Lateral with Tom Scott - 158: Room 556

Episode Date: October 17, 2025

'Map Men' Jay Foreman & Mark Cooper-Jones and Mithuna Yoganathan face questions about accurate aircraft, cute churches and notable names. LATERAL is a comedy panel game podcast about weird questions with wonderful answers, hosted by Tom Scott. For business enquiries, contestant appearances or question submissions, visit https://lateralcast.com. HOST: Tom Scott. QUESTION PRODUCER: David Bodycombe. EDITED BY: Julie Hassett at The Podcast Studios, Dublin. MUSIC: Karl-Ola Kjellholm ('Private Detective'/'Agrumes', courtesy of epidemicsound.com). ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS: Dave Cartwright, Sidney Allison, Steve O’Neill, Daniel Peake, Michael J., Nick Huntington-Klein. FORMAT: Pad 26 Limited/Labyrinth Games Ltd. EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS: David Bodycombe and Tom Scott. © Pad 26 Limited (https://www.pad26.com) / Labyrinth Games Ltd. 2025. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What did the comedian Dino Wilson do? Because he wanted to see his name in lights. The answer to that, at the end of the show, my name's Tom Scott, and this is Lateral. Today's episode is brought to you by gravity, bringing things together since the Big Bang. Gravity, if life gets too heavy, that's our fault. Sorry. Joining me on the show today, there are three other fundamental forces of nature. First, we have from The Matt Men, Jay Foreman, welcome back to the show. Hello, thank you for having me back on the show.

You are, I have to point this out, and I apologise for pointing this out. You are in a studio today. You have a backdrop. You are not in your car trying to find something that works. The last time you had me on the show, it was really bad timing with my home life because I had a sleeping baby, and the only place to record a podcast from that was perfect for soundproofing in internet was my car. but it looked awful and I was so cold

but I'm now in the comfort of my own studio with maps on the wall behind me it's good to be back and for those not watching in video there is a large prop by you with an arrow pointing to it I'm going to ask the other of the map men to talk about that

and Mark Cooper Jones welcome to the show oh thank you very much yeah okay so the audio description here of Jay's screen which I had the pleasure I was on a meeting with him earlier and he decided to set up

well we've got a book coming out in October and you may be able to guess if you're looking at this that it is called This Way Up and you probably won't be able to read. It's also called When Maps Go Wrong and Why It Matters. Jay has also then made a rudimentary cut-out arrow. It's like I'm watching a YouTube thumbnail in real life. I know, well, Jay loves arrows.

Can I also just say, the Jay being in a car, that is not an aberration. The number of meetings I've had with Jay in a car park in Tesco, all that. That happens. It happens a frightening amount, actually. I would say you're probably more at home in a car than you are here in the studio, Jay. You made it sound like you and I have the actual physical meeting both in the car park. I was about to say that, yeah. Oh, yeah, no, no, opposite ends of London. So usually just over some form of teams or Skype, isn't it?

Maybe we should all have our podcast in the supermarket car park. It means that we can have good snacks. It's almost a format. Well, good luck to both of the Mattmen on the show today. You are joined from Looking Glass Universe on YouTube. Yoga Nathan, welcome to the show. Hey, thanks for having me. This is your first time here, the first time meeting our audience. So tell us what's the channel about, what do you do? Yeah, so my YouTube channel is about physics, mostly about quantum mechanics,

very nerdy deep dives into how things work. If there's anything that this show is good for, it's nerdy deep dive, so I'm looking forward to that. Excellent. Any questions in particular you're hoping to come up? Hopefully something, not about geography and a little bit about physics, because I don't want to be completely outsh on here. Well, I do wonder, if a geography question comes up, Jay and Mark,

and it isn't an immediate guess for you, how are you going to feel about that? It's my worst nightmare. Just a geography question, full stop, because it's a no-win situation, isn't it? Oh, you know it. Oh, well done. You do the job of your thing. Oh, you don't know it. You're an idiot and you're a fraud. Well, good luck to all three of you on the show today. It is time to acknowledge the gravity of the situation. Pull yourselves together and weigh up question one.

2% outside, 4% in the fridge, 8% in the bathroom, and 49% on the couch. What am I talking about? I'll give you that one more time, 2% outside, 4% in the fridge, 8% in the bathroom, and 49% on the couch. What am I talking about? Can I start by asking a really stupid question? Yes! Do those percents add up to 100%? Yeah, I was going to ask the same thing.

Because I can't be asked to actually do the maths and work out whether... Hang on. Two, four, eight, and 49. Yes, good memory. The answer's no. The answer is immediately. It's more like a countdown, you know, one from the top and four from the bottom. Yeah, that's 63% if you add up.

Not enough percent. That means there's some percent not accounted for in this. Do we have to find the other 37 percent? Is that what we have to do? That's what it seems like. Or I don't know. Well, the 2% in the fridge makes me think of like 2% milk or something like that. Is it 2%?

Yeah. North America uses 1% 2% milk. We have semi-skimmed and skimmed over here. What is 49% fat that we'd have on the sofa then? That's my first question. I mean, clotted cream, I think, is the technical answer to that question. They were originally going to market it as 49% fat, but then they thought that just doesn't sound as appetising.

They went for clotted cream, which is somehow worse. 4% was in the fridge. Yes, and 8% in the shower. So when you'd got to that point, I was like, is this something to do with humidity? and then you said 49% on the sofa. But I think humidity is much higher than that anyway, isn't it? Normally, it's not like 2% humidity outside.

