Ramdom Math/engeneer/programmer etc jokes
Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2003 8:39 pm
An chemist, a physicist, and a mathematician are stranded on an island when a can of food rools ashore. The chemist and the physicist comes up with many ingenious ways to open the can. Then suddenly the mathematician gets a bright idea: "Assume we have a can opener ..."
<hr>
A mathematician is asked to design a table. He first designs a table with no legs. Then he designs a table with infinitely many legs. He spend the rest of his life generalizing the results for the table with N legs (where N is not necessarily a natural number).
<hr>
Several scientists were all posed the following question: "What is pi ?"
The engineer said: "It is approximately 3 and 1/7"
The physicist said: "It is 3.14159"
The mathematician thought a bit, and replied "It is equal to pi".
<hr>
A mathematician, a physicist, and an engineer were traveling through Scotland when they saw a black sheep through the window of the train.
"Aha," says the engineer, "I see that Scottish sheep are black."
"Hmm," says the physicist, "You mean that some Scottish sheep are black."
"No," says the mathematician, "All we know is that there is at least one sheep in Scotland, and that at least one side of that one sheep is black!"
<hr>
Several scientists were asked to prove that all odd integers higher than 2 are prime.
Mathematician: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, and by induction - every odd integer higher than 2 is a prime.
Physicist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is an experimental error, 11 is a prime. Just to be sure, try several randomly chosen numbers: 17 is a prime, 23 is a prime...
Engineer: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is an approximation to a prime, 11 is a prime,...
Programmer (reading the output on the screen): 3 is a prime, 3 is a prime, 3 a is prime, 3 is a prime....
Biologist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 -- results have not arrived yet,...
Psychologist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is a prime but tries to suppress it,...
Chemist (or Dan Quayle): What's a prime?
Politician: "Some numbers are prime.. but the goal is to create a kinder, gentler society where all numbers are prime... "
Programmer: "Wait a minute, I think I have an algorithm from Knuth on finding prime numbers... just a little bit longer, I've found the last bug... no, that's not it... ya know, I think there may be a compiler bug here - oh, did you want IEEE-998.0334 rounding or not? - was that in the spec? - hold on, I've almost got it - I was up all night working on this program, ya know... now if management would just get me that new workstation tha just came out, I'd be done by now... etc., etc. ..."
<hr>
A mathematician, an engineer, and a chemist were walking down the road when they saw a pile of cans of beer. Unfortunately, they were the old-fashioned cans that do not have the tab at the top. One of them proposed that they split up and find can openers. The chemist went to his lab and concocted a magical chemical that dissolves the can top in an instant and evaporates the next instant so that the beer inside is not affected. The engineer went to his workshop and created a new HyperOpener that can open 25 cans per second.
They went back to the pile with their inventions and found the mathematician finishing the last can of beer. "How did you manage that?" they asked in astonishment. The mathematician answered, "Oh, well, I assumed they were open and went from there."
<hr>
Dictionary of Definitions of Terms Commonly Used in Math. lectures.
The following is a guide to terms which are commonly used but rarely defined. In the search for proper definitions for these terms we found no authoritative, nor even recognized, source. Thus, we followed the advice of mathematicians handed down from time immortal: "Wing It."
CLEARLY:
I don't want to write down all the "in- between" steps.
TRIVIAL:
If I have to show you how to do this, you're in the wrong class.
OBVIOUSLY:
I hope you weren't sleeping when we discussed this earlier, because I refuse to repeat it.
RECALL:
I shouldn't have to tell you this, but for those of you who erase your memory tapes after every test...
WLOG (Without Loss Of Generality):
I'm not about to do all the possible cases, so I'll do one and let you figure out the rest.
IT CAN EASILY BE SHOWN:
Even you, in your finite wisdom, should be able to prove this without me holding your hand.
CHECK or CHECK FOR YOURSELF:
This is the boring part of the proof, so you can do it on your own time.
SKETCH OF A PROOF:
I couldn't verify all the details, so I'll break it down into the parts I couldn't prove.
HINT:
The hardest of several possible ways to do a proof.
BRUTE FORCE (AND IGNORANCE):
Four special cases, three counting arguments, two long inductions, "and a partridge in a pair tree."
SOFT PROOF:
One third less filling (of the page) than your regular proof, but it requires two extra years of course work just to understand the terms.
ELEGANT PROOF:
Requires no previous knowledge of the subject matter and is less than ten lines long.
SIMILARLY:
At least one line of the proof of this case is the same as before.
