Question Measuring the consumed food at the caf

Phoenix Spiritus wrote: Umm, yes you can measure the momentum of a single billiards ball and yes it will have conservation of momentum until something else acts on it. It is perfectly valid even im a complex system to make measurements in a single object during a finite time when that onject is not being acted on by other pieces and then make accurate predictions.

Here's the thing: there are three numbers involved -- mass, velocity and momentum. If you have any two, you can deduce the third. But there's no way of measuring momentum directly, only through interactions with other objects of known momentum, and even that only if you are sure to isolate any other forces that might interfere in the process. For instance, if you have an iron-cored billiard ball and a magnet under the table, you can't consider only the movements of the balls; you HAVE to consider the magnet too, otherwise the numbers don't add up.

The thing is, there are so many factors (literally) floating around that it's practically impossible to isolate the one interaction you want. Say your mutant is a gravitic warper; OK, so you have a lot of sensors to measure how he exchange momentum with, say, the earth and the walls to accelerate. Thing is, there are OTHER gravitic warpers nearby, and THEY are also exchanging momentum with the earth and the walls. How do you guarantee that the sensors are measuring just the interaction you want to measure?

Or take winged mutants; that's even worse, because they exchange momentum with the air. Good luck having an accurate measurement in the chaotic atmospheric conditions in the Crystal Hall.

Phoenix Spiritus wrote: You don't need to measure the whole system if the pertinent part can be sufficiently isolated from the rest of the system instead. So, again, my suggestion is a corner after a straight piece of corridor where the flyers tend to go maximum speed (so we are seeing their limits, maximum speed, maximum deceleration, etc.) and the flyers are flying it relatively by themselces (certainly enough separation between them that the speeds and paths of the flyer in front are not dictating the mechanics of the flyer behind). In that case, where Whateley techs know pretty well the maximum acceleration and deceleration of the flyers, some high speed video cameras would be enough to work out velocities, paths, distances, etc, and again for the Newtonian flyers (not the warpers, be they reality, gravity, or density) you could create equations to get relatively accurate mass readings. It's not easy (you literally would need to know everything else), but Whateley's powers testing would seem to gather that already, so it's possible.

There's a number of assumptions here:
- that the maximum force the mutant can apply to acceleration is constant (pretty much guaranteed not to be, in fact, since they are all growing up and developing their powers),
- that they are going to apply their maximum power consistently in this informal situation -- when in fact some it's highly likely to change depending on the mood of the student in a particular day. I mean, some times I'm in a hurry and run, some times I'm feeling good and I walk briskly, some times I'm feeling lousy or distracted and I walk slowly...

Phoenix Spiritus wrote: Now, if you have a better practical method of doing it for people who would tend to just fly over scales, that's a different opposition to the solution. The fact that it doesn't work with warmers is a problem, but then again, nor will scales, which is probably why they are doing the current method they are doing (checkouts where the plates are weighed).

No, I don't. What I WOULD do is exactly what the school is doing: weigh the food trays. It's far simpler and overall more reliable. Yes, there will be the occasional kids who don't eat all they get; yes, there will be ones who deliberately fuck with the scales; but most won't care, which means that it will get reliable data for over 90% of the students. Cafeteria staff can easily spot the troublemakers and flag them to the medical staff as needing more frequent check-ups. And given how teenagers LOVE going to the doctor, I would guess they would stop this futile misbehaving pretty soon.

Another point... measuring the mass of the student, as opposed to the mass of the food, will introduce large errors every time a student hands some object (like a book) to another in the cafeteria. Which is HIGHLY likely.

Phoenix Spiritus wrote: Another suggestion if you really don't want checkouts, put the scales in the food service trays. Then note how much is being removed and onto which I plate it goes with cameras and student card RFID scanners near the serving trays. It doesn't then matter what the students do to their plate, because you are measuring what is being removed from the serving trays.

That might work, and it's more precise in theory (since you could theoretically quantify how much of each type of food each student is consuming, not just the overall mass) but I think is unnecessarily complex, with all the tracking of which student is picking how much meatloaf -- and it assumes students are well-behaved and polite, serving themselves always in the assigned order.