2% humidity is almost impossible, yes. Yes, it's like much, much higher than that, isn't it? Yeah. So it's not that. Could you call a bucket of water 100% humid? I mean, do you actually want the answer to that, Jay? Because I had to look into humidity for a thing recently, and annoyingly you'll be answer.

If the answer is snappy and interesting, then yes, please. but if it turns out it's going to be quite long and involved, then make it snappy somehow. Humidity percentage is the amount of water that is possible for air to take on before it just starts condensing out. So 100% is like steam. So a bucket of water is in fact not 100% humid.

It's just water. And this hasn't helped us get to the bottom of this. Not in the slightest. It hasn't helped at all. All right, great. Yeah, what else you got? do you guys think that it's supposed to add up or they're like different you know kind of like community each of them is like a percentage of what's possible for that object yes i mean i yeah

good question i don't know um i was also wondering if these four places you've listed are the only places you might take this reading or because they obviously feel very strange and unconnected places on first site so if we're looking to connect them and see what connects them, then, or could we be taking readings in other places like the attic and the chimney and the football pitch or anything? I'm not sure taking readings is the right word here, but yes, this could be any other place. Football pitch would be extremely unlikely. That 49% figure is unsurprising, though. The 49% remind me which one was the 49? That was on the couch. 49 in the couch. Is this a percentage as an amount of time spent doing something?

So, for example, you would spend 49% of your entertainment watched on a sofa, and only 2% of it while staring at your phone looking in the flip. That started to get closer. It's not time spent. Started to, but then I went wrong. Yeah, you're inching towards a solution there, definitely. I'm probably wrong about entertainment, because let's remind ourselves... Oh, I think you're very right about entertainment.

Oh, it is to do with entertainment. Okay, so, okay, what we do know is that it's possibly entertainment, and that 49% on the sofa is normal. But then that means if the rest of it is wrong. So this is not where you are likely to be consuming entertainment. Remind me what the other ones are. 2% in the fridge. What's the rest?

2% outside, 4% in the fridge, 8% in the bathroom. Is it how much you consume something whilst consuming entertainment? For example, crisps. That doesn't work either. In the toilet. How many of the crisps do you have in the bathroom versus in the fridge? You never had a sad bath with a packet of crisps? Unfortunately, no.

Is it to do with how humans use something? Yes. Something, definitely. Okay, because it's not about your location because you never find yourself in the fridge. So, well, you find yourself in front of the fridge. Yeah, it doesn't mean in front of the fridge. You don't find yourself in the fridge, Mark,

but you've come very close with that. You don't find yourself in the fridge. No, no, you don't. But the thing you find in the fridge only 2% of the time and are we happy with the interpretation of the time? Yeah, yeah, I think you've got that. So 2% of the time when you find this thing,

you find this thing in the fridge. Yeah, it's 2% outside, 4% in the fridge, yeah. Is it things to clean? Is it to do with cleaning? It's a bit more frustrating than that. I think I might... Well, hang on, I'm excited for no good reason. Is this a percentage of where things get lost and then found? Yes, yes it is.

So it's 49% on the couch. Does anyone want to guess what that thing might be? Your phone? The remote control. The remote control. The remote control. This was a survey. How was it in the fridge?

The fridge? I've put it in the fridge. I'm part of that 4% statistic. I wonder if I got surveyed. I will absolutely walk out and put a remote control in the fridge. I have to check the fridge every time I'm looking for anything. Yeah, it's quite regular for me. This is a perhaps slightly questionable survey in 2011 by Logger.

who detailed where people had found their TV remote, 49% of the time, in the couch somewhere, 8% in the bathroom, 8% to dress a drawer, 4% in the fridge freezer, 2% outside somewhere like in the car, or, as he said, on the football pitch. Hang on, who's funding research into where you've left the remote control? Logitech. Yes, when I say this is one of those slightly dodgy surveys,

this was 2011, which is kind of the peak of companies commissioning some science to go in a newspaper to get some column inches. Like, we've discovered the formula for beauty. We've figured out the percentage of time people find their remote somewhere. How accurate this is, couldn't tell you, but you are absolutely right. It's a survey by Logitech saying that most of the time you find your remote in the couch.

Each of our guests has brought a question along with them. We're going to start today with Mark. Okay, well, this question has been sent in by Steve O'Neill. When Boeing introduced advanced autopilot systems to their aircraft, they were soon asked to make the ILS worse. Why? I'll say it again. When Boeing introduced advanced autopilot systems to their aircraft, they were soon asked to make the ILS worse. Why? What's IELS? ILS is the instrument landing system, which I worry has just taken out 50% of the banter. in this question.

Yeah, let's go back a step and say, guys, what does ILS stand for? Let's have a five-minute writing period and then give me your best answers, because that's what they do before the panel shows. They get the questions in advance, they get time to think of their jokes. I was going to split it into three.

What does the I stand for? And then once we've nailed that... It's the imbecile launch system. It's for when you need to eject a passenger who's just causing too much trouble. And you're on the right track there, Tom? Really? No. Okay, hang on. They deliberately were supposed to make the instrument landing system.

Was that it? They were told to make it worse. They were asked to make it worse. And Tom, you are right. That is what ILS stands for. It's the instrument landing system. Can I posit a theory? You can. So if I was... That's the game. I nearly. I nearly said something along those lines, Mark.

