poemranker ::Why you don't fall through the floor by ?-Dave_Mysterious-?

DetailsThe poem, its numbers, and the conversation.

Sonnet № 77262

Why you don't fall through the floor

by ?-Dave_Mysterious-?

Member since 2003 · Posted 7 Dec 2003 · Edited 7 Dec 2003 · 46 comments

Schrödinger’s equation: -(ħ²/2M)grad²φ(x,y,z) + Vφ(x,y,z) = Eφ(z,y,z) For a particle in a box: V = 0 if 0 < x,y,x < a = ∞ otherwise Try a solution of the form φ = Nsin(2πlx/a)sin(2πmy/a)sin(2πnz/a) Where N is the normalisation factor. φ must go to zero at x,y,z = a, therefore l,m,n are integers. So, E = -(1/2M)(2πħ/a)²(l² + m² + n²) Now, pressure P = ∂E/∂V And dV = d³a = d(a³) = 3a²da Therefore P = (1/3a²)∂E/∂a This is quantum pressure.

Rate it

0 is the worst, 10 the best. Pick a number, add a comment if you like, then send it. Keys: 0–9 pick, Enter sends.

mean 7.00 weighted 5.54 rank 2504 views 394 View voting details →

8 votes so far. Yours would make 9.8 votes so far

46 comments

[n/a] kingit 7-Dec-03/5:44 PM Reply
Are you Zodiac?
[10] zodiac › kingit 19-Jan-04/11:13 AM Reply
What are you trying to imply? And - no.
[n/a] The_Third_Isis 7-Dec-03/8:42 PM Reply
A xmas cock-tail to beat all Quantum pressure , tall frosty glass the only normalisation factor in this concoction ahem..2 shots of bacardi rum 151 better yet
will make it really elemental for this holiday season no need to invite the neighboors they will get a lil -bit wink..ahem quantro what the hell..be generous, all the stolish you want. As 33 a dash,H1 yep,He2 what the hell laugh a bit,N7 a bit expensive but why not,Pu94 a
pinch of criptonite you'll fly anyhow just to be sure extra momentum now don't bother to shake, make it pretty and light it. pressureP=Boom now that's how to be a particle in a box happy reincarnation!!I'll drink eggnog with a shot of 151 hold the extras, a quantum 10
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › The_Third_Isis 9-Dec-03/6:10 AM Reply
I have no time for this nonsense - there's quantum physics to be done!!!
[n/a] Shardik 8-Dec-03/2:44 AM Reply
Tell that to a Quark Nugget.
[9] ARTIE 8-Dec-03/10:42 AM Reply
Nice, although I misplaced my Shigley. Your title reminds me of a question I ask when interviewing Engineering Co-ops. "Why is a manhole cover round, vs. any other geometric shape?" Good for checking the thought process.
[n/a] Everyone › ARTIE 8-Dec-03/5:13 PM Reply
I think manhole covers should be the exact outline of a man. That way, even though the manhole cover could fall down the manhole if inserted at the wrong angle, the cost in lost manhole covers would be easily compensated for by the money saved through being able to make manholes and steel scarecrows in the same factory. Checkmate, I believe.
[9] ARTIE › Everyone 8-Dec-03/5:22 PM Reply
Oooooooooh! Shigle-me-timbers! You've won the $64,000 question AND come up with a real LEAN manufacturing idea. I can only offer you 2 weeks of vacation per year with no med bennies. Touche, a 10 for you.
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › ARTIE 9-Dec-03/6:19 AM Reply
What? A rectangular manhole cover couldn't fall down the hole at any angle, nor could a triangular one, or a man shaped one. I think it is because the circle is the purest shape known to man, and so is necessary to ward off the impureness which it covers.
[9] ARTIE › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 9-Dec-03/8:18 AM Reply
There is help for you yet. Once you find an apron that fits, and isn't too insulting, you'll be allowed to play with the (Tupperware) food storage containers and their lids right on your own kitchen floor. The unbridled ecstasy you will experience, in that single moment when you see the concept, will seem as if the cover were removed and you are able to climb up out of the impureness that is clouding your geo.m
PS: Play with the rectangular "holes" first.
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › ARTIE 9-Dec-03/8:45 AM Reply
Where I live, manholes are entirely two dimensional. Idiot.
[n/a] Everyone › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 9-Dec-03/9:43 AM Reply
Dear oh dear, Dave. Honestly. You can't haul yourself out of the sewers with a feeble attempt at 'zaniness'. I'm afraid you owe the entire poemeranking community an apology for thinking that neither rectangular nor triangular manhole covers could fall down the manholes they cover. You should have said a torus shaped manhole cover couldn't fall down a manhole - at least that provides an example of a non-circular solution to the manhole cover crisis. -10-
[n/a] Everyone › Everyone 9-Dec-03/9:58 AM Reply
P.S Whether or not a man-shaped manhole cover could fall down a manhole is still a massive open question in the field of sewer research. For many years scientists believed that man-shaped manhole covers could always fall down the manhole if inserted in the "standing up" position. However, in 1981 this claim was refuted following the birth of a spherical man named Alex "Burgers" Turner, upon whom the X5 series of manhole covers were based. In fact, the X5 was the very first circular manhole cover to be used in Britain, and circular manhole covers have since been adopted as the industry standturd.
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › Everyone 9-Dec-03/3:06 PM Reply
You think you're pretty clever, don't you? Well, for your information, his name is Burgers "Alex" Turner.
[n/a] Everyone › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 10-Dec-03/7:05 AM Reply
I was the one who invented the name "Burgers" in the first place. Your beak attempts to lecture me on the subject of Alexander Robert Horsfall Turner are not welcome here, rogue.
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › Everyone 10-Dec-03/4:06 PM Reply
No, look, what is the Alex's real name, as it appears on his birth certificate? Clearly it is "Burgers". His nickname is Alex. You are wrong, whoever you are - I imagine that both Matthew and James would claim to have invented the name Burgers.
[n/a] -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 13-Feb-04/9:07 AM Reply
You are wrong, whoever you are. I would not claim to have invented the name "Burgers", only to have helped popularise it.
[9] ARTIE › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 9-Dec-03/9:54 AM Reply
Within the nature of spatial understanding, reason, meaning and possibility are all linnear vectors. Covers are two-dimensional. Holes, however, possess Depth, which is something lacking where you live - by your own admission. At first, I was prepared to expound on your reason for a 2-D hole, but then you added an insult - dementional immaturity is not your saviour. It only proves a lack of depth. Idiot, indeed. Tri-again.
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › ARTIE 10-Dec-03/4:02 AM Reply
An equalateral triangle still wouldn't fall through the hole. You're theory is therefore wrong, or at best incomplete. It just so happens that the circle can't fall down the hole, but that doesn't explain why it isn't triangle shaped. Is that why you wrote "Tri-again"? Clearly the real reason must be so that the workman is presented with the same hole no matter what angle he approaches it from. e.g. if it was square, a man approaching from 45 degrees would have more chance of falling in than a man approaching from 0 degrees, which would be unfair.
[n/a] Everyone › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 10-Dec-03/6:29 AM Reply
You are a terrible dunce. An equilateral triangle can fall down the manhole. [Hint: Rotate the triangle so that one of its edges is perpendicular to the ground.] (2 marks)
[9] ARTIE › Everyone 10-Dec-03/8:53 AM Reply
Is he paying you to tutor him after class? Dear "Everyone", I already offered you the job. You don't have to give it away so easily just because it is clear that Dave has not slept in a few days now. 45° and 0°?? Oh, now I get it! Oh yes, "Inversion challenged people" can be... er... shall we say: "Could've had a V8, but apparently, are only blessed with a Slant-6."
[n/a] Goad › Everyone 15-Jan-04/1:02 PM Reply
A triangular manhole cover with a relative thickness comparable to the circular manhole covers I have seen wouldn't fall in without a bit of chiselling.
[n/a] Everyone › Goad 19-Jan-04/1:23 PM Reply
You're wrong, and you're a grotesquely ugly freak.
[n/a] Everyone › Goad 19-Jan-04/1:52 PM Reply
Here's a problem for you, Goad (though I daresay I only just invented it so it may be rife with schoolboy errors):

