SOTD by u/ginopono

u/ginopono posted on 2023-07-04 08:33:05-07:00 (Pacific Standard Time). Reddit Comment (See markdown)

2023-07-04 — It's July

  • Brush: West Coast Shaving - Lantern Brush, Silvertip, Ivory
  • Razor: QShave Adjustable #DIAL
  • Lather: Extro Cosmesi - Liquirizia e Magnolia
  • Post Shave: Stirling Soap Co. - Obsidian (Glacial)
  • Fragrance: Lulu & Bee - Magnolia & Orchid

Challenge Accepted: Science again! I said science again!
(I feel like I should disclaim that I am 100% pro-science. If at any point it sounds like I'm denigrating science, I am not. I also realize I'm very unlikely to be the only one to talk about this.)

Science is one of those things that people everywhere have very strong opinions about, though many—regardless of their stance—may not really be aware of what it is. So what is science?
"Why, surely it's the field of study that deals with hard facts and such, like physics and chemistry, yeah? That's why come our challenge today is all about precise measurements and such!"
Those are sciences, sure, but that's not what science is.

Science is a philosophy, a framework by which one can seek to better understand the nature of... nature. At its core is the Scientific Method, by which one forms hypotheses from observations, tests these hypotheses' predictions, thereby generating more observations, rinse and repeat. Ad infinitum (this part is pretty important).

Put another way, science says that, in order to best understand nature, we must first try to explain what we see, and then try to show that that explanation is wrong. In order for this to be possible, the explanation (theory) must be falsifiable. All scientific theories, by definition, can conceivably be shown to be false.

Enter pseudoscience, which is anything that purports to be science, but does not adhere to the scientific method. A common (but not exclusive) way that pseudosciences deviate from science is with regard to falsifiability.
It is common for pseudosciences to claim to be able to explain anything under their purview, but done in a "just-so" way. These explanations come after the fact; i.e. phenomena are shown to be explainable under the theory as those phenomena arise.
No predictions are made or tested. Why would they be? If the theory can explain everything, then there's nothing that can prove it wrong. If it can't be proven wrong, then it's not science.

Can you believe I actually pared that little rant down by at least 50%?
Oh shit, I'm actually supposed to do something sciency...

Relevant Post Shave and Fragrance: The lather's featured notes unite the distinct prominent scents of the otherwise disparate post-shave and fragrance.

Brush: I'm supposed to disclaim here that I paid $0.00 for this brush. Same story as yesterday: I was buying other stuff, saw that this brush was $0.00, and so I added it to my cart and paid $0.00. If they were trying to clear inventory, that's an effective way to do it.

Razor: This knockoff Futur not only checks off a hardware box, but I'm not convinced that the adjustments really do anything, so this also seems like a decent enough place to pretend to to some science. Hypothesis: if the adjustment settings do anything more than fuck-all, then I will be compelled to avoid a certain range of settings in favor of another. Not super precise, but I'm comfortable enough with the sciency-ness of it.

I'm relying on my subjective assessment of the shave, so I chose to start by going back and forth between extremes before moving to an intermediate setting, checking on those subjective assessments along the way.

Starting off with the lowest setting, it was immediately clear that that was awful. Hypothesis confirmed! The highest setting made for a bit too much blade, so I moved it around a bit from time to time and settled in around 3.5. Side note: I do not care for how much wider wider the head of the razor is beyond the length of the blade; it makes precision under the nostrils difficult.

Lather: I also went ahead and measured my soap usage, because why not. I've seen you guys with your little scales, so I followed suit: by comparing the weight of the jar before and after loading, I was able to determine that I used exactly 0.0 lbs of soap. Huh, I guess the jar's almost empty!

I love anise and licorice; in fact, Stirling's Obsidian was one of my first shave soaps. Fast forward to last year, when I saw this post by u/Marquis90, I knew I had to try Liquirizia e Magnolia.

#FOF

With both licorice and magnolia sharing the spotlight, this soap would be right at home on either Floral Day or Spice Day! I opted for the former, because I thought it best to err on the side of caution, just in case someone decided that licorice wasn't the right kind of spice (not that I'd expect that, especially if they'd tried the Amarelli licorice used in this soap; that is spicy and, speaking from experience, not unlike just chewing on licorice root).

The magnolia accord in this scent seems to envelop the licorice, serving to mellow out its spiciness. They interplay in a way that gives me the impression of an uneasy balance, like a cease-fire in which either one could easily overcome the other if it so chose. Either the magnolia smothers and suffocates the licorice, or the licorice breaks through and overwhelms the magnolia. But the balance rests in this uncertain push-and-pull.

Post Shave: Enter Obsidian, on the spicy side of the battle. Licorice and anise are not quite the same, and they seem interchangeable in my mind, but their subtle differences start to seem more apparent when side-by-side.
I find that Stirling's Obsidian tends to be a bit on the sweeter side (as determined by their supplier's harvest, as I understand), especially when faced with the bold spice of the Amarelli licorice. But they are on the same side of this war. (It's a war now)

Fragrance: Enter, uh... Grandma.

I don't know what I expected with this perfume (and it is a women's perfume), but all I get from it is "Grandma." It is the essence of a crocheted doily draped over a coffee table that is adjacent to a mauve recliner with... yup, some kind of crocheted doily thing on each arm. And the back. That's also where the bland colors of the brush fit in.

Now that I've put both of these on my skin, these two representative armies—the aftershave fighting for the glory of the spice vs the...knitting—continue to fight on my very person. I am really glad I don't have to be near people today; the anise is not winning.

#photocontest

Photo: Fruit
I was about to call this vegetable, considering that, botanically speaking, a vegetable is any edible part of a plant. And then I realized and confirmed that the star anise pods are the fruit of that plant. Science!

I'm compelled to science things up a bit more. The razor thing was in the interest of following the letter of the challenge, but this was my first idea. Forgive me for not formalizing a hypothesis here, but I am going to try to replicate the Ouzo Effect! If you're unfamiliar, anise-flavored liquors like ouzo, pastis, sambuca, and absinthe, when water is added, change from transparent to cloudy; this has to do with something from the anise being soluble in alcohol, but insoluble in water, so it separates from the alcohol when water is added.

First, I'm guessing I'm probably going to need some kind of anise extract, so under the assumption that I make that in the same way as vanilla extract, I'm going to need some of the purest vodka. I don't drink, so I'm just going to use non-alcoholic vodka. And to save time, I'm going to heat that up to boiling before adding the anise and letting it... extract for 5-10 minutes or so.

Behold our anise extract! As expected, it is transparent and non-cloudy. Now, when we add the water...
Horse shit! There you have it, people: I have disproven the Ouzo Effect! Yeah science!

Detected Items:

This SOTD is part of the challenge
  1. SOTD photo scavenger hunt
  2. Lather Games 2023
  3. Feats of Fragrance 2023