And then I thought, that's a bit too rude to do to a guest. So thank you. Thank you for doing that. for me. That was appreciated. Oh, Mark used to talking to me like that. Well, because I don't think this is necessarily the solution, but it's an idea I've had. If I was a trained up proper airline captain with the four epaulets on my shoulder, and I had a robot pilot that was really good, I'd be tempted to kick back and read a book. So surely if the autopilot's too good, that's actually a safety risk, or is that rubbish? I mean, it's a good thought, but that's not what it is.

No, it's not about pilots kicking back too much or anything like that. And passengers aren't going to complain that the landing is too smooth? No, you'd think not. Oh, okay, but they will. No, no, I mean, sorry. That was, again, me being probably slightly withering. What I mean is there's no way that would happen, no, Tom. Just for the avoidance of doubt.

Tom, have you ever flown a plane? I've sort of taken the controls of a little one for a while, just kind of as what is a training flight or something like that. And I have landed a plane in a simulator once for a video. So on average, yes. On average, yes. You know what thing where there was going on? Like, most men believe that in an emergency, they could land the plane? If you magically get through the cockpit door, which you can't, and you magically connect to air traffic content,

so there's someone to talk you down, which you can't, then yeah, it's really easy. Those are the difficult bits. Getting through the door and getting the radio to work. Yeah. Sorry, you can't talk to air traffic control if you get... That's the one thing you need, if you need to... Yeah, I thought...

So my knowledge of this comes from the film, Airplane. I've always just assumed that that's how I would be able to land a plane. But then again, if you look at what autopilot is in airplane, it is just an inflatable doll, which for far too long, I thought was the case, because I watched it when I was quite young. You'd think going in and talking to air traffic control would be easy. But like, if you walk into that cockpit, there is just a headset and an enormous amount of control panel.

And the odds of you actually hitting the right button and turning to the right frequency, unless you already know that, basically zero. So if you walk into this cockpit, is there just like a massive button that's called autopilot? No. Just click that. Absolutely not. All right, what happens? How do you plan a plane on autopilot?

I'm going to point you to my video about that. Okay, great. That's a good plug. But that's the reason only what ILS was. Because instrument landing system, once you line it up, it basically lands itself. Like there are exceptions. Strong winds, odd things happening. That's why you still have a human pilot.

But for 90 plus percent of landings, you can flick the instrument landing system on. It will follow the guideway down and land the plane. But they were told to make it worse. Yes. I'll just as a sort of first clue then, I mean, you know, Tom already got that we're in the space of landing. So you need to think around that space, obviously, and what's involved in that, but it wasn't something that was affecting passenger safety. It's nothing to do with passenger safety whatsoever. So if I was an airline captain, would I be pleased that they'd made it worse? Is it for my benefit? It's not for your benefit at all. In fact, it's not for the benefit of anyone on the plane,

not the captains, not the crew, and not the passengers. Is this something to do with controlled obsolescence? Because I know that they deliberately make light bulbs that go bang in order to keep the light bulb industry a thing. Is that in any way related to planes being harder to land on purpose? What do you expand on that? What do you mean? What would be obsolescence in this case?

What are you referring to? I haven't figured out stage two. Stage one is controlled obsolescence in light bulbs. Stage three is this is the solution to the landing conundrum. I'm hoping stage. two would come to me, but no. The only thing I would say is you could apply the word obsolescence, but I don't think in the logical way that you are,

not using the same logic as you. It's not sort of a, it's not about keeping the industry, it's not about, you know, intentional obsolescence to keep an industry going, if you like. But the word obsolescence could apply to the answer here. Is it something to do with the plane? Like maybe the older planes, for some reason, were having some difficulty with the better landing system,

maybe like more wear and tear or something? You're wrong about everything until the last three words. Where and tear are the words that you might want to focus on there. Those are really good words. But the bit before, it's not about the... Okay. Interesting. I remember when 5G phone networks were turned on in the US, there was a worry they could disrupt

some sort of air traffic control instrument system. But this was like early autopilot, right? You said this was right. This is the beginning of autopilot, so very early days. So, and there's another clue because we all sort of start a circle around the right area, I think. With sort of, if you have the idea of obsolescence and wear and tear, yeah, we're taxing round. The busier airports were the ones that were requesting this change. Is it wear and tear of the runway?

Because busier airports would have, you know, a lot of that. And they're landing in the exact same position. Oh, that's a... And they'd wear it down leaving tie-mox. Yeah. Oh, cool. Yeah, you're exactly that. You're absolutely right.

So both of both of you, and then are well done and Tom as well, getting over the line. That's exactly what it is. The instruments were too good and the planes were landing in the exact same place. So the instrument landing system allows pilots to automate the landing of the aircraft.

It was so precise that many planes were landing in exactly the same place every single time, causing uneven wear and tear to the runway. The airports asked if the tolerances of the autopilot landing position, otherwise known as the longitudinal scattering could be changed

so that the touchdown points had more variety. So yeah, that was what it was. Well done. You got there. With Amex Platinum, access to exclusive Amex pre-sale tickets can score you a spot trackside. So being a fan for life turns into the trip of a lifetime.

That's the powerful backing of Amex. Presale tickets for future events subject to availability and vary by race. Turns and conditions apply. Learn more at mx.ca. Thank you to Nick Huntington Klein for this next question. In 1980, soft soap became the first company to sell liquid hand soap to consumers. However, there was nothing about the soap that could be legally protected.

