How I’ve Been Spending My Evening

Standing on a giant scale so that the people running Capricon 31 could find out what my weight is in Coke Zero cans.

The answer: 204 cans, or for those of you with metric inclinations, 76.5 liters. A measurement of 76.5 liters is henceforth to be known as a “Scalzi,” as in “Your dad is coming and he does like his beer, better get a Scalzi’s worth from the liquor store.”

Someone please update Wikipedia to reflect this new knowledge.

Yes, there are pictures. No, I don’t have them because I was busy standing on the scale. I’ll post some when I get them.

I’m guessing that my night has been more interesting than yours so far. I mean, I haven’t even told you about the part where I was photographed fondling my own nipple yet.

You’re welcome for that mental image, by the way.

And now, off to a party.

47 thoughts on “How I’ve Been Spending My Evening

  1. Well, I’m just sitting here reading my latest copy of Ghost Brigades in between checking my email.
    I keep loaning out these books and I never get them back. This makes the third set so far.

    Btw, Thanks!

  2. Empty or full cans? If empty, I think the number of cans is good enough for my metric brain. Even full it works, as long as it’s the standard 355ish mL can, of course!

  3. And thats a little under 1¼ kegs of beer. So a half Barrel and a quarter barrel equals one Scalzi. Thats a good party!

  4. That’s about 19 gallons, or about what it takes to fill a truck at the pump. I look forward to Soylent Gasoline’s marketing campaign, “Come on in and pump a Scalzi today!”

  5. King Rat has a valid qualm. I can accept “One Can of Coke Zero” as a unit of measurement, but your volume analogy is fallacious. It doesn’t account for the mass of the can itself, so even saying that Coke Zero has a set unit density (not so because that doesn’t deal with post-mix, which will be of variable composition and therefore density) the mass 76.5 litres of Coke Zero in a light container would not be the same mass as 204 cans.

    You’re a flim-flam man, Scalzi. A dilettante at best, a charletain at worst. Good day, Sir.

  6. Wait a minute. 76.5 Litres divided by 204 cans is 375mL per can. Are Coke Zero cans 375mL? A standard Coke can in Canada is 355mL. I assume they’re labeled as 12 fluid ounces in the US. At 355mL per can, a Scalzi should be 72.42L

  7. I think some of us need a Scalzi of perspective…My simple brain assumed the density of Coke Zero is similar enough to water that weight can be relayed reasonably by a volume (assuming density and gravity are a constant).

    I come from a land that deals in the “Ohio Unit” which is 200lbs.

  8. I so didn’t need that image of Scalzi fondling his nipples at 6:30AM. Now I wish I could and go and sleep that image off.

  9. Justin @15, you’re pandering to the unscientific with your willy-nilly approximations. Did we guess our way to the Moon? Is the computer you’re using based on “that looks about right” bucket chemistry? Have I used my day’s quota of haughty question marks yet? And if I have, is there not enough stuffed-shirt pretention left in me to carry on?

    There is, sir. I assure you – there is.

    http://www.fooducation.org/2007/03/does-light-really-mean-light-part-ii.html

    There. THAT for your guesstimatory sham-mathematics! Ha! I say Ha! There’s at least a .001 gram/millilitre density variation from water, and that doesn’t even include the container.

    *stalks off with the wounded dignity of a heron with a sprained ankle*

  10. Speaking of scales, I just read an interesting article on Yahoo about the 10 states with the worst eating habits. Mine, Arizona, is 9th. Ohio is 8th. At least we aren’t in Mississippi!

  11. Mental floss, where’s the mental floss. Damnit. I just run out and Scalzi goes and puts the image of him flicking his own nipple making it go “sprung” and I’m out of the damn mental floss. Oh, the humanity.

  12. First, it was the image of a shirtless Henry Waxman & now, a self-inflicted purple nurple?

    Shame, have you none?

  13. Wikipedia, schmikipedia. I’ll be impressed when the measurement is rendered in multiple generations of paint on the Harvard Bridge.

