Teacher teacher",a physics student asks," why do I keep on getting the wrong answer??"
The physics teacher answers,“Your trying to do the right hand rules with your left hand.”
Can you come up with some more?? I have to leave but I will post some more later.
Daniel D. Van Hoy wrote:
>Just think: When you drop a cat from a few feet, it lands upright.
>Also think: When you drop a piece of buttered bread, it lands with
>the buttered side down
>Now think: If you strapped a piece of buttered bread to the back
>of a cat, which would land first.
First the source of the forces must be understood. The force acting on the
bread is not the butter, as some may think. Without the bread, butter
wouldn’t land bread side up, and therefore the force could not possibly be
in the butter. We know the force is not the bread because it has been
experimentally proven that bread does not land any particular side down
without butter. The bread/butter force is caused by the fusing of bread and
butter particles together. This fusion causes energy to be released in the
form of shifting gravity and anti-gravity energy to opposite sides of the
bread/butter continuum. The gravity energy naturally shifts to the butter
since it is denser then the bread, while the anti-gravity energy shifts to
the bread side.
The energy in a cat for landing on its feet comes from the feet themselves.
This has been proven experimentally. Cats without feet have a near zero
success rate of landing on their feet. We will call this energy cat foot
energy.
Considering the equal but opposing bread/butter and cat foot forces one
would expect the cat to spin violently about its axis. However the strength
of these forces must be considered. A regular cat is not structurally
stable enough to withstand the torque the spinning causes. I should not
have to describe the way the cat’s limbs give way, the way the legs wrench
around until the feet are on the same side of the cat as the butter. And
thus the cat can then land on its feet, butter side down.
We are now researching the possibility of using structurally reinforced
cats for levitation systems, but so far the cost is too high to be
practical. Several attempts at producing economically viable systems were
made by separating the feet so that the instability of the cat would not be
a factor. At first there was dificulty because there was no cat to tie the
bread to. Later it was discovered that when not attached to a cat the feet
lost their cat foot force over time. It is hypothesized that the feet need
to be living to exert the cat foot force, and so far no practical method
has been found for keeping the feet alive other than a cat.
Attempts are also being made to breed flat cats with no legs (only feet).
There are many other problems related with this method of levitation as you
may well imagine, but they are beyond the scope of this discussion.
-Harold G Sputsberry PHD
Institute for Alternative Energy Research
Why did the checken cross the road?
Ralph Nader’s Answer:
The chicken’s habitat on the original side of the road had been pollutedby unchecked industrialist greed. The chicken did not reach the unspoiled habitat on other side of the road because it was crushed by the wheels of a gas-guzzling SUV.
woops I must of accidentlly posted this in the wrong area. Ooo well.
Hear is a chemistry practical joke:
Get some ninhydrin and dab it on an object that you know belongs to someone. Make sure you are wearing gloves. Run away and watch the persons delight as his hands turn permentaly blue until his skin rubs away.
*Originally posted by wysiswyg *
**woops I must of accidentlly posted this in the wrong area. Ooo well.
**
I moved it …
i guess this could be considered a physics joke…
what do ya get when you cross an elephant with a mountain climber?
nothing! a mountain climber is a scaler!
hehe… i love that one =-]
vectors are so fun to play with
Once all the scientists die and go to heaven. They decide to play hide-n-seek.
Unfortunately Einstein is the one who has the den. He is supposed to count
upto 100 and then start searching. Everyone starts hiding except Newton.
Newton just draws a square of 1 meter and stands in it, right in front of
Einstein.
Einsteins counting …97,98,99,100, opens his eyes and finds Newton
standing in front. Einstein says “Newtons out, Newton’s out.”
Newton denies and says I am not out. He claims that he is not Newton. All
the scientists come out and he proves that he is not Newton. how?
Newton says:
I am standing in a square of area 1m square…
That means I am Newton per meter square…
Hence I am Pascal.
Why do all the other subatomic particles hate the electrons - they are so negative
I moved it …
Actually I put this in the science and math forum because I did want the jokes to have some basis in science and math. Of couse that really did work as plan. 
Heheh physics really is fun if you have a good teacher. He was telling us how vulgar a right hand rule for a particle moving through a field.
ya my phys. teacher also has these reallly corny jokes and like rhymes he constantly comes up with alota the time they have nothing to do with physics but i think ill start posting whatever he says that is really not taht funny
him and our advisor came up with this
birdy birdy in the sky
whyd you do that in my eye
thank god cows cant fly
birdy birdy in the sky
My physics teacher gives us uplifting stories trying to keep us awake…
okay, here are a bunch of chessy ones:D
What does a mermaid wear?
An Algae-bra
(Algrebra)
What did one tree say to the other tree?
Gee-I’m-a-tree
(Geometry)
If an iris had to pick between dating a daisy or a mushrrom, who would she pick?
the mushroom, b/c he’s a fun-guy (fungi)
lol, those must be the most cheesy jokes I have ever heard 
what do you do with a death chemist?
bury him
[barium]
This is one of my dads:
Why do ducks have webbed feet?
To stamp out forest fires.
Why to elephants have big feet?
To stamp out flaming ducks.
…lets never speak of this “joke” again…
I’m working on some jokes…
Yup… my 9th grade science teacher would always tell jokes he knew where bad. He would prep us weeks in advance… “Oh yeah it’s coming… the worst joke of the year”… here it is:
The Conductor
Once there was a bus conductor. On one particular day, one old woman tries getting into the bus, but the conductor does not stop the bus. She falls down and dies. He is tried in the court, found guilty and sentenced to capital punishment. He is taken to the electric chair cell.
