Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Conan and Jim Carrey on QM

  1. Feb 25, 2007 #1
    I thought this was pretty funny:

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2014
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 25, 2007 #2
    Wonder how long it took him to memorize that :rolleyes:
     
  4. Feb 25, 2007 #3
    You cynic:wink: :smile:

    That's pretty funny actually.:biggrin:
     
  5. Feb 25, 2007 #4
    :rofl: Nice.
     
  6. Feb 25, 2007 #5

    G01

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    That is funny!
     
  7. Feb 25, 2007 #6
    What is funny :confused:
    This is an interesting discussion :approve:
    Although, <insert here silly geek comment>
    :tongue2:
     
  8. Feb 25, 2007 #7

    morphism

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Haha. That was classic!
     
  9. Feb 25, 2007 #8

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You must be an insider! I found it nonsensical.
    For instance, how does the "diffusion constant D", which is dimensionally the inverse of time, supposed to "approach t_n"? Also, Carrey's first sentence sounds like a great revelation or exciting explanation, when in fact, it is simply the definition of a phase bistability, and is not at all specific to an electron in a Penning trap.
     
  10. Feb 25, 2007 #9

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I saw it on Conan the other night and thought it was hilarious, but did wonder if it was just a bunch of nonsense strung together to sound smart, or if someone had actually coached them and helped put together something actually scientifically sound. I'm glad someone found a clip to ask here. The exchange did sound like some of the arguments I've read in a few subfora around here. :biggrin: :rofl:
     
  11. Feb 25, 2007 #10

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    In order to understand, you would have to watch the entire show.
     
  12. Feb 25, 2007 #11

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Despite my objection above (and I didn't watch the entire show) it may be scientifically sound. But it is still reading of definitions made to sound like a discussion of interesting results. Everyone knows that particles that are thermally activated from a trap will escape at a rate that goes "exponentially like the negative of the activation energy". You learn the Arrhenius equation in a high school chemistry class.
     
  13. Feb 25, 2007 #12

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Btw, I was kidding. :biggrin:
     
  14. Feb 25, 2007 #13
    I think Gokul is kidding too :rofl:
     
  15. Feb 25, 2007 #14

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    A diffusion coefficient usually has units of unit area per unit time, e.g. cm2 s-1.

    Perhaps tn is normalized time.

    I am sure it sounded impressive to the audience.

    I found it non-sensical too.
     
  16. Feb 25, 2007 #15

    turbo

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Nice skit, though!
     
  17. Feb 25, 2007 #16
    My opinion: Show off...

    A decade ago they thought we nerds were really creepy and avoided us whenever we came down the hallway (Mind you, I was doing really nerdy 3 year old stuff back then), and now, they USE us! For publicity!
     
  18. Feb 25, 2007 #17

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That's all they were supposed to accomplish.

    It didn't matter if it was. It was meant to be funny, not educational. I doubt anyone assumed they were talking serious science. I just found it hilarious that I've actually heard people talk like that (though, sometimes it hasn't been about science, but science fiction...*snickers* "Only a moron wouldn't know that in episode 2 of season 3 of Stargate..." :biggrin:)
     
  19. Feb 25, 2007 #18
    Talk about beating a dead horse. -it was a joke people, :rolleyes: -
     
  20. Feb 25, 2007 #19

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There's a good deal of irony in the amount of discussion that has occurred here over that particular joke. :biggrin:
     
  21. Feb 25, 2007 #20
    Don't worry about it, Conan O'Brien is also a huge nerd. He was a writer for the Simpsons and SNL, after all.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Conan and Jim Carrey on QM
  1. Conan and Martha (Replies: 3)

  2. Is it life Jim (Replies: 3)

Loading...