is no.
Moving quickly on a geological timescale, pausing only to thank the tectonic forces that fashioned this earth with the odd helping hand from extraterrestrial meteorites, read this carefully-arranged eruption which spells
ABSTRACT (as well as trouble for a few geological theories when it's discovered).
Welcome, welcome to one and all. [DrQ] It's abstract. Really quite abstract. So yes, if only in our minds. [Duj] Not the flat-earthers. [Boo] No Amazons here (with Black Friday coming, that may be a relief) [Raak] Not our twin from the dark side. [Gus] Topical in this epoch, but not relevant.
Lots of good stuff coming now. Both on the right evolutionary branch. [DrQuuxum] If you mean ems, ens and that sort of thing, no. [Raak] No, though in a sense, as you taught us to say, isn't everything?
[Boolbar] No "e" whatever, nothing to do with maths. Look, it begins with "b", it's short (hint: 3 letters), it's not a verb, a noun (notwithstanding a famous phrase in which it gets used as both a noun and a verb),or adjective and I'm regretting having used it. Not enough to give the answer?
Summary: mainly metal (but note the "strictly speaking" concerning the glass question), made now and before 1900 (perhaps predominantly the latter, judging by the audience reaction), can be larger than a toaster, not unique, not naturally occurring, no moving parts, not furniture, not a measuring device, not a kitchen item, not a lamppost.
[KagomeShuko] Welcome. Others who've played more will correct me if I get this wrong I'm sure, but I think it's pretty straightforward - ask a question to narrow down the possibilities (just as you have!), then await the answer from Boolbar - later on make specific guesses, once you've an idea. Scroll back to earlier rounds for the flavour of it... Q: Is it a heraldic animal?
[KagomeShuko] Questions should be those which can be answered with a simple "Yes" or "No". Speaking of which... (KagomeShuko) Mythical? YES. But that wouldn't be the first thing you'd think of when the answer on the card is revealed. So I predict a lot of questions which are going to go down the wrong path. (blamelewis) Heraldic? NO.
I think it is better to say Mythical creature? NO as the AOTC is not a creature of ancient myths itself, but belongs to a group that is based on creatures of myth. (Raak) A metaphorical animal? NO.
Belonging to a class of mythical creatures, the specific animal was originally from an English piece of fiction from over twenty years ago (but possibly re-used since). Not a heraldic animal, nor a monster, not from Tolkien, not Scandinavian.
Note : English language but not necessarily English. And as I put it "belongs to a group that is based on creatures of myth" but that won't help much. (Bismarck) Doggy? NO (Bismarck) A song? YES (more of a by-product) and at least one other obscure and dreadful song that I know of.
*Some of the audience hums at the mention of transformation* (KagomeShuko) Human that turns into another creature? NO but within their history, the AOTC has had a few methods of "changing" :) (Bismarck) Science fiction? Hmm, there are many Sci-fi elements that come into this, so it is involved, yes. I thought this could be simple but I forgot the AOTC has had so much variation over the years.
(KagomeShuko) AOTC = "Answer on the Card" or in other words : the answer you are looking for. As for the tiny hint about transforming: it is an everyday transformation that we are all capable of doing. The AOTC has a few nifty ways of doing it. (Raak) Superhero? YES. *cue audience going wild with excitement*