CANONICAL FORM:
4 out of 5 mathematicians surveyed recommended this as the final form for their students who choose to finish.
TFAE (The Following Are Equivalent):
If I say this it means that, and if I say that it means the other thing, and if I say the other thing...
BY A PREVIOUS THEOREM:
I don't remember how it goes (come to think of it I'm not really sure we did this at all), but if I stated it right (or at all), then the rest of this follows.
TWO LINE PROOF:
I'll leave out everything but the conclusion, you can't question 'em if you can't see 'em.
BRIEFLY:
I'm running out of time, so I'll just write and talk faster.
LET'S TALK THROUGH IT:
I don't want to write it on the board lest I make a mistake.
PROCEED FORMALLY:
Manipulate symbols by the rules without any hint of their true meaning (popular in pure math courses).
QUANTIFY:
I can't find anything wrong with your proof except that it won't work if x is a moon of Jupiter (Popular in applied math courses).
PROOF OMITTED:
Trust me, It's true.
<hr>
Salary Theorem
The less you know, the more you make.
Proof:
Postulate 1: Knowledgeis Power.
Postulate 2: Timeis Money.
As every engineer knows: Power = Work / Time
And since Knowledge = Power and Time = Money
It is therefore true that Knowledge = Work / Money .
Solving for Money, we get:
Money = Work / Knowledge
Thus, as Knowledge approaches zero, Money approaches infinity, regardless of the amount of Work done.
<hr>
"The number you have dialed is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try again."
<hr>
The light bulb problem
Q: How many mathematicians does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A1: None. It's left to the reader as an exercise.
A2: None. A mathematician can't screw in a light bulb, but he can easily prove the work can be done.
A3: One. He gives it to four programmers, thereby reducing the problem to the already solved (ask a programmer, how)
A4: The answer is intuitively obvious
A5: Just one, once you've managed to present the problem in terms he/she is familiar with.
A6: In earlier work, Wiener [1] has shown that one mathematician can change a light bulb.
If k mathematicians can change a light bulb, and if one more simply watches them do it, then k+1 mathematicians will have changed the light bulb.
Therefore, by induction, for all n in the positive integers, n mathematicians can change a light bulb.
<hr><pre>
A SLICE OF PI
******************
3.14159265358979
1640628620899
23172535940
881097566
5432664
09171
036
5
</pre>
I got bored...
Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:1171, old post ID:10257
<hr>
A mathematician is asked to design a table. He first designs a table with no legs. Then he designs a table with infinitely many legs. He spend the rest of his life generalizing the results for the table with N legs (where N is not necessarily a natural number).
<hr>
Several scientists were all posed the following question: "What is pi ?"
The engineer said: "It is approximately 3 and 1/7"
The physicist said: "It is 3.14159"
The mathematician thought a bit, and replied "It is equal to pi".
<hr>
A mathematician, a physicist, and an engineer were traveling through Scotland when they saw a black sheep through the window of the train.
"Aha," says the engineer, "I see that Scottish sheep are black."
"Hmm," says the physicist, "You mean that some Scottish sheep are black."
"No," says the mathematician, "All we know is that there is at least one sheep in Scotland, and that at least one side of that one sheep is black!"
<hr>
Several scientists were asked to prove that all odd integers higher than 2 are prime.
Mathematician: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, and by induction - every odd integer higher than 2 is a prime.
Physicist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is an experimental error, 11 is a prime. Just to be sure, try several randomly chosen numbers: 17 is a prime, 23 is a prime...
Engineer: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is an approximation to a prime, 11 is a prime,...
Programmer (reading the output on the screen): 3 is a prime, 3 is a prime, 3 a is prime, 3 is a prime....
Biologist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 -- results have not arrived yet,...
Psychologist: 3 is a prime, 5 is a prime, 7 is a prime, 9 is a prime but tries to suppress it,...
Chemist (or Dan Quayle): What's a prime?
Politician: "Some numbers are prime.. but the goal is to create a kinder, gentler society where all numbers are prime... "
Programmer: "Wait a minute, I think I have an algorithm from Knuth on finding prime numbers... just a little bit longer, I've found the last bug... no, that's not it... ya know, I think there may be a compiler bug here - oh, did you want IEEE-998.0334 rounding or not? - was that in the spec? - hold on, I've almost got it - I was up all night working on this program, ya know... now if management would just get me that new workstation tha just came out, I'd be done by now... etc., etc. ..."
