14.0120 charming stories

From: Humanist Discussion Group (willard@lists.village.virginia.edu)
Date: Mon Jul 17 2000 - 07:00:53 CUT

  • Next message: Humanist Discussion Group: "14.0121 on WWW: Computerphilologie, Neurasia"

                   Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 120.
           Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
                   <http://www.princeton.edu/~mccarty/humanist/>
                  <http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/>

       [1] From: "Paul F. Schaffner" <pfs@umich.edu> (18)
             Subject: Re: 14.0114 a charming story

       [2] From: "Pat Moran" <pjmoran@gdsys.net> (138)
             Subject: Re: 14.0114 a charming story

       [3] From: Arun-Kumar Tripathi <tripathi@statistik.uni- (124)
                     dortmund.de>
             Subject: Re: 14.0114 a charming story

       [4] From: Arun-Kumar Tripathi <tripathi@statistik.uni- (55)
                     dortmund.de>
             Subject: Bonus Question: Is hell exothermic (gives off heat)
                     or endothermic(absorbs heat)?

    --[1]------------------------------------------------------------------
             Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 07:45:55 +0100
             From: "Paul F. Schaffner" <pfs@umich.edu>
             Subject: Re: 14.0114 a charming story

    > The following charming story has been circulating in print and via E-mail
    > for decades, but, recently, has developed a new twist.
    ***
    > "Describe how to determine the height of a skyscraper with a barometer."
    ***
    > Can anyone authenticate the story as being attributable to Bohr?

    According the the "Urban Legend Reference Pages,"
    (http://www.snopes.com/college/exam/barometr.htm), the story
    has not been traced back earlier than a 1961 reference to it
    by Dr. Alexander Calandra, who tells it in the first person
    and may have invented it; the association with Niels Bohr
    seems to have appeared for the first time only last year (1999).
    [I owe this reference to (physicist) Steve Schaffner
    (sfs@genome.wi.mit.edu).]

    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Paul Schaffner | pfs@umich.edu | http://www-personal.umich.edu/~pfs/
    University of Michigan Digital Library Production Service
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

    --[2]------------------------------------------------------------------
             Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 07:46:18 +0100
             From: "Pat Moran" <pjmoran@gdsys.net>
             Subject: Re: 14.0114 a charming story

    "The Barometer Story" appears on page 198-199 in chapter 18 of Peg C.
    Neuhauser's CORPORATE LEGENDS AND LORE (McGraw-Hill, 1993), but the
    elaboration immediately below and the
    possible Bohr anecdote are not included. Pat Moran, Graduate Student, Ed
    Foundations,
    312 Stone Building, FSU, Tallahassee, FL 32306 pjm0362@mailer.fsu.edu
    =======

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Humanist Discussion Group
    <willard.mccarty@kcl.ac.uk>) <willard@lists.village.virginia.edu>
    To: Humanist Discussion Group <humanist@lists.Princeton.EDU>
    Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 6:47 AM