Assume an equilateral triangle shaped manhole cover, with sides of length x. Show that if we are to be sure the manhole cover CAN fall down the manhole, then its thickness must not exceed

(x/4)*(2*(root 3) - 3)

Indeed, if this result is correct, and we assume a reasonable value for x (say 1m?), then provided its thickness does not exceed about 11.6 cm, it WILL be able to fall down the manhole.

Is 11.6cm a spectacularly thick manhole cover? I daresay it is not, though more research in this field is DESPERATELY needed.

Good day to you, Sir!
[n/a] Goad › Everyone 19-Jan-04/2:42 PM Reply
You are correct, 11.6 cm is rather on the thick side. I should've drawn it, it's been years since I could just visualize stuff like that and be able to count on getting it right.
[n/a] Everyone › Goad 19-Jan-04/4:15 PM Reply
"You have learnt your lesson, my child" said the old teacher, "Now go and tend to the orchard". The young monk left his master in the garden and returned to his labours. Master Daizui watched him disappear among the tall sheaves of rice, then, when he was quite sure the pupil had gone, he removed his sandal and covered the manhole with it.
[n/a] Goad › Everyone 19-Jan-04/4:25 PM Reply
Now that right there is why I keep coming back to pomeranker. It sure as hell ain't the orchard. I mean, the poetry.
[9] ARTIE › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 10-Dec-03/8:32 AM Reply
Sorry Dave, I have already offered the job to Everyone, but now, I am going to throw in the Medical bennies. "Tri-again" was merely a play on words - not a clue, which is still what you're missing. Nice try on the equalateral triangle but you still lack the third dimension. I won't ask whether you're familiar with the concept of "Six degrees of Freedom" - you're still stuck behind the first two. No Tupperware in the house? You could have made a trip to the store.
45° and 0°...??? What more am I to conclude from you here? Remember this: Gravity is our friend, always has been, always will be. If you drop a golf ball straight into a hole, what is the angle of approach? This is the second question on the test. (Your scholarship is at stake.)
[n/a] Everyone › ARTIE 10-Dec-03/8:57 AM Reply
Here's an old chestnut of a problem: You are in a boat floating in a swimming pool. In the bottom of the boat sits a boulder. If you pick up the boulder and throw it into the pool, what will happen to the water level?
[9] ARTIE › Everyone 10-Dec-03/9:15 AM Reply
Darn. That's the third question on the test.
You're "nadda-gonna" give Dave the answer, are you?
[n/a] Everyone › ARTIE 10-Dec-03/9:24 AM Reply
Dave will work it out himself. He's probably already heard it.
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › Everyone 10-Dec-03/4:04 PM Reply
I have not heard that question, but I have heard of Archimedes' principle - the water level stays the same.

