# Hell explained by chemistry student

Hi, No result from a search, for this old one. Is it amusing? Something to cheer one up on a grey/gray day? Or just stale and too long? Apologies if anyone is offended, anyone called Teresa for instance.

The following is an actual 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 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 THE ONLY ‘A’

Well placed in the games section of this site.

Sir any perceived wisdom you find on the internet needs to be smelt at a distance, as though it were ammonia.

Students all display one immutable quality: they are horses arses. Your linked article purports to wit and intelligence, neither of which is in the domain of a student.

[quote=“economy ah”]The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term.[/quote]Other versions have “a Yale professor” , “Dr. Schambaugh, of the University of Oklahoma School of Chemical Engineering”. And the “student’s answer” has more than one version. Which raises doubts if it was really written by a “chemistry student”.

:bravo: :bravo: :roflmao:

BFM, Yup, I know. I should perhaps have explained that I have seen it many times, purporting to originate from various sources. I thought it was pretty clear that it was a joke and one whose provenance must always be suspect, thereby causing less of an impact. I suggest that the reverse it true about the crude letter from the British Embassy in Moscow in 1943 as it is obviously genuine. ntk.net/2000/02/25/moscow.gif

[quote=“economy ah”]BFM, Yup, I know. I should perhaps have explained that I have seen it many times, purporting to originate from various sources. I thought it was pretty clear that it was a joke and one whose provenance must always be suspect, thereby causing less of an impact. I suggest that the reverse it true about the crude letter from the British Embassy in Moscow in 1943 as it is obviously genuine. ntk.net/2000/02/25/moscow.gif[/quote]It’s funny and clever, and it’s a good thing to post. I just don’t like people adding things like “this is a real story from xyz” when it isn’t. I mean whoever really wrote this, not you.

Why not? The earth is old; there’s nothing ‘new’ to be said. Comedy and all story-telling is in setting the scene. Kids don’t say ‘WHICH pigs? Pigs don’t have opposible thumbs and therefore are unlikely to be able to construct a viable dwelling even using durable building materials. WHICH pigs? Farmer Brown’s pigs? Hmm. Can it, mama.’

It’s the western (and probably other places too) oral tradition.