A possible Whateley-style solution would be to embed scales and RFID readers in the *trays themselves*. Tracking the weight change between taking the tray out of the food tables and returning it to the bussing area would yield rather precise data on the amount eaten. But it would still have to deal with human-nature complications, such as a friend bussing the tray of another.

Don't you love it when a throwaway joke leads to it's own thread. Lol

Iblike the tray idea though.

Honestly? We're the masters of tangents. There are more tangents here already than a geometry textbook.

Blue Moose wrote: Honestly? We're the masters of tangents. There are more tangents here already than a geometry textbook.

Except when we close one out then it becomes an issue

In any case, getting back to the topic at hand from my own tangent tangenting.....

SirLee wrote:

Phoenix Spiritus wrote: Another suggestion if you really don't want checkouts, put the scales in the food service trays. Then note how much is being removed and onto which I plate it goes with cameras and student card RFID scanners near the serving trays. It doesn't then matter what the students do to their plate, because you are measuring what is being removed from the serving trays.

That might work, and it's more precise in theory (since you could theoretically quantify how much of each type of food each student is consuming, not just the overall mass) but I think is unnecessarily complex, with all the tracking of which student is picking how much meatloaf -- and it assumes students are well-behaved and polite, serving themselves always in the assigned order.

A possible Whateley-style solution would be to embed scales and RFID readers in the *trays themselves*. Tracking the weight change between taking the tray out of the food tables and returning it to the bussing area would yield rather precise data on the amount eaten. But it would still have to deal with human-nature complications, such as a friend bussing the tray of another.

I see one major problem with this solution: the trays themselves. With Whateley, they'd go though a ridiculous number of trays, between being broken in cafeteria fights, mangled from students who are still getting a hold of their new increased strength, and stolen for a variety of purposes. Heck, at the local university, I know the students steal trays for use as sleds during winter. Add to that the odd divisor that hacks the scale for personal use in the labs (Because you know some would) and making those trays would be far too cost-inefficient for campus.

Edit: As an aside, I can totally see Toni stealing a tray for full-throttle extreme sledding.

Umm, what's measuring the weight of the trays got to do with them being stolen?

Anyway, it doesn't matter what the trays weigh, or what the amount of food in the trays weigh, it only matters the weight of the food leaving the tray, i.e. the delta amount the weight of the tray is changing.

And all the others issues with them being stolen and the like are issues that are currently being faced, no different with or without scales built into the serving equipment or not.

If the school keeps losing the trays, from damage or thievery, how can they be used to adequately measure the food in the first place? As such, It makes more sense to have the measuring device in a central place, like the 'pay' counters, then de-centralizing the measurement.

If the school is loosing trays at that rate, who cares about measuring the food, how the hell are they serving it?

Trays aren't measured its the item itself and if its a bowl for salad it should already be computed into the scale to subtract its weight from the salad itself. This goes for plates also. Step-daughter went through this at college

IMHO it would be far easier for a cafeteria to just lay out basic service like this for the most part --at least till you have to deal with Goodkind that is!--lol

every item is a serving in a box to match--burgers, whole pizzas, a large salad, old dog or cat ect then bar-code the boxes and done for the most part --where the rest is the banquet service is where the hard stuff starts in.

"ohh crud Sara is gone --what are we going to do with the 40 cats and dogs I ordered!"

lighttech wrote: "ohh crud Sara is gone --what are we going to do with the 40 cats and dogs I ordered!"

"Waa do ya thinks in the burger?"

naww that's Fridays meatloaf!

Okay, I'm doing a piss-poor job at trying to describe what I'm saying, and waffling between ideas. (Sadly, This is normal.)

Let's say that these gadgeteer-designed trays that weigh the food on them cost around oh, $50. (considering the miniaturization involved to make the necessary sensors, that's probably on the low end, but I'll stick with that.) In comparison, The price of a simple plastic tray is $2.99. Let's also assume that the trays can be replaced at the same rate: 1 business day plus shipping time. (I'd expect the scale-trays would take longer to manufacture, due to electronic work, but gadgeteers are amazing that way.)