<hr>
A mathematician, an engineer, and a chemist were walking down the road when they saw a pile of cans of beer. Unfortunately, they were the old-fashioned cans that do not have the tab at the top. One of them proposed that they split up and find can openers. The chemist went to his lab and concocted a magical chemical that dissolves the can top in an instant and evaporates the next instant so that the beer inside is not affected. The engineer went to his workshop and created a new HyperOpener that can open 25 cans per second.
They went back to the pile with their inventions and found the mathematician finishing the last can of beer. "How did you manage that?" they asked in astonishment. The mathematician answered, "Oh, well, I assumed they were open and went from there."
<hr>
Dictionary of Definitions of Terms Commonly Used in Math. lectures.
The following is a guide to terms which are commonly used but rarely defined. In the search for proper definitions for these terms we found no authoritative, nor even recognized, source. Thus, we followed the advice of mathematicians handed down from time immortal: "Wing It."
CLEARLY:
I don't want to write down all the "in- between" steps.
TRIVIAL:
If I have to show you how to do this, you're in the wrong class.
OBVIOUSLY:
I hope you weren't sleeping when we discussed this earlier, because I refuse to repeat it.
RECALL:
I shouldn't have to tell you this, but for those of you who erase your memory tapes after every test...
WLOG (Without Loss Of Generality):
I'm not about to do all the possible cases, so I'll do one and let you figure out the rest.
IT CAN EASILY BE SHOWN:
Even you, in your finite wisdom, should be able to prove this without me holding your hand.
CHECK or CHECK FOR YOURSELF:
This is the boring part of the proof, so you can do it on your own time.
SKETCH OF A PROOF:
I couldn't verify all the details, so I'll break it down into the parts I couldn't prove.
HINT:
The hardest of several possible ways to do a proof.
BRUTE FORCE (AND IGNORANCE):
Four special cases, three counting arguments, two long inductions, "and a partridge in a pair tree."
SOFT PROOF:
One third less filling (of the page) than your regular proof, but it requires two extra years of course work just to understand the terms.
ELEGANT PROOF:
Requires no previous knowledge of the subject matter and is less than ten lines long.
SIMILARLY:
At least one line of the proof of this case is the same as before.
CANONICAL FORM:
4 out of 5 mathematicians surveyed recommended this as the final form for their students who choose to finish.
TFAE (The Following Are Equivalent):
If I say this it means that, and if I say that it means the other thing, and if I say the other thing...
BY A PREVIOUS THEOREM:
I don't remember how it goes (come to think of it I'm not really sure we did this at all), but if I stated it right (or at all), then the rest of this follows.
TWO LINE PROOF:
I'll leave out everything but the conclusion, you can't question 'em if you can't see 'em.
BRIEFLY:
I'm running out of time, so I'll just write and talk faster.
LET'S TALK THROUGH IT:
I don't want to write it on the board lest I make a mistake.
PROCEED FORMALLY:
Manipulate symbols by the rules without any hint of their true meaning (popular in pure math courses).
QUANTIFY:
I can't find anything wrong with your proof except that it won't work if x is a moon of Jupiter (Popular in applied math courses).
PROOF OMITTED:
Trust me, It's true.
<hr>
Salary Theorem
The less you know, the more you make.
Proof:
Postulate 1: Knowledgeis Power.
Postulate 2: Timeis Money.
As every engineer knows: Power = Work / Time
And since Knowledge = Power and Time = Money
It is therefore true that Knowledge = Work / Money .
Solving for Money, we get:
Money = Work / Knowledge
Thus, as Knowledge approaches zero, Money approaches infinity, regardless of the amount of Work done.
<hr>
"The number you have dialed is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try again."
<hr>
The light bulb problem
Q: How many mathematicians does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A1: None. It's left to the reader as an exercise.
A2: None. A mathematician can't screw in a light bulb, but he can easily prove the work can be done.
A3: One. He gives it to four programmers, thereby reducing the problem to the already solved (ask a programmer, how)
A4: The answer is intuitively obvious
A5: Just one, once you've managed to present the problem in terms he/she is familiar with.
A6: In earlier work, Wiener [1] has shown that one mathematician can change a light bulb.
If k mathematicians can change a light bulb, and if one more simply watches them do it, then k+1 mathematicians will have changed the light bulb.
Therefore, by induction, for all n in the positive integers, n mathematicians can change a light bulb.
<hr><pre>
A SLICE OF PI
******************
3.14159265358979
1640628620899
23172535940
881097566
5432664
09171
036
5
</pre>
I got bored...
Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:1171, old post ID:10257