Chemistry Midterm.
The answer by one student was so "profound" that the professor shared it with colleagues via the Internet which is, of course, why we now have the pleasure of
enjoying it as well :
Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?
Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant.
One student, however, wrote the following:
First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today.
Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added
This gives two possibilities:
1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.
2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell,then
the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.
So which is it?
If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman year that,
"It will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you," and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number two must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is therefore, extinct......leaving only Heaven, thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Teresa kept shouting "Oh my God."
THIS STUDENT RECEIVED AN A+.
Chemistry Midterm
- kingfisher
- Site Admin
- Posts: 173
- Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 9:41 pm
- Location: Knapper, Norway
- Contact:
Hi
A clever answer indeed or is it?
Do souls have mass?
If so and assuming the mass of the universe is constant, it will eventually disappear into heaven and hell and there will be nothing left.
If no, what is a soul, energy, and this is accepted as interchangable with mass, again the outcome is the same, nothing left.
An A+, well there are Professors who believe in intelligent design.
If the question was really asked in a Chemistry Exam, our world is in a sorry state.
Take care
Dave
Take
Do souls have mass?
If so and assuming the mass of the universe is constant, it will eventually disappear into heaven and hell and there will be nothing left.
If no, what is a soul, energy, and this is accepted as interchangable with mass, again the outcome is the same, nothing left.
An A+, well there are Professors who believe in intelligent design.
If the question was really asked in a Chemistry Exam, our world is in a sorry state.
Take care
Dave
Take
Hi again
Well I saw the funny side.
Then the realisation that the question may have been asked, prompted my answer.
A belief, a scientific proof, well these are constantly changing and will continue to do so, or as we study anything including fish behviour our knowledge will increase.
One is based on facts as we know them, the other on historical writings, and both are open to interpretations.
As I see it scientific proofs are fairly consistent on our planet, where beliefs are not, so any attempt to confuse the two, or mix them up doesn't help anybody.
Just my opinion.
Take care
dave
Then the realisation that the question may have been asked, prompted my answer.
A belief, a scientific proof, well these are constantly changing and will continue to do so, or as we study anything including fish behviour our knowledge will increase.
One is based on facts as we know them, the other on historical writings, and both are open to interpretations.
As I see it scientific proofs are fairly consistent on our planet, where beliefs are not, so any attempt to confuse the two, or mix them up doesn't help anybody.
Just my opinion.
Take care
dave