An engineer, a mathematician, and a physicist (another stolen Brutuskend JOKE)

Brutuskend

Lifer
Apr 2, 2001
26,558
4
0
An engineer, a mathematician, and a physicist are told to measure the height of the flagpole on campus.

They bring a measuring tape, go to the flag pole, and start pondering how they will measure the height of this. It's tall and they can't get up there. They think of different solutions and methods, but they just can't agree on a method.

Finally, an English professor drops by, and asks them why they look so puzzled. They tell him of their problem of measuring the height of the flagpole.
The English professor thinks for a second, asks them to hand him the measuring tape, pulls the pole out of the ground, puts it down, and measures it.

When he's done, he returns the tape and gives them the measurement, puts the pole back in and heads off.

The engineer is shaking his head, the mathematician stares into the ground, and finally the physicist says:
"Stupid linguist. We needed the height, and gives us the f*cking length"

 

JDub02

Diamond Member
Sep 27, 2002
6,209
1
0
us nerds would measure off a distance and take an angle measurement from the ground to the top of the flagpole and use geometry or trig to figure out the height. :p
 

maddogchen

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2004
8,903
2
76
Originally posted by: JDub02
us nerds would measure off a distance and take an angle measurement from the ground to the top of the flagpole and use geometry or trig to figure out the height. :p

which is what I woulda thought the Mathematician would have done. :confused:
 

slpaulson

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2000
4,413
13
81
Originally posted by: maddogchen
Originally posted by: JDub02
us nerds would measure off a distance and take an angle measurement from the ground to the top of the flagpole and use geometry or trig to figure out the height. :p

which is what I woulda thought the Mathematician would have done. :confused:

Exactly what my first idea was...
<-- Engineering student
 

ggnl

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2004
5,095
1
0
:thumbsup:

I'm waiting for this thread to turn into an arguement over the best way to actually measure the flagpole.
 

silverpig

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
27,703
12
81
Originally posted by: maddogchen
Originally posted by: JDub02
us nerds would measure off a distance and take an angle measurement from the ground to the top of the flagpole and use geometry or trig to figure out the height. :p

which is what I woulda thought the Mathematician would have done. :confused:

A physicist would have put extremely accurate clocks at the base and at the top of the pole and then measured the gravitational time dilation factor between them to get a height.

:D
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
1) Lower the flag
2) Attach a piece of string to top of flag
3) Raise flag
4) Mark string at point it touches the ground
5) Lower the flag
6) Measure the length of the string
 

Aharami

Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
21,205
165
106
Originally posted by: conjur
1) Lower the flag
2) Attach a piece of string to top of flag
3) Raise flag
4) Mark string at point it touches the ground
5) Lower the flag
6) Measure the length of the string

something i'd have done
 

silverpig

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
27,703
12
81
A Physics Legend
The Legend

Sir Ernest Rutherford, President of the Royal Academy, and recipient of the Nobel Prize in Physics, related the following story.

Some time ago I received a call from a colleague. He was about to give a student a zero for his answer to a physics question, while the student claimed a perfect score. The instructor and the student agreed to an impartial arbiter, and I was selected.

I read the examination question: "Show how it is possible to determine the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer." The student had answered: "Take the barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower it to the street, and then bring it up, measuring the length of the rope. The length of the rope is the height of the building."

The student really had a strong case for full credit since he had really answered the question completely and correctly! On the other hand, if full credit were given, it could well contribute to a high grade in his physics course and certify competence in physics, but the answer did not confirm this.

I suggested that the student have another try. I gave the student six minutes to answer the question with the warning that the answer should show some knowledge of physics. At the end of five minutes, he hadn't written anything. I asked if he wished to give up, but he said he had many answers to this problem; he was just thinking of the best one. I excused myself for interrupting him and asked him to please go on.

In the next minute, he dashed off his answer, which read: "Take the barometer to the top of the building and lean over the edge of the roof. Drop the barometer, timing its fall with a stopwatch. Then, using the formula x=0.5*a*t^2, calculate the height of the building." At this point, I asked my colleague if he would give up. He conceded, and gave the student almost full credit.

