Arguments devolve on threads to wordsmithing contests

I will come out with the reverse threaded light bulb and stomp to a feverish beat about how great it is......but nobody will be able to use it in their existing sockets. I will blame them for this.

six months later I will introduce a reverse thread adapter that will enhance the original bulb by several orders of magnitude Dilly Dilly

Nah, I think the concept stated in the OP is due mostly to a lot of folks just think they know more than they do. Don Rumsfeld came close to grasping the fundamentals of this in his theory of "known knowns" and "unknown knowns." It hurts your head if you spend more than a few seconds on it

Personally, I think M.C. Escher should get credit for the double helix; he had drawings of it a decade before Watson & Crick came along.

yeah, I believe that was the title of the piece.......i will guess you will end up with the same thing you started with after cutting, just a smaller version? what do I win? or do I lose?

I'll take infinity for 800

Do the discussions devolve or do they evolve?

I suspect what happens to them is alternating versions of osmosis and capillary action, each in inverse intensity and magnitude to the other. But I could be wrong.

a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma is why Churchill drank a fifth every day.....and it wasn't Beethoven's