The following is an actual exam question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term. The answer by one student was so "profound" that the professor shared it with colleagues via the Internet, which is of course, why we 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 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 that they are leaving." "I think 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 into Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist 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 most 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, then Hell must 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 rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.

If we accept the postulate given to me by Theresa during my freshman year, that "it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you," and take into account that the fact that I have not succeeded in having that event take place, then #2 cannot be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and will not freeze."

This student received the only A in the class.
3:50:25 PM    

Just received this email - worthy of your attention....

-----Original Message----- From: Tom's Team [mailto:info@tomspetition.org] Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10:51 AM To: ccline@msn.com Subject: COLUMBINE'S TOM MAUSER VS THE NRA

Dear Craig,

This past Monday, President Bush and the Republican Congress brazenly blocked the renewal of the federal Assault Weapons Ban. Uzis, AK-47s and other military-style assault weapons are legal again -- for now.

The blocking of the renewal has already become a major issue in the Presidential election. Supporters of the ban in Congress are already gearing up to SAVE THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN. If we work together, even the NRA's lobbying machine will not be able to stop legislation supported by nearly 80% of Americans and every major law enforcement group.

Nearly 50,000 people have already signed Tom Mauser's petition to renew the Ban -- click here to see a map showing this nationwide support. Tom started the petition because his son Daniel was killed a t Columbine High School by two students. The Columbine shooters used an assault weapon -- Tom is fighting to keep these weapons out of the hands of children, criminals, and terrorists.

Your friends and family felt powerless when they saw the news reports about the ban expiring. Let them know that they can do something to fight back! Go to your personal petition page and invite 10 friends to join us:

http://www.tomspetition.org/impact.php?uid=3c4567ba04c02c92e4f89bde0daf604 8

By sending our petition to mothers, fathers, friends, and relatives, we can help keep American families safe from crime, terrorism, and needless accidents.

Thanks for your support, Tom's Team

www.tomspetition.org
1:07:16 PM    

THE PRESIDENT TELLS A BALD-FACED LIE: For those who missed it, the president claimed yesterday that John Kerry has "a complicated blueprint to have our government take over the decision making in health care," which is--oh, what's the phrase I'm looking for?--a BALD-FACED LIE. Granted, Mike Allen points out that Kerry's plan "consists largely of tax credits, as does Bush's," in his piece on the matter. Allen also includes a quote from Sarah Bianchi, Kerry's policy director, emphasizing that Kerry's plan "is purely designed to strengthen employer-based health care." But, since Bush's claim is actually a BALD-FACED LIE, not a simple one-side-says-this, the-other-side-says-that difference of opinion, why not report what actually happened yesterday, which is that the president told a BALD-FACED LIE? (I don't mean to single Allen out. He's certainly not the only White House correspondent who reported the Bush's comments this way. The New York Times' David Sanger filed a far more relativistic account. And my hunch is that Allen's instinct is to report the story in a more straight-forward way, but that he'd never get it past his editors.) posted 11:57 a.m. TNR

1:00:05 PM