Shannon Nicoletta Manns

The last "barometers" I sent had nothing to do with barometers, as you
probably noticed. Here is the real 'barometers':


> Lateral thinking or Many Answers to a Question
> By R.G. Keswani
>
> Some time ago I received a call from a colleague. He was about to give a
> student a zero for this 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 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 to certify competence in physics, but the answer did not
confirm
> this.
>
>
> I suggested that the student have another try. I gave him 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 had not 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
the
> fall with a stopwatch. 'Then using the formula s=0.5at^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, 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 the
> 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 this 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 at the street level and at the top of the building. From the
> difference between two values of g, the height of the building, in
> principle, can be calculated"
>
>
> "On the 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, "there are many other ways of solving the
problem.
> Probably the best." he said, "is to take the barometer to the basement and
> knock on the superintendent's door. When he answers, you speak to him as
> follows: Sir, 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 student was Niels Bohr and the arbiter Rutherford.
> Taken from, Ieema Journal October 1999.
>
>
>