How did they prevent industry giants from copying the idea for over a year? I'll say that again. In 1980, soft soap became the first company to sell liquid hand soap to consumers. However, there was nothing about the soap that could be legally protected. How did they prevent industry giants from copying the idea for over a year? Did they make it really bad? So it just didn't really work. I mean, they said that it was only a year later that people followed them.

So it doesn't seem like you could get that much of the lead in a year, unless the technology for some reason is quite difficult, like making a pump. Did they market it as something else so that for a whole year nobody knew it was supposed to be be soap and they wouldn't try copying it. You know, it was available to buy. They could test it out on the market, but people were eating it. And then they'd reveal one year later, aha, we'll finally able to copyright the, don't eat it, lovely hand soap. And sales had been so high up to that point, but they got that, you know, they got a real head start commercially, didn't they? My sister once convinced me that a bar of, like, cream-colored soap was solid white

chocolate. How far did that convincing go? I sniffed it and went, no, it wasn't. But, you know, I came close. I wonder if there is something in the pump thing, whether it's to do, I mean, it's not the most advanced piece of tech, is it a hand pump? Well, it determines when this was, because, I mean, mass producing that. Oh, 1980, okay. I think. So before 1980, there was no liquid soap and all soap was like that solid bar of soap at your grandma's house. All consumer soap, certainly. When you say consumer soap, actually, sorry, what's, what, I'm saying this is just for people buying it for their houses, or does that include kind of schools and public places

and stuff like that? No, this would be the sort of thing that would be on sale in the supermarket, to like the individual household. So if you're another company, you see a liquid soap from the market and you've got your old bars and you're like, oh no,

it's the old, horrid, hairy bars. And they've got liquid soap and that's so much nicer and I'm buying it, we should produce that. But we can't. Or we won't. of those, because, but it's not a legal issue. It's not a legal issue.

It's not a legal issue. It's not a legal issue. The reason... But you have correctly done some character work there and identified what the other soap companies and chemical companies would have been thinking. We want to rip that off, but we can't because. And it's can't that not won't.

Yeah. Because they couldn't get... They couldn't produce bottles. They couldn't get the bottles. Now, Jay at this point is bouncing up and down in his chair. And I don't think it's because he's excited about my bottles suggestion. Jay, what is it? Well, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But could it be that it takes precisely a year for the product to form? I was so sure that you got it there, Jay. And unfortunately,

only because I got excited. Yeah, it's just because you got excited. Mark is actually quite close there. The bottles thing. We're back to the bottles. We're back to the bottles. Okay. So they couldn't, yeah, they weren't, it's a, I mean, the basic answer, which is not going to be because of the way this podcast works is that they just, you know, it takes that long to start producing a new product. That's just the lack time. It's like, oh, God, how do we do this? Oh, got to figure it out. Okay, well, then building a factory. Let's assume that the competitors could have pivoted to this pretty quickly. Okay. You were talking about the bottles, and you seem to have forgotten the bottles. Remind me what you said about the bottles, Mark.

I just said they weren't set up to put things in bottles. They had to find bottles. Oh, that's not what you said, Mark. You didn't say they have to find bottles. Oh, well, that was what I was thinking. Is that the bit I missed that was the good bit? That's the bit you missed. That was the good bit. They had to find bottles.

Well, Jay's started bouncing around. That thought was at the front of my... And then Jay's jumping up and down with his, you know, how long it takes to brew soap, I dear, because, again, it's back to consumer, consuming it. Okay, well, okay, so it's difficult to find bottles, really? Maybe, because, I mean, I guess these soap companies didn't have to have bottles before, but maybe this other company was like pivoting from being like some sort of like Coca-Cola company

or something like that. And now they have put soap into those bottles. That's cool, I think. When you're thinking like liquid soap, what's that sold in? Obviously a bottle, but... With a plunger. What do you mean by the plunger? Well, I mean, there's probably a technical name. The bit that you push down and it squirts out. Is that not called the plunger? I'll go with...

We're going to call it the plunger now for the rest of this show. I usually find it in the fridge. Yeah, so that bit is a little... Hand pump. A little hand pump on the top, yes. Of course, yes. The hand pump bit is obviously the most...

It feels like the most technical bit that previous soap bar manufacturers would not have been set up to do it. And obviously there's... Because... I mean, I don't know about how that works, but you've got to get... For the viscosity, you've got to have the right sort

of hand pump, haven't you? You do have to have the right kind of hand pump. There's a slight technicality to this hand pump mechanism, one would assume. But something that's probably more interesting than, did you know it takes about a year to get it just right? Is it about the material that the bottles are made out of, and the availability of that? No. Oh, you're very close.

Just the last bit of the question. How did they prevent industry giants from copying the idea for over a year? They bought a year's worth of supply of all the bottles on the planet just for themselves? Yes, they did, Jay. Absolutely right. Wait, how? Soft soap was sold in bottles with a hand-operated pump at the top. At the time, there were only two manufacturers of plastic hand pumps in the US, and this is the 1980s.

So couldn't really go for international trade here. This was just US manufacturing. Their parent company, Minotonka Corporation, raised all the money they could and placed an order of 100 million hand pumps. Wow. Can you imagine that hadn't paid off? Right? Yeah, then they just go to, you know, Sweden and say, oh, we'll use your hand pump factory, thanks.

And also, ours smells better. Bad luck. Enjoy your debt. A hundred million is ludicrous. Like, that's like one in three people in America now that they expected to just buy the site. Did they just block out future orders or did they all arrive like the next day and they had to store them? I would imagine it wasn't that big a problem because that creates enough backlog in the factories for a year. Wow.