So at the start of the school year, the cafeteria orders 500 trays. With that amount, the scale-trays have cost $25,000, whereas the normal trays have only cost $1,500. Over the course of a semester, let's say 100 trays are damaged or stolen. Providing that the cafeteria crew can stay on top of this turnover, they spend another $5,000 for the scale-trays, but only $300 for new normal trays. After 1 year, the scale-trays have already cost an additional $27,900, money that the cafeteria can use for other things.

I'm also not taking into account things like damage to the scale-tray sensors, where the sensors are down, but it's still a functional tray, or the increased wear from having 'moving' parts in the tray, as opposed to a solid chunk of plastic.

I know that Whateley has a significant amount of money, but would something like this be worth the cost?


Edit: If I'm still sounding like a moron, just tell me, and I'll shut up.

Phoenix Spiritus wrote:

lighttech wrote: "ohh crud Sara is gone --what are we going to do with the 40 cats and dogs I ordered!"

"Waa do ya thinks in the burger?"

I think that response would give Ayla a heart attack.

Blue Moose wrote: Okay, I'm doing a piss-poor job at trying to describe what I'm saying, and waffling between ideas. (Sadly, This is normal.)

Let's say that these gadgeteer-designed trays that weigh the food on them cost around oh, $50. (considering the miniaturization involved to make the necessary sensors, that's probably on the low end, but I'll stick with that.) In comparison, The price of a simple plastic tray is $2.99. Let's also assume that the trays can be replaced at the same rate: 1 business day plus shipping time. (I'd expect the scale-trays would take longer to manufacture, due to electronic work, but gadgeteers are amazing that way.)

So at the start of the school year, the cafeteria orders 500 trays. With that amount, the scale-trays have cost $25,000, whereas the normal trays have only cost $1,500. Over the course of a semester, let's say 100 trays are damaged or stolen. Providing that the cafeteria crew can stay on top of this turnover, they spend another $5,000 for the scale-trays, but only $300 for new normal trays. After 1 year, the scale-trays have already cost an additional $27,900, money that the cafeteria can use for other things.

I'm also not taking into account things like damage to the scale-tray sensors, where the sensors are down, but it's still a functional tray, or the increased wear from having 'moving' parts in the tray, as opposed to a solid chunk of plastic.

I know that Whateley has a significant amount of money, but would something like this be worth the cost?

the only issue I see is --do the trays tell you whats on them? as if they don't? You might as well just let the cashier do the weighing and that person can say whats on it to measure the kids intake in food --calories, vitamins ect

Blue Moose wrote:

Phoenix Spiritus wrote:

lighttech wrote: "ohh crud Sara is gone --what are we going to do with the 40 cats and dogs I ordered!"

"Waa do ya thinks in the burger?"

I think that response would give Ayla a heart attack.

"why are we having a Korean BBQ themed lunch day?" --i had too it called me this joke --- hides fast from food fight to come!

@Blue Mouse.
The trays aren't the scale, the scale is built into the serving cabinets. The food is loaded into a stock standard tray, same as always. But brand new serving cabinets now inanition to heating / refrigerating the food, also have sensors to weigh them. As a student reaches into a tray, computer's work out the difference in weight in the tray, not down the weight, the type of food and the student and incidentally trigger an alert to the kitchen if the tray is starting to get empty.

By the way, are we getting caught up in the "trays" terminology? Maybe you guys call the things inside the serving cabinets "Platters" or "dishes" or something? Here you put food on trays, and trays go into the warmers to be served from.

Phoenix Spiritus wrote: By the way, are we getting caught up in the "trays" terminology? Maybe you guys call the things inside the serving cabinets "Platters" or "dishes" or something? Here you put food on trays, and trays go into the warmers to be served from.

Ah. Here, "tray" usually refers to what the students/customers put their food onto. Usually either these or these .

I'm not sure what we call the bits you're talking about. For all I know they might also be called trays among those who work with them, but they aren't what most of us think of when we hear "tray" in association with food.

I hate to say this, but everyone here is off topic.

You see, this isn't a topic about measuring consumed food. It's about "Measuring the consumed foot at the caf", and nobody here has mentioned the eating of feet.




The easiest way to measure consumed feet would be a shoe count. Get a devise that measures how many shoes enter the Crystal Hall and how many leave, and when the numbers are the same you know that no feet have been eaten in the meantime.

