Heisenberg joke, I think.

[ChrisGreaves]

Source
There’s a scene in the animated series Futurama that cracks me up every time I think about it.

The show’s characters are at the horse track of the future, but there’s controversy when a race ends very, very closely — so closely that the race officials need a powerful electron microscope to judge the “photo finish.” The track loudspeaker eventually announces, “And the winner is … Number Three, in a quantum finish!”

And Professor Farnsworth, who had bet on the other horse, tears up his tickets in a rage and yells, “No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!”

[John Gray]

"Actually, Heisenberg was completely unprincipled..."
(olde tagline)

[jonwallace]

are you sure...

[HansV]

are you sure...

"Yes, I'm positive."

Oops, sorry, wrong joke...

[BobH]

Thanks for this, folks!

Never was much into physics and was, thus, not familiar with Heisenberg. However, now that I've overcome that encumbrance, I'm going to make ample use of his work.

When dove season comes, I'll be able to explain to my hunting buddies just why it is that they (and I) can't seem to be able to get a bird with every shot (or every 10 or 20 shots).

But every once in a while, the bird proves that Heisenberg was full of feathers.

[Argus]

Source
There’s a scene in the animated series Futurama that cracks me up every time I think about it.

"This again emphasizes a subjective element in the description of atomic events, since the measuring device has been constructed by the observer, and we have to remember that what we observe is not nature in itself but nature exposed to our method of questioning."
Werner Heisenberg

So, if you don't want to hear the wrong answer, don't ask the wrong question. Or perhaps, since we can't close our eyes, ears etc., ask an infinite number of questions.

As for Futurama, it's fun and witty, but I guess they did not need to know the speed of the horse (or part of it...), only its (definite) position... And according to Schrödinger, the whole thing is a bizarre result of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, which meant that the horse was all over the place, perhaps even in the stable, and won just because they were watching.

Me thinks they were a little fluffy over there in Copenhagen, or, I need some more coffee.

BTW, I think that, what the blog post calls, “Easter eggs” also can be found in for example the Monty Python sketches; slapstick (to put it mildly) at one level, literate on another.

We had some bar jokes the other day.
An infinite number of mathematicians walk into a bar. The first one orders a beer; the second orders half a beer, the third asks for a quarter of a beer. Before the next one can speak, the bartender says

Spoiler

"You're all idiots", and pours two beers.

[ChrisGreaves]

... did not need to know the speed of the horse (or part of it...), only its (definite) position... And according to Schrödinger,

To the best of my memory, Schrödinger only knew about cats, and even then not enough to be able to tell if a cat was dead or not.
(If mine continue to engage in wrestling matches at 4:30 a.m. there is going to be, well, dead silence ...."

[stuck]

IM(not so)HO a box is the best place for a cat, dead or alive. For thinking that up, I consider Schrödinger to be a worthy of high esteem.

Ken