Talk:3131: Cesium

I think that's called a recipe for disaster. NOTE: I am also 104.225.172.143. 138.43.101.123 14:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

No, I am 104.225.172.143! 82.13.184.33 15:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm 104.225.172.143, and so's my wife! 92.23.2.228 20:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I also chose this guy's wife. 2600:1014:B130:F85B:54C8:CB88:DB33:11D0

My best recipe comes with a Notice to Mariners Hcs (talk) 14:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I added a transcript. Hopefully it's okay. 104.225.172.143 14:54, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

A gram of gold runs on the order of ~$100 USD as of writing; a gram of cs-137 looks to be in the millions~billions range. --158.91.163.9 14:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Nope. It's 99 dollars. 191.57.16.100 20:40, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I think you're quoting the price for Caesium metal in general, which is probably almost entirely Caesium 133; Caesium 137 is a synthetic isotope which could easily be a million times more expensive than the natural stuff, gram for gram. 80.41.70.128 22:37, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

You're right, my bad. I couldn't find a quote for Cs137, but considering it's produced from uranium, it probably is very expensive. As for the shrimp thing, I doubt anything close to a gram of Cesium ended up in the shipment. It's probably a component from a measuring device. 177.12.48.45 09:57, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Caesium contamination usually is caused by nuclear accidents (or atmospheric nuclear weapon tests) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesium-137#Environmental_contamination. It is unlikely that someone acquired pure Cs-137 and then "accidentally" contaminated the shrimp with that. --134.102.219.31 15:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Bothering the NSA shouldn't be hard, just write some of their secrets on a cake (with frosting is optional) and post it online. 212.101.26.209 14:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I feel like the writing on the cake is not part of its recipe. I think a more fitting way to get their attention would be "accidentally" poisoning the president with your cooking. --128.31.34.92 22:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

What would IMO do, revoke your math license? 216.73.162.10 15:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

They have numerous penalties at their disposal. 82.13.184.33 15:27, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I imagined the reason the IMO would get involved would be because the recipe created some interesting mathematical problem that could be used for the next competition. For example, something like this video, where a grocery order taken too literally creates a seemingly harmless Diophantine equation whose smallest positive solutions are on the order of 10^80. 137.25.230.78 15:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

A cook on Air Force 1 "accidentally" contaminates Trump's fast food with cesium. The assassination attempt fails and US retaliates by invading Canada/Panama/Greenland (roll 1d3). IMO bans the US team, like they banned Russia in 2022. Thus a single cooking "accident" can get the attention of IAEA, IATA, IMO, and NSA. --128.31.34.92 22:21, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe The IATA could get involved if your ruined recipe caused food poisoning on a commercial airliner that then resulted in an in-air emergency (whole flight deck passed out). 170.85.70.249 (talk) 17:32, 20 August 2025 (UTC) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Or if you create a column of dense toxic fumes that spreads over a wide area (on the level of a volcano eruption). On the other hand, I wonder what could bring the attention of the IMO when Terryology seemingly couldn't.--94.73.52.245 18:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

The criticality accident in 1999 at the Tokaimura nuclear facility seems like a good example of messing up a recipe in a way that draws considerable attention. Tokaimura nuclear accidents 2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:1B 19:11, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

1. Randall creates a new way to cook airplane food that is either cheap enough or expensive enough to significantly affect airline ticket pricing. 2. Randall's recipe poisons a Math Olympiad team. 3. The coach of the team turns out to be an undercover spy. 24.53.184.90 23:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

IATA is an international trade association for airlines. It's not particularly involved in air safety, except as a sideline; the International Civil Aviation Organization is much more involved that way. However, IATA used to be directly concerned with recipes. In the 1950s, the IATA airlines agreed on international standards for meals, under which economy class passengers would only be provided with sandwiches. However, airlines such as SAS and Swissair provided their passengers with more and better sandwiches than U.S. airlines such as Pan Am and TWA were willing to provide. Eventually IATA issued a rule that sandwiches were to be cold, simple, unadorned, and inexpensive, feature “a substantial and visible” chunk of bread, and could not include materials normally regarded as expensive or luxurious, such as smoked salmon, oysters, caviar, lobster, game, asparagus, or pate de foie gras. Providing better sandwiches than those IATA allowed could result in a fine. (The rule was later revoked to allow economy class passengers to receive hot meals.) So at one point, it was possible to mess up a sandwich recipe by adding expensive ingredients that would incur the wrath of IATA. --208.59.176.206 00:43, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

The explanation "... if the recipe is used in major airports, and the recipe is contaminated with a drug, the pilots that eat could experience vision loss or other problems, and if this recipe is widely used and normal people won't notice much besides minor side effects, then this could attract the attention of of the IATA" does not make sense. If a recipe caused vision loss when pilots ate the food, it would also cause vision loss for non-pilots. --208.59.176.206 00:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

The phrase "messing up a recipe" means whatever Randall intended it to mean. The fact that some people may use the phrase to mean to make something at home does not mean that such a definition was intended by Randall. I don't think I have ever heard "messing up a recipe" mean anything other than ruining the preparation of the food. Inquirer (talk) 02:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Someone who creates recipes could make a mistake, publish a bad recipe, and cause problems. If a recipe left food unsafe, for example: not cooked enough to kill bacteria, left at room temperature for an unsafe time, etc. Tell people to find wild mushrooms, and that the red mushrooms with white spots are extra tasty. :-) BunsenH (talk) 03:37, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Is it possible this comic was inspired by the recent FDA recall on certain Indonesian frozen shrimp? 174.21.93.112 03:33, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

That's noted, with that specific link, in the second sentence of the Explanation here. BunsenH (talk) 03:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Ack, apologies. I may be a little stupid. 174.21.93.112

68 Bq/kg of Cs-137 is about 93 billions Cs-137 atoms in 1 kg of shrimp, that is about 1,5 picomole or 213 picograms. On the other hand one BED (banana equivalent dose) is ~15 Bq per piece, so eating a half pound package of this shrimp will irradiate you in the same amount as eating one banana, in terms of number of decays, but much less in terms of biological dose: potassium-40 in bananas emit beta radiation which is much more harmful when coming from ingested material than beta and gamma, roughly equally emitted by Cs-137. So this recall is on the level of emptying a reservoir after two guys pissed into it. Security theater. -- 2620:1F7:2C04:7C44:0:0:31:3A 14:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Or the Dutch boy at the [deleted] dike. With the assault by Our (USNA) Government on such business-insensitive excesses as food safety, we should be grateful that the FDA is, at least for now, still capable of functioning at this level. 2605:59C8:160:DB08:5C9D:407E:3E50:C822 15:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)