TOPIC: Most Intelligent
We all know who the most Intelligent animal is right? I mean, i shouldn't even ask about this.
Comments (16)
Okay, what’s the Atomic Weight of Magnesium?
Dear BoredGenious: How much wood would I chuck if I could chuck wood?
OK, Bored Genius, I’ve got one that will stump you: How do you spell “answer”?
Now Sputter and Parrotbird- no hints!
Mwahahaha...good one Ellen! Chalk one up for the cats!
@parrotbird: it is a well known fact that magnesium is as heavy as two heliums combined with one oxygen. I assume you already know this, you are just testing my owliness wisdom. I forgive you. I am also a raptor.
@sputter: the answer, ofcourse, is chuck. you could ask him.
@ellen: how do you spell cat backwards? C-A-T-B-A-C-K-W-A-R-D-S!
@milo catz: you know why you’re so small?? Because you only drink condensed milk!!!
Wrong! I’m a squirrel, not a woodchuck. I don’t chuck wood. I WOULD chuck wood if I was a wood chuck but-- wait. I’m confused now…
@BoredGenius:
I think you are too bored to be a genius. Mg has an average AW of 24.305 amu; O has an average AW of 15.999 amu; He has an average AW of 4.003 amu. Do the math. 2 x 4.004 = 8.008; 8.008 amu + 15.999 amu = 24.007 amu.
Now, are you telling us that 24.007 = 24.305?
What is your verdict, O Wise One?
Ah, my feline friend, i want to teach you about the concept of “rounding down” but maybe another night, i am bored.
Poor owl, you are just jealous of my slim, handsome figure.
But I must ask, what does being a raptor have to do with forgiveness?
@milo, that means if you make me mad again i’ll show you want raptors do. My sentence is called “the subtle way of making a threat”.
@@ReallyBoredGenius:
O “Wise One”, where is thy wisdom? Surely you must be aware that atomic weights are averages reflecting naturally-occurring isotopic distribution, and the truly wise one therefore can never ever “round down” these averages! That would be the height of the nadir of unwisdom!
We felines do not ordinarily deign to share bits of our great innate Knowledge with the Common Folk, or make the effort to rectify their misconceptions. Consider yourself blessed indeed.
One talks of “averages” and arrives at an absolute value? If this is so i’m afraid neither of us is correct, for the “expected” weight of Magnesium is 24.3050518651. Alas, parrotbird is now confused, for “24.305050518651” is a jarring way of making a statement that is more appropriately expressed simply by gently allowing the student to arrive at his own “absolute” answer. There is a method to my teaching, and today i hope the lesson is learned.
I was actually looking for an answer more like “Magnesium is heavier than Helium but not as heavy as a bicycle.” I should have been clearer.
I thought is was 8 oz. Oh wait. That’s the volume of Milk of Magnesia. Forget I was here.
Come, Come, let us talk about other questions.
@@@@@Really, Really, Truly BoredGenius:
It is evident that we do not speak the same language. There is no valid “expected” weight of an element, but only an empirical weight obtained through observation of mass spec analysis of its naturally-occurring state. “Expected” weights, no matter how many decimal-place accuracy they are carried to, are always in error, since they presumably comprise the simple sum of the masses of the subatomic units and do not take into account the loss of mass inherent in their “fusion” to form the element, nor the distribution of its different nuclides.
We surely did not speak of “absolute” masses, and we do not know from whence you obtained this strange notion. We tried to comprehend just what it is that you were trying to say in the remainder of your statement, but we failed. We are at a loss in trying to translate your words into English, and we must give this up as a failed task. We detect neither “method” nor “teaching” in your odd ruminations. We shall adjourn this discourse for the more rewarding sojourn of catching a few z’s under our favorite bush in the Garden of Gentle Repose.
LOG-IN or JOIN so you can comment, agree or say "Yes"