In that room, there is one electric chair in the middle and a banana peal in one corner. He is strapped to the electric chair and high voltage current is passed. He does not die. The authorities release him. He goes back to work. He sees another old woman trying to get in to the bus; does not stop the bus. She too dies. He is tried and convicted. They take him to the same electric chair. The room, this time also, has a banana peal in one corner and the electric chair in the middle. Current is passed; he manages to survive. Perplexed the authorities release him.
He goes back to work. This time he sees an old man getting into the bus. This time he stops the bus; still the old man falls down and dies. The conductor is tried in the court and convicted (due to his earlier follies). This time also they take him to the same room with the electric chair in the middle and banana peal in a corner. This time when the high voltage current is passed, he succumbs to that and dies. Why does he escape the first couple of times?
The first couple of times, he did not stop the bus, he was a BAD CONDUCTOR. So current couldn’t pass through him and he didn’t die!! The third time, he stopped the bus… he was a GOOD CONDUCTOR. So the current passed through him and he falls dead.
*Originally posted by Scottie2Hottie *
**Daniel D. Van Hoy wrote:
>Just think: When you drop a cat from a few feet, it lands upright.
>Also think: When you drop a piece of buttered bread, it lands with
>the buttered side down
>Now think: If you strapped a piece of buttered bread to the back
>of a cat, which would land first.…
**
This leaves unanswered the question about buttering the cat directly. If you were to butter the cat’s back, upon release the cat would immediately assume an inverted posture, and then start to yaw back and forth, on the most valuable nearby porous surface, suggesting a relationship between the butter and the value of, and distance to, the surface. This might be an area for further research.
*Originally posted by ssjcell *
**ya my phys. teacher also has these reallly corny jokes and like rhymes he constantly comes up with alota the time they have nothing to do with physics but i think ill start posting whatever he says that is really not taht funnyhim and our advisor came up with this
birdy birdy in the sky
whyd you do that in my eyethank god cows cant fly
birdy birdy in the sky **
Actually there is a phrase that goes: ahem
Birdy, birdy in the sky
Why’d you turdy in my eye?
I’m a big kid I won’t cry
I’m just glad that cow don’t fly.
At any rate my old field bio teacher had some really bad one liners his favorite was from the acids and bases unit we did:
“OK class I am now passing out the acids you will be testing. You better not drop them, I do not tolerate any illegal activity in my class.” Har Har he had others but I don’t remember them right now.
I’m a bit surprised no one put this one here:
Two hydrogen atoms are walking down the street.
One says to the other, “I lost an electron.”
“Are you sure?”
“I’m positive.”
My chemistry teacher says it’s the lamest joke on Earth, but he keeps on reminding us of it. (It’s supposedly good for remember how to notate ions.)
Back to buttered bread…
Tumbling toast, Murphy’s Law and the Fundamental Constants
European Journal of Physics 16 172-176 1995
There’s a widespread suspicion among the public that toast sliding off a plate or table has a natural tendency to land butter side down, thus providing prima facie evidence for Murphy’s Law: “If something can go wrong, it will”. Most scientists, in contrast, dismiss such belief as ludicrous. Indeed, an investigation by the BBC-TV science programme Q.E.D. in 1993 claimed to have proved definitively that the whole notion was nothing but an urban myth. However, as I show in the paper, the experiments carried out by the programme were dynamically inappropriate (in that they consisted of people simply tossing buttered bread into the air - hardly common practice around the breakfast table). When the problem of toast sliding off a plate or table is examined more carefully - with the toast modelled as a thin, rigid, rough lamina - it turns out that the public perception is quite correct. Toast does indeed have a natural tendency to land butter side down, essentially because the gravitation torque induced as the toast topples over the edge of the plate/table is insufficient to bring the toast butter-side up again by the time it hits the floor. Note that this has nothing to do with some aerodynamic effect caused by one side being buttered - it is just gravity, plus a bit of friction.However, I go on to show that the tumbling toast phenomenon has far deeper roots than one might expect. If tables were a lot higher - around 3 metres high - the problem of toast landing butter-side down would go away, as the toast would have enough time to complete a full rotation. So why are tables the height they are ? Simple: to be convenient for humans. So why are humans the height they are ? Using a simple chemical bonding model of the human frame, I show that there is a limit to the safe height for bipedal, essentially cylindrical creatures like humans. The limit is around 3 metres - above that height, a simple fall results in gravity accelerating the skull to such a high kinetic energy that the chemical bonds in the skull are ruptured, causing severe fracturing. This limit, in turn, sets a maximum height on tables suitable for creatures with human articulation of about 1.5 metres - which is still not high enough to prevent toast landing butter-side down. It thus seems that human-like organisms are doomed to experience this manifestation of Murphy’s Law.
But then comes the real cosmic twist in the tale. The formula giving the maximum height of humans turns out to contain three so-called “fundamental constants of the universe”. The first - the electromagnetic fine-structure constant - determines the strength of the chemical bonds in the skull, while the second - the gravitational fine-structure constant - determines the strength of gravity. Finally, the so-called Bohr radius dictates the size of atoms making up the body. The precise values of these three fundamental constants were built into the very design of the universe just moments after the Big Bang. In other words, toast falling off the breakfast table lands butter-side down because the universe is made that way.
…
1996 Robert A.J. Matthews
I rather liked this explanation…
Here’s a really bad math joke, I forget where I heard it.
A bunch of numbers are at a party and e^x is standing alone in a corner looking depressed. So one of the other numbers goes over to e^x and says, “Integrate yourself.” But e^x says, “Why, it won’t change anything.”