While leaving my colleague's office, I recalled that the student had said that he had other answers to the problem, so I asked him what they were.

"Well," said the student, "there are many ways of getting the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer.

For example, you could take the barometer out on a sunny day and measure the height of the barometer, the length of its shadow, and the length of the shadow of the building, and by the use of simple proportion, determine the height of the building."

"Fine," I said, "and others?"

"Yes," said the student, "there is a very basic measurement method you will like. In this method, you take the barometer and begin to walk up the stairs. As you climb the stairs, you mark off the length of the barometer along the wall. You then count the number of marks, and this will give you the height of the building in barometer units." "A very direct method."

"Of course. If you want a more sophisticated method, you can tie the barometer to the end of a string, swing it as a pendulum, and determine the value of g [gravity] at the street level and at the top of the building. From the difference between the two values of g, the height of the building, in principle, can be calculated."

"On this same tack, you could take the barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower it to just above the street, and then swing it as a pendulum. You could then calculate the height of the building by the period of the precession".

"Finally," he concluded, "there are many other ways of solving the problem. Probably the best," he said, "is to take the barometer to the basement and knock on the superintendent's door. When the superintendent answers, you speak to him as follows: 'Mr. Superintendent, here is a fine barometer. If you will tell me the height of the building, I will give you this barometer."

At this point, I asked the student if he really did not know the conventional answer to this question. He admitted that he did, but said that he was fed up with high school and college instructors trying to teach him how to think.

The name of the student was Niels Bohr." (1885-1962) Danish Physicist; Nobel Prize 1922; best known for proposing the first 'model' of the atom with protons &amp; neutrons, and various energy state of the surrounding electrons -- the familiar icon of the small nucleus circled by three elliptical orbits ... but more significantly, an innovator in Quantum Theory.
 

Wallydraigle

Banned
Nov 27, 2000
10,754
1
0
Originally posted by: ggnl
:thumbsup:

I'm waiting for this thread to turn into an arguement over the best way to actually measure the flagpole.



Like there's any question. Intimidate a midget into climbing the pole with your tape. Toss him if you have to.
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,031
14
81
Originally posted by: conjur
1) Lower the flag
2) Attach a piece of string to top of flag
3) Raise flag
4) Mark string at point it touches the ground
5) Lower the flag
6) Measure the length of the string

Not accurate enough. You have to calculate the deflection of the string.
 

TheLonelyPhoenix

Diamond Member
Feb 15, 2004
5,594
1
0
Originally posted by: conjur
:thumbsup: silverpig!

Ditto. :)

I used the angle measurement method to measure the maximum achieved height of a bottle rocket I was working on in middle school. Four people stood 40 feet away from the rocket in each direction (40 feet because that's about as high as the rocket was going at the PSI I was using, so a small angle error had little effect), and pointed the bottom edge of a protractor at the bottle when it was at its peak. From that data, I got an angle which I could use to get the height through some trig... then I tossed the highest and lowest values and averaged the other two for the estimated height. Worked rather well... I never did get the fvcking parachute to eject right though, and the thing ended up shattering on impact when I pumped it up to about 10 times the PSI my test runs were using. :(
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: Triumph
Originally posted by: conjur
1) Lower the flag
2) Attach a piece of string to top of flag
3) Raise flag
4) Mark string at point it touches the ground
5) Lower the flag
6) Measure the length of the string

Not accurate enough. You have to calculate the deflection of the string.

Pull the string taught. :p
 

booger711

Platinum Member
Jun 15, 2004
2,736
1
0
Originally posted by: Triumph
Originally posted by: conjur
1) Lower the flag
2) Attach a piece of string to top of flag
3) Raise flag
4) Mark string at point it touches the ground
5) Lower the flag
6) Measure the length of the string

Not accurate enough. You have to calculate the deflection of the string.

deflection of the string my ass.
 

vood0g

Golden Member
Mar 5, 2004
1,442
1
0
Originally posted by: silverpig
A Physics Legend
The Legend

Sir Ernest Rutherford, President of the Royal Academy, and recipient of the Nobel Prize in Physics, related the following story.

