I was reminded of this and well, when reminded I must share.
Shit writers say.
“It’s not like Twilight.” …is actually something I’ve had to say several times.
I feel I am guilty of many of these.
OMG! I love this. <_< unfortunately <_< Knights may be >_> just a teency tiny itty little bit <_< >_> like Twilight. O_O Noooo! T__T Meyers is, unfortunately, the most famous example of my genre at the moment. There’s only one vampire in the whole zero draft though and they’re a villain. So it’s not that bad. Right. Right? Right??
Participating in NaNoWriMo? Prone to jealousy when a rival has written more words than you? Don’t worry, Auntie Malice is here to give you a piece of sound advice:
Nothing is more distracting than a spot o’ confusion. Place a frying pan in your rival’s doorway, and attach a note detailing its desire to be reunited with bacon. Leave a trail of breadcrumbs that extends to a good thirty miles before ending in an old people’s home on Scrabble night. They’ll be gone for hours.
Alternatively, you can use their higher word-count as motivation to make you write more. Personally, I’d stick with the frying pan method.
Sir Ernest Rutherford, President of the Royal Academy, and recipient of the Nobel Prize in Physics, related the following story:
“Some time ago I received a call from a colleague. He was about to give a student a zero for his answer to a physics question, while the student claimed a perfect score. The instructor and the student agreed to an impartial arbiter, and I was selected.
I read the examination question: “Show how it is possible to determine the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer.”
The student had answered: “Take the barometer to the top of the building,attach a long rope to it, lower it to the street, and then bring it up, measuring the length of the rope. The length of the rope is the height of the building.”
The student really had a strong case for full credit since he had really answered the question completely and correctly! On the other hand, if full credit were given, it could well contribute to a high grade in his physics course and certify competence in physics, but the answer did not confirm this. I suggested that the student have another try. I gave the student six minutes to answer the question with the warning that the answer should show some knowledge of physics.
At the end of five minutes, he hadn’t written anything. I asked if he wished to give up, but he said he had many answers to this problem; he was just thinking of the best one. I excused myself for interrupting him and asked him to please go on. In the next minute, he dashed off his answer, which read: “Take the barometer to the top of the building and lean over the edge of the roof. Drop the barometer, timing its fall with a stopwatch.
Then, using the formula x=0.5*a*t^2, calculate the height of the building.”
At this point, I asked my colleague if he would give up. He conceded, and gave the student almost full credit. While leaving my colleague’s office, I recalled that the student had said that he had other answers to the problem, so I asked him what they were.
“Well,” said the student, “there are many ways of getting the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer. For example, you could take the barometer out on a sunny day and measure the height of the barometer, the length of its shadow, and the length of the shadow of the building, and by the use of simple proportion, determine the height of the building.”
“Fine,” I said, “and others?”
“Yes,” said the student, “there is a very basic measurement method you will like. In this method, you take the barometer and begin to walk up the stairs. As you climb the stairs, you mark off the length of the barometer along the wall. You then count the number of marks, and his will give you the height of the building in barometer units.”
“A very direct method.”
“Of course. If you want a more sophisticated method, you can tie the barometer to the end of a string, swing it as a pendulum, and determine the value of g [gravity] at the street level and at the top of the building.
From the difference between the two values of g, the height of the building, in principle, can be calculated.”
“On this same tack, you could take the barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower it to just above the street, and then swing it as a pendulum. You could then calculate the height of the building by the period of the precession”.
“Finally,” he concluded, “probably the best,” he said, “is to take the barometer to the basement and knock on the superintendent’s door. When the superintendent answers, you speak to him as follows: ‘Mr. Superintendent, here is a fine barometer. If you will tell me the height of the building, I will give you this barometer.”
At this point, I asked the student if he really did not know the conventional answer to this question. He admitted that he did, but said that he was fed up with high school and college instructors trying to teach him how to think.
The name of the student was…
The Nobel Prize winner in Physics 1922
In case anyone wonders why I like geekboys: this.
XD I actually laughed out loud at this. But it does get to a really important point, the correct answer is not always the best answer and the fundamental trait of high competence seems to be not the knowledge of the correct answer but the ability to see a lot of answers. If a correct answer is known, you can always look it up. But only the ability to look at things in different ways will show you how to find out an answer that isn’t known or already suspected. My favorite college professor called this “Looking Awry.” I have to admit I admire anyone who is good at it. Also, smartasses are amusing ;)
Stephen Colbert and Stephen King holding hands in matching sweaters. [x]
This is just beautiful. I’m sure reblogging it carries a curse. Maybe one eye will grow arms, wings, and legs and crawl out of your face and fly up to a corner to watch you while you sleep. Just watch you. Every night.