That was how they blocked it. They simply bought all the manufacturing capacity of both hand pump factories for a year. So any other company launching, they could launch liquid soap, but it wouldn't have the hand pump. I mean, that is a really ballsy move, though, isn't it? I mean, I'm really impressed by that. That just, that sounds commercially terrifying to do that. You have to be so sure your soap is going to, nobody's, nobody's used it yet, it hasn't caught on.

But then, I mean, hairy bars of soap are bad, so. It caught on well enough that after millions of dollars in sales, the brand was sold to Colgate palm olive in 1987 for $61 million. Medina, it is over to you for the next question, please. All right, so the next question was sent in by Dave Cartwright. James checks in at a hotel in Dubai. The receptionist says, welcome Mr. Somerset. I've allocated you to room 556.

James goes to his room, but instead of entering it, he leaves the hotel and never returns. Why? So I'll repeat the question one more time. James checks in at a hotel in Dubai. The receptionist says, welcome Mr. Somerset. I've allocated you to room 5.56. James goes to his room, but instead of entering it, he leaves the hotel and never returns. Why?

That was an interesting detail there. He didn't, as soon as he got told Mr. Somerset, your room is from. five, five, six. He didn't, like, leave straight away. He went to the room like he saw the door and then left. Is that a crucial bit of information? Yeah. I wonder if James is a human or the name of something else. I mean, I thought James might be a celebrity, which I realise implies I don't think of celebrities as human. We're on the same page, Tom. Well, celebrities often use funny names when they check into hotels. That's what I was thinking. James Somerset. James Somerset.

Feels like a celebrity or something like that. Yeah, just because it's a hotel in Dubai, my thought is it's someone who has enough money to pull off a stunt that involves somebody checking in downstairs and asking for a room and then not actually going in there. It sounds like a gag from Mission Impossible, complete with fake name and... But we said they go up to the room door,

but there was some wording along those lines. Yeah, I can read that, but it again. He goes, James goes to his room, but instead of entering it, he leaves the hotel and never returns. Goes to the room, as in sees where the room is, sees where the door is, that doesn't give them a chance to find out anything about the room itself, because it might be a simpler question if it was. They opened the door, look at the room, but instead of staying the night they leave.

They don't even enter the room. They don't enter the door. So what can you know about it before deciding, well, my work here is done? There's too much ceremony over this. there's a version of this question which is just a man. He does this. And there's so much James Mr. Somerset, none of which, well, I mean, sorry, they do sound real. James sounds like a very real name. No offence, 20 Jameses. But, you know, the Mr. Somerset thing feels like something out of a spy thing or, you know, it feels like a code name, doesn't it? Yeah, because Mr.

Thameter is actually quite an unlikely name. It's been written by chat GPT. This sounds like a British surname, but we all know isn't really. You're right that that is a very unusual name and maybe isn't his real name. But it could be any other name. It could be Mr. Dorset. Yeah. Yeah, it could have been Mr. Dorset. Mr. Real Human Man.

Okay, so it's a spy thing. And that's very relevant here. Oh, it could be that he intended to go up to the room. He wanted to go in the room, but he was stopped by some sort of murder. That sentence didn't end how I expected. Yeah, it didn't seem to end like that. But he was stopped by some sort of murder, like all these murders we've been talking about. It's bad.

He never came back and they seemed quite sure in the word. No, he left the hotel. Oh, he left the hotel. Out the window? Did he notice something maybe? Did he see that the room next door was clearly bugging him or something like that? No, but he did notice something on the door. He needs to stay in a room that has a peephole so that he can be safe.

When he sees that there is no peephole, he'll know that if I ever go in the room, I won't be able to look out of the room. They've reversed the peephole on the door so you can see in. No, these are good guesses, but you're going further away. So maybe I'll give you another clue. So the number of the room is important, 556. But also he knew when he booked the room and the receptionist said 556, he knew it was 556. So it can't just be the number itself that put him off.

He had to see for himself what room 556 was. The repeated digit is famous in another context. And it's obviously got the rhythm of 007, but I feel like that's irrelevant as well. That 007 reference is important. But is it like an agent number? No, that can't be right. It is an... So the room number is like an agent number in this case.

But instead of the seventh most important, they're the 556 most important. And actually, it's just an insult. Yeah, maybe that number you could think about another way that that number might be represented. Oh, Roman numerals. VV1. What does that mean?

VVR. So, yeah, I'm just in... Wouldn't a hotel in Dubai ever write his hotel room name in Roman numerals, though? So it's actually a terrible suggestion from me. No, but I think you're actually on the right track. So what, like, you know, way might a hotel in Dubai write the numerals? Is it to do with the Arabic language? Which 2% of Dubai speaks.