  14. We know Scalzi’s weight, and we know the volume of Coke Zero that approximates that weight. So that begs the simpler question – what is Scalzi’s volume?

    If we assume that Scalzi’s density approximate’s the density of Coke Zero (and considering how much Coke Zero he ingests, this would seem a fair assumption), then Scalzi’s volume would also by about 76.5 liters. But of course the higher density of the metallic cans and the lower density of Scalzi’s squishy parts would throw that number off.

    This would be measured most accurately by immersing him in a Coke Zero bath, and seeing how much Coke Zero he displaces. I trust Capricon 32 will add that to the agenda.

  15. The Coke Zero equivalence informtion is still on Wikipedia. Thankfully the fondling of the nipple did not make the cut…

  16. Steve Buchheit:

    Actually, the correct science fictional reference is “spung,” not “sprung.”

    On a slightly related note, type in the domain name “spung.info” and see where it takes you.

  17. OMG John…you crack me up… I need a Scalzi’s worth of PEPSI!!!!! (I quit drinking beer 8 months ago)

  18. Lemme see, the rule of thumb is “a pint’s a pound”. and there are 12 ounces of coke zero per can and one pint is better than two in a bush, times 2 multiplying rabbits, minus 1 submersible, plus sizes at lane bryant, carry the one, and that means…. (click) (click) Scalzi weighs…. (click) (click) (click)…. one fortnight.

    Well. I’m glad we had this talk.

    As for nipple fondling, there’s circular motion and then there’s rapid flick. Be careful what you wish for.

  19. Simon @26, the Coke Zero data is still there on Wikipedantica but the definition of the new unit of measurement was not, so I’ve added it. Now we’ll see how long that lasts.

  20. If the “Scalzi” is going to become a standard unit of measurement, will the International Prototype Scalzi have to be stored in a nitrogen-filled container in some secure vault, so future generations will be confident they know the exact quantity?

    Better bring a book, John.

  21. A full 355ml can of Coke Zero is 366g, but the can itself is 14g… was this accounted for? A ‘true’ scalzi might be 75.26 liters, adjusting for this.

  22. Also, assuming Coke Zero is weighs about as much as a standard soda, you weighed in at about 175 pounds. If I remember, the “Scalzi Weight Loss Plan” was shooting for 165 pounds. Throw in maybe five pounds for clothes and personal electronic devices, and that’s fairly close to your target, so yay!

  23. I find the typo on the Wiki reference amusing. Especially given “on the bog” as a UK euphamism for visiting the lavatory.

  24. Good to see you at Capricon.
    Good to see you being weighed in Coke Zero.
    Good to see your nipple.
    Good. Much.

    See you at the World Con, and I will probably be working that event as well!
    Michael Unger, M.D.

  25. Wait a minute — were those Coke Zeros naked, or contained in cases? If so, we need to compensate for the weight of the empty cases. Fluids, too, are measured in volume ounces, not weight ounces; reality is trickier than that, the standard is volume, but production measures the weight of that volume of product.

    Different can styles, too, have different weights.

  26. Added to German Wikipedia, I hope they accept the new changes, they sometimes prefer more serious contents (but I do have a reliable reference!)…
    btw. Thanks for the Old Man’s War series. I’d never thought that I will be addicted to military sci-fi one day…

    Greetings from Germany

  27. Considering, that 1 kg = 1 L

    I’m a Scalzi and a 1/2…

    I move that we legalize this unit of weight immediately because it sounds cool….

  28. Speaking as one of the minions who was ‘helping’ with the Wikipedia entry, and whose work has now been cruelly deleted, thereby depriving posterity of important information, I thought others might be entertained by the associated notes on the revision history page:

    “13 February 2011: removed uncited silliness”
    “28 February 2011: removed irrelevant trivia”

    Sigh. Our work is unappreciated.

  29. Speaking as another minion who tried to share a scientific breakthrough with the illiterate world, I have to laud English Wikipedia for reasoning their deletion, the Germans just restored the last version without any comment. So our endeavor to educate the people was not fulfilled.

Comments are closed.