    >
    > Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 114.
    > Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
    > <http://www.princeton.edu/~mccarty/humanist/>
    > <http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/>
    >
    >
    >
    > Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 07:45:00 +0100
    > From: "Dr Donald J. Weinshank" <weinshan@cse.msu.edu>
    > Subject: Measuring the height of a building with a barometer.
    >
    > Fellow Humanists:
    >
    > The following charming story has been circulating in print and via E-mail
    > for decades, but, recently, has developed a new twist.
    >
    > =================================================================
    > Great Moments in Physics
    >
    > The following concerns a question in a physics degree exam.
    >
    > "Describe how to determine the height of a skyscraper
    > with a barometer."
    >
    > One student replied:
    >
    > "You tie a long piece of string to the neck of the
    > barometer, then lower the barometer from the roof of
    > the skyscraper to the ground. The length of the string
    > plus the length of the barometer will equal the height
    > of the building."
    >
    > This highly original answer so incensed the examiner
    > that the student was failed. The student appealed on
    > the grounds that his answer was indisputably correct,
    > and the university appointed an independent arbiter to
    > decide the case. The arbiter judged that the answer
    > was indeed correct but did not display any noticeable
    > knowledge of physics. To resolve the problem it was
    > decided to call the student in and allow him six
    > minutes in which to provide a verbal answer which
    > showed at least a minimal familiarity with the basic
    > principles of physics.
    >
    > For five minutes the student sat in silence, forehead
    > creased in thought. The arbiter reminded him that time
    > was running out, to which the student replied that he
    > had several extremely relevant answers, but couldn't
    > make up his mind which to use.
    >
    > On being advised to hurry up the student replied as
    > follows:
    >
    > "Firstly, you could take the barometer up to the roof
    > of the skyscraper, drop it over the edge, and measure
    > the time it takes to reach the ground. The height of
    > the building can then be worked out from the formula H
    > = 0.5g x t squared. But bad luck on the barometer."
    >
    > "Or if the sun is shining you could measure the height
    > of the barometer, then set it on end and measure the
    > length of its shadow. Then you measure the length of
    > the skyscraper's shadow, and thereafter it is a simple
    > matter of proportional arithmetic to work out the
    > height of the skyscraper."
    >
    > "But if you wanted to be highly scientific about it,
    > you could tie a short piece of string to the barometer
    > and swing it like a pendulum, first at ground level
    > and then on the roof of the skyscraper. The height is
    > worked out by the difference in the gravitational
    > restoring force T = 2 pi sqroot (l / g)."
    >
    > "Or if the skyscraper has an outside emergency
    > staircase, it would be easier to walk up it and mark
    > off the height of the skyscraper in barometer lengths,
    > then add them up."
    >
    > "If you merely wanted to be boring and orthodox about
    > it, of course, you could use the barometer to measure
    > the air pressure on the roof of the skyscraper and on
    > the ground, and convert the difference in millibars
    > into feet to give the height of the building."
    >
    > "But since we are constantly being exhorted to
    > exercise independence of mind and apply scientific
    > methods, undoubtedly the best way would be to knock on
    > the janitor's door and say to him 'If you would like a
    > nice new barometer, I will give you this one if you
    > tell me the height of this skyscraper'."
    >
    > =================================================================
    >
    > This is a lovely example of "thinking out of the box" and has been
    > widely circulated.
    >
    > Recently, however, I have received several copies of the story with two
    > additions.
    >
    > 1. The story is set at the University of Copenhagen.
    > 2. The following "tag line" has been added:
    >
    > The student was Niels Bohr, the only person from
    > Denmark to win the Nobel prize for Physics.
    >
    > If true, this would not be entirely surprising. After all,
    > the battles between Bohr and Einstein at
    > the Solvay conferences in the late '20's hinged
    > on such "gedankenexperimenten" covering their
    > disagreements. Bohr was one of the champions of
    > quantum mechanics. Einstein always felt that "God
    > does not play dice" and that there had to be a deeper,
    > underlying mechanism, not simply random chance.
    >
    > Be that as it may, can anyone authenticate the story
    > as being attributable to Bohr?
    >
    > Thanks.
    > _______________________________________________________________
    > Dr. Don Weinshank weinshan@cse.msu.edu
    > http://www.cse.msu.edu/~weinshan
    > Phone (517) 353-0831 FAX (517) 432-1061
    > Computer Science & Engineering Michigan State University
    >
    >
    >

    --[3]------------------------------------------------------------------
             Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 07:46:40 +0100
             From: Arun-Kumar Tripathi <tripathi@statistik.uni-dortmund.de>
             Subject: Re: 14.0114 a charming story

    Dear Dr. Donald Weinshank,

    Hi,
    A very interesting story, an intelligent response! Thanks, I cann't resist
    myself to give my own thoughts..

    On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Humanist Discussion Group wrote:
    > Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 07:45:00 +0100
    > From: "Dr Donald J. Weinshank" <weinshan@cse.msu.edu>
    > >
    > Fellow Humanists:
    >
    > The following charming story has been circulating in print and via E-mail
    > for decades, but, recently, has developed a new twist.
    >
    > =================================================================
    > Great Moments in Physics
    >
    > The following concerns a question in a physics degree exam.
    >
    > "Describe how to determine the height of a skyscraper
    > with a barometer."
    >
    > One student replied:
    >
    > "You tie a long piece of string to the neck of the
    > barometer, then lower the barometer from the roof of
    > the skyscraper to the ground. The length of the string
    > plus the length of the barometer will equal the height
    > of the building."
    >
    > This highly original answer so incensed the examiner
    > that the student was failed. The student appealed on
    > the grounds that his answer was indisputably correct,
    > and the university appointed an independent arbiter to
    > decide the case. The arbiter judged that the answer
    > was indeed correct but did not display any noticeable
    > knowledge of physics. To resolve the problem it was
    > decided to call the student in and allow him six
    > minutes in which to provide a verbal answer which
    > showed at least a minimal familiarity with the basic
    > principles of physics.
    >
    > For five minutes the student sat in silence, forehead
    > creased in thought. The arbiter reminded him that time
    > was running out, to which the student replied that he
    > had several extremely relevant answers, but couldn't
    > make up his mind which to use.
    >
    > On being advised to hurry up the student replied as
    > follows:
    >
    > "Firstly, you could take the barometer up to the roof
    > of the skyscraper, drop it over the edge, and measure
    > the time it takes to reach the ground. The height of
    > the building can then be worked out from the formula H
    > = 0.5g x t squared. But bad luck on the barometer."