So do we need to know, for instance, how they would write 5, 5, 6? Oh, wait, backwards. No, is that wrong? It's not 655, is it? No. No, if you use Arabic numerals, they still go left to right, even in right to left text, I think. Unless there is another number system used in that script, but I don't know what... Do we need to know the Arabic numerals? I'm not going to be able to get us there, if so. Do we need to know them? Yeah, I think you basically got it. Yeah, so you would need to know the Arabic numerals to answer this,

Well, I mean, to be clear, like, Arabic numerals, annoyingly are what we call the numbers we use. There's got to be another name for this. Yeah, that's what I was confused about. I thought, you know, the numbers that we all use around the globe today were of Arabic origin. So Arabic numerals means normal numerals, doesn't it? So, yeah, I had a look into this. It's really interesting. So apparently the system of, like, using base 10 and also zeros for places and everything

came from India, went to the Arabic speaking world. and then was translated into various other languages and spread to Europe. But in that time, there was certain, like, different ways to write it. And so the one that became more prevalent in that part of the world is the Western version, I think the Eastern version, I can't remember. And so it looks slightly different from the version we use, but is otherwise the same, like the same type of numbers. They just have different symbols for each of the digits.

so 5-5-6. Does that look like 007? Yeah. If you use the glyph from that part of the world. That's right. Oh. Oh.

And so, yeah, do you want to fill in the rest of the story? Like, why did he turn around in? Okay, so he saw the words, he saw the letters what looked like 007 on his door because they were using, for some reason, in Dubai, the old-fashioned Arabic writing system. And he is a spy.

That's why he's checking in with the fake name. Yes. And then they go, we know you're a spy by putting you in room 007, Mr. Somerset. And he's like, they're on to me. They know I'm a spy with their secret special code. I'm off. That's exactly right. He realizes that they know he's actually James Bond. Oh, that's lovely. And if you were trying not to give that aware, would you give him that room with literally 007 written on your door? It's a bit silly. No, hang on.

Especially since I let him leave. Oh, he spotted it. Our Bond spotted the 007 on the door. This is why he's a world-class spy. Unless we've added an unnecessary extra detail to the story, it's plausible that the room, because it's a normal hotel in normal Dubai, did still say 556, but his knowledge of Arabic.

But then he wouldn't have to get all the way up to the room. No, I think that the other numeral system is actually used in Dubai and certain parts of the Arabic. Arab Peninsula. So certain hotel rooms will write both the, like, Latin version and also that version. For the authentic look, for all those hotel guests who couldn't otherwise read, you know, the other Arabic numeral system. I think it's actually, it thinks it's more like different parts of the Arab world use the two different systems. And so Dubai uses the system that doesn't look like our one. Thank you to Michael Jay for sending this next question

During the Battle of Leyte Gulf in 1944, Japanese battleships narrowly missed the aircraft carrier USS White Plains. According to some accounts, an American sail equipped, they're shooting at us in Technicolor. What was happening? I'll say that again. During the Battle of Leite Gulf in 1944, Japanese battleships narrowly missed the aircraft carrier, USS White Plains. According to some accounts, an American sail equipped, they're shooting at us in Technicolor.

What was happening? Were they shooting light? It kind of sounds like maybe they were shooting some sort of light to mess up their system or something. Does anyone know how Technicolor works? How does that... But like that could... Technicolor is a system of weights and pulleys and sorcery.

It looks really good Technicolor, doesn't it? Sorry, this is definitely divergent. But I sort of realized recently how good Technicolor actually looks in that the colours are so vibrant and it's got a real palette to it and I was like, oh, they invented that ages ago but I'd sort of possibly even prefer it to obviously the ultra-realism that we have today.

Well, it could be that when they say technicolor, it's in an era when technicolor didn't specifically mean brightly colored colorful films. They mean newfangled technology. So when someone bombs you with loads and loads and loads of technology that's very modern, you'd be like, this is technicolor, you know, that's the word that means. the most up-to-date and brightly lit thing.

Is it about the clarity with which they're seeing being fired at... Well, it's more likely to be colour, isn't it? Yeah, it is more likely to be colour, but I appreciated all the diversions there. I mean, you kind of write about shiny new technology. It's just not quite that way round. The Japanese were using an older technology. Interesting.

Wait, so just to clarify, is this World War II? This is World War II, yes. And okay, because Technicolor doesn't, did it exist? I didn't realize it existed so. Oh, okay. Well, Technicolor, as we know, came along just in time for the Wizard of Oz when the real world changed from black and white to colour. Yes.

Because before then, the real world was in black and white, and we've got the records to prove it. Okay, so hang on, that's really throwing me, though, you say. Japanese are using older technology. Yeah. You're on the right lines of technology. It's Japanese using... It's like being fired out in Technicolor.

Yeah. Oh, is the older technology more colourful then? Definitely. Then what they, yes, of course. I mean, yes, because colour in weaponry doesn't necessarily correlate to advancement. It's a more colourful and therefore better weapon. Right, yeah. It's not how it happens.

If anything, so, okay, but, okay, so as I don't remember from chemistry, there are sort of different elements that explode in different colours, something like magnesium and lithium and those ones on that side of the table. Has it got anything to do with that sort of business? Are they shooting them with fireworks? I mean, in the sense that there is... I ended the sentence differently to how I started it, I'm aware of that. I just said new thought popped into my head.

If they're shooting them with fireworks, is there an accompanying? D-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d. I mean, in the sense that there are rockets going towards the ship with explosive stuff in them, yes, I feel like the definition of firework has to be stretched a little bit for that to work. But, yeah, I like that sedition of it being about the colours of the explosions. Is that sort of... It is. That seems like...

Yes. Not necessarily the explosions themselves. But the bits that... The ignition bit, you know, like the bit where they light the cannon fuse. Are you now... So now we need to say what colour it was or why. No. It wasn't the explosion where the colour was.

Oh. The engines? No. Is it that there are different warning lights for different types of... coming, oh, the ship's going to get damaged. So, like, red light means very soon, white light means very, very, very soon. And because there were so many missiles coming in, the alarms went off in Technica. No, it's not that. But are we talking things that are being fired at them, and it's their, it's their smoke coming out behind them.