Also, this gives me an idea that you shall see momentarily in the Bad Idea thread. I'm sorry.

Kristin Darken wrote: This is the basis behind the size of portions served in the average restaurant. They could very easily serve you a portion that is 1/3 the size... doing so would actually be more appropriate to caloric intake levels of the average customer. But they cannot do so and also charge you 1/3 of the price... which is what most people would expect for the smaller portion size. You might only use 1/3 of the raw materials, but the time to prepare is going to be nearly the same, the effort involved in serving the table will be the same, the number of dishes/service used that will need to be cleaned is the same.

Oh, cool. I learned a thing.

Blue Moose wrote: Okay, I'm doing a piss-poor job at trying to describe what I'm saying, and waffling between ideas. (Sadly, This is normal.)

Let's say that these gadgeteer-designed trays that weigh the food on them cost around oh, $50. (considering the miniaturization involved to make the necessary sensors, that's probably on the low end, but I'll stick with that.) In comparison, The price of a simple plastic tray is $2.99. Let's also assume that the trays can be replaced at the same rate: 1 business day plus shipping time. (I'd expect the scale-trays would take longer to manufacture, due to electronic work, but gadgeteers are amazing that way.)

So at the start of the school year, the cafeteria orders 500 trays. With that amount, the scale-trays have cost $25,000, whereas the normal trays have only cost $1,500. Over the course of a semester, let's say 100 trays are damaged or stolen. Providing that the cafeteria crew can stay on top of this turnover, they spend another $5,000 for the scale-trays, but only $300 for new normal trays. After 1 year, the scale-trays have already cost an additional $27,900, money that the cafeteria can use for other things.

I'm also not taking into account things like damage to the scale-tray sensors, where the sensors are down, but it's still a functional tray, or the increased wear from having 'moving' parts in the tray, as opposed to a solid chunk of plastic.

I know that Whateley has a significant amount of money, but would something like this be worth the cost?


Edit: If I'm still sounding like a moron, just tell me, and I'll shut up.

Sounds like you've worked as a contractor for the military procurement office. Hammers: $750.00 Bolts: $170, Toilet Seats $1500.

Phoenix Spiritus wrote: @Blue Mouse.
The trays aren't the scale, the scale is built into the serving cabinets. The food is loaded into a stock standard tray, same as always. But brand new serving cabinets now inanition to heating / refrigerating the food, also have sensors to weigh them. As a student reaches into a tray, computer's work out the difference in weight in the tray, not down the weight, the type of food and the student and incidentally trigger an alert to the kitchen if the tray is starting to get empty.

By the way, are we getting caught up in the "trays" terminology? Maybe you guys call the things inside the serving cabinets "Platters" or "dishes" or something? Here you put food on trays, and trays go into the warmers to be served from.

Yep, that's exactly what is happening here.

Foodie,the famous biodevisor, rebuilt some security scanners in the late '80s so they scan people as they enter, than again as they exit recording the amount of and types of food eaten.

Velentine said."Foodie,the famous biodevisor, rebuilt some security scanners in the late '80s so they scan people as they enter, than again as they exit recording the amount of and types of food eaten."
It was burnt out by I don't think so the famous antidevisor.

OK. A few points first.

First, yes, there was a suggestion of building scales into the individual trays the students use to carry food to the table. I was the one to suggest it. But I agree with Blue Moose's criticism: it is certainly an expensive solution and maybe not much better at tracking what students eat, in practical terms, than simpler solutions.

Second... weighing the entire meal IS actually useful. It's not as good as tracking the individual calorie content of each individual item, but it does give a general idea.

Around here, there is a very popular sort of restaurant -- mostly catering to the lunch trade, which Brazilians like to have as a full meal, and in fact employers are legally obligated to supply -- nicknamed a "kilo": it's a buffet system, but the price is computed from the weight of the food you put on your plate. It's not as precise as tracking the individual items (which can range from the very cheap lettuce and rice to expensive meat and seafood, depending on the place) but it's considered a good enough approximation.

Yes, there is an entire business model built around the idea that, for the most part, people will eat a bit of everything, instead of concentrating on the most expensive/tasty items. And it works, and it's reasonably efficient: unless you go to the poshest places, a full meal will go for about the same as a McDonald's combo.