|
Title: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: shaggy on October 15, 2006, 07:09:48 PM How much wood can a woodchuck chuck?
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: TraderJake on October 15, 2006, 08:24:28 PM Obscure options rule. Hence, I choose take the hypotenuse of the chucking divided by the mass of the woodchuck. I believe that if you do the calculations you will get a nice closed form answer, an integer actually, see, the answer is 42.
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: The Metamorphosing Leon on October 15, 2006, 09:39:48 PM Well I chose 1 metric ton, since if a woodchuck could chuck wood it would. Therefore it would have to be some amount of wood or another, metric ton being the only specific number it must be that answer.
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: Hydrobond on October 15, 2006, 10:51:32 PM Quote from: Wikipedia The name woodchuck has nothing etymologically to do with wood. It stems from an Algonquian name for the animal (possibly Narragansett), wuchak. The apparent relationship between the two words has led to the common tongue twister: "How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?  A woodchuck would chuck no amount of wood since a woodchuck can't chuck wood" (alternative second verse: "He would chuck what a woodchuck would if a woodchuck could chuck wood."). Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: Tynstar on October 16, 2006, 01:51:07 AM A lot
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: The Metamorphosing Leon on October 16, 2006, 03:08:31 AM Quote from: Wikipedia The name woodchuck has nothing etymologically to do with wood. It stems from an Algonquian name for the animal (possibly Narragansett), wuchak. The apparent relationship between the two words has led to the common tongue twister: "How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?  A woodchuck would chuck no amount of wood since a woodchuck can't chuck wood" (alternative second verse: "He would chuck what a woodchuck would if a woodchuck could chuck wood."). That's what I was saying, that second verse, has to be something, and the only real something in this poll is 1 metric ton. Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: chrisbid on October 16, 2006, 08:23:46 AM 42
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: wrldstrman on October 16, 2006, 12:35:48 PM mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm fried woodchuck
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: shaggy on October 18, 2006, 05:37:05 PM I picked take the hypotenuse of the chucking divided by the mass of the woodchuck. If you think about it the chucking is proportional to the mass of the woodchuck which in turn would be the hypotenuse!
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: wrldstrman on October 20, 2006, 12:28:45 PM If a woodchuck cuts down a tree in the woods and no ones around does it make a sound.
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: The Metamorphosing Leon on October 20, 2006, 01:39:15 PM Yes, because the woodchuck is around.
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: Zimbacca on October 21, 2006, 01:24:00 PM There are no such things as woodchucks, there's a huge conspericy like global warming and second hand smoke and jesus.
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: The Metamorphosing Leon on October 21, 2006, 03:35:07 PM No, I've shot at woodchucks before. Basically another name for groundhogs.
Title: Re: Weekly Poll 10/15/06 Post by: OatBob on January 20, 2007, 01:48:35 AM ... I believe that if you do the calculations you will get a nice closed form answer, an integer actually, see, the answer is 42. 42 is the correct answer. At least someone got it right. |