At 19:29 17-02-02 -0500, you wrote: >At 09:23 AM 2/17/02 -0600, Reggie wrote: >>>From: "J. van Baardwijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>At 16:24 14-2-02 -0600, Reggie Bautista wrote: >>>And when he was done laughing, he did not say "hey, you are reading private >>>e-mail at work? You are fired!"? :-) >> >>Nope, I still have my job, and a printed copy of that lab report is now >>hanging just inside my boss's office, where he can easily see it but it >>won't be noticed by a casual visitor... >> >>Reggie :-) > >Another career jeopardized, then saved, by lame humor. >My work here is done ;-) > >Sean
Thanks for the link. I've already passed it along to some people who found it humorous. The experiment with a similar outcome I recall best from freshman physics was one where the data points on the graph formed a perfect connect-the-dots picture of a witch with a pointed hat riding on a broom (unfortunately, it was the spring semester, so Hallowe'en had come and gone). Of course, the data points were *supposed* to form a straight line. Then there was an experiment in an upper-level course where if one believed the resistance readings given by a Wheatstone bridge hooked to a thermocouple that had been placed in a crucible of molten lead, the temperature kept going *up* as the lead solidified . . . As the old "Guide to Laboratory Sciences" tells us: If the experiment fizzes and stinks, the subject is chemistry. If the experiment bites and scratches, the subject is biology. If the experiment just plain won't work, the subject is physics. -- Ronn! :) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Ronn Blankenship Instructor of Astronomy/Planetary Science University of Montevallo Montevallo, AL Standard Disclaimer: Unless specifically stated otherwise, any opinions stated herein are the personal opinions of the author and do not represent the official position of the University of Montevallo. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