It was the water that was turning bright colours. All these vessels are sea vessels. This is all happening on the sea, and the missiles are mostly going, like, through the sky from one bit of sea to another bit of sea. But they're missing. Because that's the crucial thing. They almost hitting the USS, what's it called? And therefore, where they're hitting the sea, they're hitting rainbow trout. There we go.

Lots of rainbow trouts. No, but obviously something about the impact. So it's the reaction with water of whatever's in the explosive that's creating a new colour. Or is it just the oiliness? Well, remember older technology? Older technology like gunpowder or radar. Oh, radar's a good shout, Jay. Radar.

Oh, radar's not an old technology, that was about it. It's not, that's the new one. Yeah. So... Oh, so what's the old one? Oh, what do they have before? Radar. The Americans had radar. Oh, the Japanese had what then? Hmm. And why would it turn the water different colours?

They used to locate things, not using radar, but some sort of system of weights and pulleys with coloured dye. I mean, not a system of weights and colours, Jay, but coloured dye is the right word. And the dye would be used to detect whether there was some sort of weapon coming in, where if a wet... I'm going to abandon even that word, let alone the sentence, because I don't know where I was going with it. Okay, so the radar used to locate where other vessels are, possibly, or incoming missiles, as you're saying, Jay, but it's more vessels.

The Japanese battleships do not have that. So instead, what they're doing is spreading dye around. Yes. And then... And the reason for the coloured dye is because if a bit of sea gets attacked, it changes the colour, and you can see from far away, they've attacked this bit.

Yeah. Yes. I don't know how that's helpful, though. Mithina, I think you're about to kick it home there. Oh, I'm not sure. I was thinking that maybe they could see it from further away. Like, they couldn't see the ship, but they could see the dye spots.

And so they could be like, well, we haven't fired at this spot yet. So let's try that. More or less there. Like a big game of battleships. Yeah. With big areas and the color coding sorts it into, with weights and pulleys,

it's a three-pillar... You know what, Jay, I think between you and Method, you've kicked that one home. Japanese battleships didn't have radar. They relied on optical range finders. So the Japanese looked to see where the previous shell had last. landed. So possibly with a system of weights and pulleys, they could adjust the aim and then

fire the next shell closer. Oh. So they created like a patchwork quilt. Yeah. That was the battleship's grid, essentially. And then they would fire, that's clever. Wait, so they could see the boat that they wanted to get, but they would miss and then they'd be like, okay, that was we overshot. So, well, because we saw where the die went. So let's, uh, let's pull it back a bit. Oh, that's clever. Absolutely right. If the ship, Shell missed its target, the dye that was added in a space at the front, would create this massive, visible, colourful splash on the water. Other navies have used this as well, but the quote, they are shooting at us in technicolor, came from allegedly an American sailor who just

saw the patterns spread out on the sea. That is so cool and interesting, but also easily defeatable by bringing your own dye. And when you work out which one is near and far, you just chuck a load of a different colour on it. Well, question, why did they use different colours? There were different colours in the sea. It wasn't just one. Why might you do that? So that you could have a system in place

where, you know, the cold of the colour, the blue of the colour, the higher your number was, so that you could basically, the colour could be interpreted as a number of metres up to fire with the... Waits and pullies! Would you use a colour... Would you use like a gradation almost,

or like, you know, some sort of... of colour wheel where you're like the first, and then we go further away. Oh, no, nothing so precise, because they're just loading these in and firing them. So you've got lots of different, what you're saying is there's lots of different battleships firing, so you need your colour. Yes, you do. Yeah. And every ship needs a different way.

Yes. There are several Japanese battleships, so each ship used a different colour. That is fun, isn't it? But then if you're on the ship and you've got six different colours around you, you're like, oh, we are day-numbered here. Honestly, we're in so much trouble. Is that Move? Oh, God.

Indigo's come into play. Jay, it is your question whenever you're ready. This question has been sent in by Sydney Allison. And the question is, in Keystone, Nebraska, the little church contains pews that incorporate an unusual feature. What is it? And why was it needed?

Back question again. In Keystone, Nebraska, the little church contains pews that incorporate an unusual usual feature. What is it and why was it needed? Does anyone know anything about Nebraska? Does anyone know anything about churches? Nebraska's in the middle. It is. It's one of the plain states. It's very flat. I think it is the middle. Or at least, I don't know about technically, but to the eye,

Nebraska's bang in the middle. And pews are the benches in church, right? The way you sit down. Yeah. So sorry, was it a little design, a feature, did you say, on the pews? Yeah, there's a special thing about those pews. It's very unusual for a church. Was they, is it some sort of electronic thing? Like, you know, you press a button and it transforms into a more comfortable seat.

It doesn't say that there's any electronics involved, but you could definitely have this thing with or without electronics. I'm going to guess without. Okay. Keystone. I'm just thinking Keystone cops now. There's some comedy thing where that's a reference that half the audience isn't going to get. But, you know, you just set the pew out

and suddenly there's a lot of people running around it and doing a chase scene. Well, I got the reference and I liked it. And also, if you were making one of those, this feature would be very handy. Well, I don't know what this... Sorry, what was the reference, Tom? Keystone Cops was an old,

I think, black and white, silent comedy skit, I think, Jay. My comedy history knowledge is not great. If you're imagining like Charlie Chaplin films where there's lots and lots of policemen, like an increasing number of policemen chasing you all around and you have to find different ways

of trapping them and losing them. If I was making one of those, I'd film it in this church. But don't be thrown by it because the name Keystone is actually a massive coincidence here. Okay. It is not going to help you find out

what the pews do's. So does it help, did it assist, sort of a question for the floor, I guess, but do we think it might have assisted more with the religious experience aspect of this, you know, is this about getting closer to God, or is this about bum comfort and something else? I feel like it's about bum comfort, because pews are so uncomfortable.