    Yes, using the Second Law of equation, and taking initial velocity u,
    zero.

    > "Or if the sun is shining you could measure the height
    > of the barometer, then set it on end and measure the
    > length of its shadow. Then you measure the length of
    > the skyscraper's shadow, and thereafter it is a simple
    > matter of proportional arithmetic to work out the
    > height of the skyscraper."

    Yes, here we could measure the height of a skyscraper by method of
    *Trigonometry Ratios* first by checking the angles of elevation
    (depression) of Sun to the ground, and then using Tangent of theta.

    > "But if you wanted to be highly scientific about it,
    > you could tie a short piece of string to the barometer
    > and swing it like a pendulum, first at ground level
    > and then on the roof of the skyscraper. The height is
    > worked out by the difference in the gravitational
    > restoring force T = 2 pi sqroot (l / g)."
    >
    > "Or if the skyscraper has an outside emergency
    > staircase, it would be easier to walk up it and mark
    > off the height of the skyscraper in barometer lengths,
    > then add them up."
    >
    > "If you merely wanted to be boring and orthodox about
    > it, of course, you could use the barometer to measure
    > the air pressure on the roof of the skyscraper and on
    > the ground, and convert the difference in millibars
    > into feet to give the height of the building."
    >
    > "But since we are constantly being exhorted to
    > exercise independence of mind and apply scientific
    > methods, undoubtedly the best way would be to knock on
    > the janitor's door and say to him 'If you would like a
    > nice new barometer, I will give you this one if you
    > tell me the height of this skyscraper'."

    Great, Birbal replies to Emperor Akbar!!

    > =================================================================
    >
    > This is a lovely example of "thinking out of the box" and has been
    > widely circulated.
    >
    > Recently, however, I have received several copies of the story with two
    > additions.
    >
    > 1. The story is set at the University of Copenhagen.
    > 2. The following "tag line" has been added:
    >
    > The student was Niels Bohr, the only person from
    > Denmark to win the Nobel prize for Physics.
    >
    > If true, this would not be entirely surprising. After all,
    > the battles between Bohr and Einstein at
    > the Solvay conferences in the late '20's hinged
    > on such "gedankenexperimenten" covering their
    > disagreements. Bohr was one of the champions of
    > quantum mechanics. Einstein always felt that "God
    > does not play dice" and that there had to be a deeper,
    > underlying mechanism, not simply random chance.
    >
    > Be that as it may, can anyone authenticate the story
    > as being attributable to Bohr?
    >
    > Thanks.
    > _______________________________________________________________
    > Dr. Don Weinshank weinshan@cse.msu.edu
    > http://www.cse.msu.edu/~weinshan
    > Phone (517) 353-0831 FAX (517) 432-1061
    > Computer Science & Engineering Michigan State University

    Sincerely
    Arun Tripathi

    --[4]------------------------------------------------------------------
             Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 07:51:04 +0100
             From: Arun-Kumar Tripathi <tripathi@statistik.uni-dortmund.de>
             Subject: Bonus Question: Is hell exothermic (gives off heat) or
    endothermic(absorbs heat)?

    Dear Humanists,

    (fwd via Janet Young) --some food for thought --might interest you--
    This email "send around" was sent to me by a prof at Temple University...
    Kind of makes you go hummmmmmmmmmm...
    Have a great weekend!.

    The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington
    >chemistry midterm. The answer was so "profound" that the professor
    >shared it with colleagues, which is 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 off when it expands and heats up 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 that souls are moving into Hell and the rate that
    >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. Some of these religions state
    >that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell.
    >
    >Since there are 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 as souls are added.
    >
    >This allows 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) Of course, 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 Ms. Teresa Banyan 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 still have not succeeded in
    >having sexual relations with her, the #2 cannot be true, and thus I am
    >sure that Hell is exothermic and will not freeze.
    >
    >The student received the only "A" given.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 17 2000 - 07:10:47 CUT