"What's the difference between a nucleus and an elephant?: Using surrogate reactions to deduce neutron-induced reaction cross sections on radioactive nuclei "
I don't get this joke. Its really sciency or something....
- Thread starter benoitowns
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'll take it we're supposed to talk about how confused we are? I'll start
"I am so confused!"
Now I feel like I contributed
"I am so confused!"
Now I feel like I contributed
Well I don't know about this one... I think one looses a electron...
yeah I'm positive, one lost a electron
yeah I'm positive, one lost a electron
i think it may be to do with the fact that it has very little to do with elephants. same principle as 'whats the difference between and elephant and butter? and elephant is hard to spread on toast.' i'm guessing though and could be very very very wrong.
I don't get it either. It doesn't make any sense. Usually jokes that go "What's the difference between ____ and ____?" have punchlines that go "At least ______ doesn't ______." or "_______ doesn't _______." or something to that effect.
Hmm... You know what? If I think about it a little more, it could be about radioactivity.Warrior Irme said:
But if I didn't see that before, it'll be like forgetting my A,B,Gs
Alpha, Beta, and Gamma rads.
This appears to be a nonjoke. It's funny in that there's no actual punchline, as though it was told by a nuclear physicist who had heard of humor but had never encountered it.
I somewhat doubt http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/colloquiums/Previous/Fall_2006/Lee_Bernstein.htmlgrimsprice said:
is punking me.
Your kidding right it's not a joke it's the name of a lecture and then what the lecture is about. It's like "failing and you: a beginners guide to reading comprehension"benoitowns said:
It's not a direct joke, or at least not in the way non-Germans mean a joke. It's a literal question: what makes the difference between large constructs of elemental particles and the elemental particles themselves.
Any joke perceived in this question would have to take the form of a non-sequitur i.e. "What's the difference between and Elephant and a banana: Chickens lay eggs."
The obvious lack of connection between the set-up and the punchline, whilst maintaining a joke-like format, brings about a form of humour of discordance: it's funny because there's nothing funny about it, yet it's postulated as if it were funny. The brain seems to find this kind of absurdities amusing.
It might also be using this same absurdity based humour deliberately as the answer following the question exceeds its complexity to an amusingly mismatching degree. A synergy of this and my first guess is probably the closest to the truth, however, having not attended Dr. Bernstein's lecture this is just conjecture.
Any joke perceived in this question would have to take the form of a non-sequitur i.e. "What's the difference between and Elephant and a banana: Chickens lay eggs."
The obvious lack of connection between the set-up and the punchline, whilst maintaining a joke-like format, brings about a form of humour of discordance: it's funny because there's nothing funny about it, yet it's postulated as if it were funny. The brain seems to find this kind of absurdities amusing.
It might also be using this same absurdity based humour deliberately as the answer following the question exceeds its complexity to an amusingly mismatching degree. A synergy of this and my first guess is probably the closest to the truth, however, having not attended Dr. Bernstein's lecture this is just conjecture.