Ok, an equalateral triangle can fall through it's hole. At least I don't award jobs based on the ability to instantly solve crappy brainteasers. Look, you should always work on this principle: I am the cleverest person in the world, therefore anything I say is the best thing to say given the circumstances.
[n/a] Everyone › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 10-Dec-03/4:08 PM Reply
You fool! Given that you know Archimedes' principle, there is no excuse for thinking the water level stays the same. I'm afraid you fail.
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › Everyone 10-Dec-03/4:13 PM Reply
I was assuming the boulder has the same density as water. I win.
[n/a] Everyone › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 10-Dec-03/4:20 PM Reply
I knew you were going to say that so you don't win. May I suggest the next time you fail, rather than desperately trying to wriggle out of it with a ludicrous, retrospective assumption like "manholes are 2D" or "the boulder has the same density as water", you lower your trousers like a gentleman and hand in your letter of resignation to the nearest Bureau d'Incompetance?
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › Everyone 10-Dec-03/4:50 PM Reply
no, you.
[n/a] richa 20-Jan-04/12:59 AM Reply
Are the maths community impressed when you post poems on mathsranker?
[n/a] Everyone › richa 20-Jan-04/6:23 AM Reply
No; sadly Professor ?-Dave_Mysterious-? made the Mathsranker Brownlists for repeatedly refusing to accept The Splendour Of Gold argument for the existence of God, and for twice showing his bum. Once Brownlisted, the renowned mathematician lost all High Trouser privileges, and was only allowed to use the Whitehead Library if he balanced a potato on his head and kept it there for the duration of his stay. It was following one such 'potatoed' library session that ?-Dave_Mysterious-? hit an all time low as his Royal Society funded research took a terrible turn for the brown. Indeed, the Mathsranker Council were forced to banish him completely after he conjectured that the number 6 didn't exist and was purely an illusion, whilst simultaneously claiming (without proof) that he had discovered a new whole number between 5 and 7 called "bum". One hapless young student, after hearing the sound of a wounded animal mewing in Dave's office, foolishly decided to investigate, only to be trapped inside the soiled chamber for several days whilst the mad professor (who had been impersonating a dying otter) forced the poor fellowe to assume the validity of his blasphemous results and derive a new Theory of Arithmetic thereon. When the weeping apprentice did as he was told, and eventually proved the inevitably devastating "6 = bum" Theorem, ?-Dave_Mysterious-? flew into a terrible rage and, after throwing all his toys on the floor, ran across the room and vaulted through a closed window.


No doubt you'll agree that his is a very sorry tale, indeed.

Good day.
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › Everyone 12-Feb-04/6:02 PM Reply
Have I not now repaid my debt to society? May I now be permitted to post my humble opinions on the most redoubtable forum known as Poemranker? After all, opinions is what it's all about. isn't it? Yes, it is.
[n/a] -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. 7-Jul-04/5:00 AM Reply
The volume of the box is a³. So I understand why:

(dV/da) = 3a²

So dV = 3a²da.

But how do you get dV = d³a ? d³a = d(d(da)), doesn't it?
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. 7-Jul-04/7:15 AM Reply
In my lectures and stuff, d³a has always been used to mean a volume element. It might just be a bit of incongruous notation like sin^-1 meaning arcsin. I don't know, no one has ever told me. Maybe I should just have written dV = 3a²da.
[n/a] -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 7-Jul-04/7:37 AM Reply
Maybe you should have. It has never been my custom to write something down without knowing what it meant. How dare you.
[n/a] ?-Dave_Mysterious-? › -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. 7-Jul-04/7:42 AM Reply
Very well. But riddle me this: Who is better, Run DMC or the Beastie Boys?
[n/a] Stephen Robins › ?-Dave_Mysterious-? 7-Jul-04/8:29 AM Reply
They are both whack. Jazzy Jeff is by far the best hip hop artist of his generation.
[n/a] -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. › Stephen Robins 7-Jul-04/8:38 AM Reply
I prefer a fusion of flashdance with MC Hammer shit
[n/a] Stephen Robins › -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. 7-Jul-04/8:44 AM Reply
If I could access the damn chat cave I would tell you at length why MC Hammer was as good as Snow on his 1991 album smash "12 inches of Snow". Neither were as good as Skee Lo, who in turn was like a quivering gay in front of the awesome "spaz with a keyboard" Wesley Wallis.