No
reply to Fretful_Porpentine:
You said one of the sciences involved was psychology…
Psychology of cows? Yes
Psychology of people? No
If this particular scientific advancement had not happened…
Would Charles still have been able to drink milk from a cow? Yes
From this particular cow? Yes
Did it have to do with scientific advances in farming and how it impacted the cows, and their milk?
Did it involve increased production of milk from cows?
Yes
No
Was it proof that mechanical milking didn’t make cows give spoiled milk?
Hey, this was kind of my next inquiry. Great Q.
No.
Is it likely that a consumer at home who’s having a nice, cold glass of milk along with a couple of freshly baked chocolate chip cookies would notice a difference between this milk and any regular cow’s milk that would have come from the store?
replt to dirtball:
Is it likely that a consumer at home who’s having a nice, cold glass of milk along with a couple of freshly baked chocolate chip cookies would notice a difference between this milk and any regular cow’s milk that would have come from the store?
No
Did tgis have to do with Babcock and his experiments on only feeding cows specific grains?
reply to kitap:
Did tgis have to do with Babcock and his experiments on only feeding cows specific grains?
no
Psychology of cows was relevant. So…
Was the cow, broadly speaking, happier than normal cows?
Was the cow less happy than normal cows?
Did some relevant humans believe, possibly mistakenly or with insufficient evidence, that the cow was happier than normal?
Are interactions between cows relevant?
Are interactions between cows and humans relevant?
Are interactions between the cow and some non-animal relevant?
Is music relevant?
I’m also wondering how Charles was known, despite not being a scientist, politician, athlete, or performer…
Was he known for being rich?
Was he a businessman?
Was he a criminal?
Was he known for something bad happening to him?
Was he known primarily for a connection to someone else who was more famous than him?
Was Charles an adult at the time of the milk-drinking?
Was Charles usually known as “Charles”, or some diminutive (eg “Chuck”) ?
Never mind–just scrolled up and saw this question answered.
reply to Chronos:
Psychology of cows was relevant. So…
Was the cow, broadly speaking, happier than normal cows? supposedly.
Was the cow less happy than normal cows? I don’t think so.
Did some relevant humans believe, possibly mistakenly or with insufficient evidence, that the cow was happier than normal? The cow was thought to be good-tempered if that helps…
Are interactions between cows relevant? No
Are interactions between cows and humans relevant? No
Are interactions between the cow and some non-animal relevant? Yes
Is music relevant? No
You know what they say about contented cows? 
I’m also wondering how Charles was known, despite not being a scientist, politician, athlete, or performer…
Was he known for being rich? No
Was he a businessman? No
Was he a criminal? No
Was he known for something bad happening to him? No
Was he known primarily for a connection to someone else who was more famous than him? No
Was Charles an adult at the time of the milk-drinking? Yes
Charles
Is the scientific advance regularly used in milk production today?
If no, was it regularly used in the past?
Was Charles famous for any reason connected to cows and / or milk?
Could any person with a similar level of fame have drunk the milk without significantly changing the nature and newsworthiness of the event? Or did it have to be Charles, specifically?
If not a performer, was he involved with the performing arts in another capacity?
For example, writer, director, producer?
Was he a writer other than for performing arts?
For example, novelist or journalist.
Was he an artist?
Was he a politician?
Was he a scientist? A mathematician? Did he create some revolutionary piece of technology?
Was he the first person to achieve some remarkable feat?
Was it in aviation?
Was he a religious figure?
A military figure?