They're hard, aren't they? Yeah. I mean, surely that could just be solved with chairs. Or cushions. I'd like the idea of the pews help you get closer to God. There is just, you know, a button you put, it just steadily rises up. Yeah, just a little bit higher. Exactly. Yes. I'm the closest today. So, Mark, you said it was to do with being closer to God and being more comfortable. It is both. Maybe there's, you know how there's parts in a church service where you have to stand up and sit down? Maybe it like helps you stand up. Or forces the parishioners to stand up. Like an jack button. The priest, Vic, I don't know what the US equivalent of Parsons is. I was going with Parsons, flicks a switch, and they're just gently raised into position.

It's not that. And then it pulls them back down by the shoulders. Oh, yeah, when it's ready to get down. It's not that. I will say that, you know, these pews, you can, you know, they do have this very unusual feature, but you can sit down and stand up whenever you like. So, okay, so there's something about comfort. There's something about getting closer to God, and it's definitely, definitely more

technical than a cushion. Do all the pews have it? Yes, yes, they do. Yeah, yeah, okay. As far as I'm aware, every pew in this little church, and that's a bit of a clue, a little church has this feature. Have I think about the sort of town we're in? Have you heard of this town?

No, and it's in Nebraska, which has a population that is tiny. Yes, Tom, the small population is a clue. Does it, like, bring people... Is it like something where the chairs move so that, you know, you don't have all this empty space? space at the back, everyone's sort of like pushed to the front? Maybe once a year they host something and there's suddenly a lot of people there and they have like double-decker pews.

No, Tom, they don't ever have more than just a handful of a small number of people in there. But, Mithina, you said the chairs move. Do they have wheels? That's sort of it. How do they move? You said that it wasn't electronic, right? So it must be something like wheels or something like more mechanical. Is it Catholic?

Yes and no. the answer to that question must be yes and no oh so it's for people who do need to get received transubstantiation mass the bread and the body of Christ who need to be wheeled up

and the rest of them don't know Tom's ready to say something better I'm going to say something because if that's Jay's answer to is it Catholic is this shared between denominations yes it is so what happens to the chairs to allow the tiny church to share between denominations.

If you accidentally sit next to somebody the same denomination, it moves you apart. This is a feature that you also get on Japanese trains. And you get on some American trains as well, which is that, oh, this, how do I explain this? With a system of weights and pulleys. Okay, on a lot of Japanese trains, particularly the Shinkansen,

you can move the seats the back of the seats so they always face forward. Absolutely right. So I'll give you the answer. It's a teeny tiny village with a small population but they wanted to build a church

that both the Protestants and the Catholics could use and so the cleverest most cost-effective way to do it was to build a, and let's just see how they phrased it. Completed in 1908, the little church has a Catholic altar

at one end and Protestant altar at the other. The special cues have reversible backs which allow churchgoers to face either altar depending on which service was taking place. The last regular services were held in 1949. It's now maintained as a historical building. Which leaves me with the question from the top of the show. Thank you to Daniel

Peake for sending this one in. What did the comedian Dino Wilson do? Because he wanted to see his name in lights. Anyone want to take a quick punt at that before I give the answer to the audience? He spelt his name in lights. He got a little laser pointer and did a signature on the side of a Did he change the name that was sort of up there with, like, my moving two lights, and then suddenly his name was up there? He changed a name, yes. He changed his name by Deep Pole to exit. Spot on, Jay.

Really? Fire exit. What? Yes. Dina Wilson changed his name to fire exit. He wanted to be the one of the most famous people in the world and have his name up in lights wherever he went. So for 17 quid, he filed the deed pole, and his name is now Fire Exit.

Thank you very much to all of our players. Where can people find you? What's going on your lives? start with Mithner. You can find me at Looking Glass Universe on YouTube. Mark. Where you find Mat Men on YouTube at Jay Foreman, or just type in Map Men, and that's where we do our stuff.

And Jay. As well as watching Map Men, you can now read Map Men. We've got a book coming up very soon called This Way Up When Maps Go Wrong, and it's available in all good bookshops near you, thank you. And if you want to know more about this show, you can do that at Lateralcast.com. We can also send in your own ideas for questions. We are at Lateralcast, basically everywhere. video episodes every week on Spotify.

Thank you very much to Jay Foreman. Bye-bye. Mark Cooper Jones. Thank you, bye. Medina Yogan, Nathan. Thanks. I've been Tom Scott, and that's been Lattery. Ark Raiders, a multiplayer extraction adventure video game

set in a lethal yet vibrant future earth. As a raider scavenging the remnants of a derelict world, you settle into an underground settlement. Hoping to thrive, you jump on the chance to start over. But doing so means you must return to the surface where arc machines roam, and survivors' motives remain dangerously unclear. But if you're brave enough, who knows what you might find? Play the server slam open test from October 17th through 19th on PlayStation 5 Xbox Series X&S and PC.