Some time ago I received a call from a colleague. He was about to give a student a zero for his answer to a physics question, while the student claimed a perfect score. The instructor and the student agreed to an impartial arbiter, and I was selected.

I read the examination question: "Show how it is possible to determine the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer." The student had answered: "Take the barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower it to the street, and then bring it up, measuring the length of the rope. The length of the rope is the height of the building."

The student really had a strong case for full credit since he had really answered the question completely and correctly! On the other hand, if full credit were given, it could well contribute to a high grade in his physics course and certify competence in physics, but the answer did not confirm this.

I suggested that the student have another try. I gave the student six minutes to answer the question with the warning that the answer should show some knowledge of physics. At the end of five minutes, he hadn't written anything. I asked if he wished to give up, but he said he had many answers to this problem; he was just thinking of the best one. I excused myself for interrupting him and asked him to please go on.

In the next minute, he dashed off his answer, which read: "Take the barometer to the top of the building and lean over the edge of the roof. Drop the barometer, timing its fall with a stopwatch. Then, using the formula x=0.5*a*t^2, calculate the height of the building." At this point, I asked my colleague if he would give up. He conceded, and gave the student almost full credit.

While leaving my colleague's office, I recalled that the student had said that he had other answers to the problem, so I asked him what they were.

"Well," said the student, "there are many ways of getting the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer.

For example, you could take the barometer out on a sunny day and measure the height of the barometer, the length of its shadow, and the length of the shadow of the building, and by the use of simple proportion, determine the height of the building."

"Fine," I said, "and others?"

"Yes," said the student, "there is a very basic measurement method you will like. In this method, you take the barometer and begin to walk up the stairs. As you climb the stairs, you mark off the length of the barometer along the wall. You then count the number of marks, and this will give you the height of the building in barometer units." "A very direct method."

"Of course. If you want a more sophisticated method, you can tie the barometer to the end of a string, swing it as a pendulum, and determine the value of g [gravity] at the street level and at the top of the building. From the difference between the two values of g, the height of the building, in principle, can be calculated."

"On this same tack, you could take the barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower it to just above the street, and then swing it as a pendulum. You could then calculate the height of the building by the period of the precession".

"Finally," he concluded, "there are many other ways of solving the problem. Probably the best," he said, "is to take the barometer to the basement and knock on the superintendent's door. When the superintendent answers, you speak to him as follows: 'Mr. Superintendent, here is a fine barometer. If you will tell me the height of the building, I will give you this barometer."

At this point, I asked the student if he really did not know the conventional answer to this question. He admitted that he did, but said that he was fed up with high school and college instructors trying to teach him how to think.

The name of the student was Niels Bohr." (1885-1962) Danish Physicist; Nobel Prize 1922; best known for proposing the first 'model' of the atom with protons &amp; neutrons, and various energy state of the surrounding electrons -- the familiar icon of the small nucleus circled by three elliptical orbits ... but more significantly, an innovator in Quantum Theory.

so what is the conventional answer to the question?
 

Heisenberg

Lifer
Dec 21, 2001
10,621
1
0
Originally posted by: vood0g
so what is the conventional answer to the question?
Use the pressure difference the barometer reads between the bottom and top of the building to find the height.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
167
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Pre-empted :thumbsup: before I even read it.
All engineer-mathematician-physicist jokes are funny
(although, sometimes people mistakenly make the mathematician the butt of the joke)
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
167
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Pre-empted :thumbsup: before I even read it.
All engineer-mathematician-physicist jokes are funny
(although, sometimes people mistakenly make the mathematician the butt of the joke)

Bah!
Everyone knows the physicist, mathematician, and engineer would have all measured the pole in meters, and the subject of metric units would leave any English prof completely befuddled.