* One students said to another, “I’m reading a great book on anti-gravity and I can’t put it down.
Her friend replied, “I’m reading a great book on helium and I can’t put it down either.”
* I have a new theory on inertia but it doesn’t seem to be gaining momentum.
* Why can’t atheists solve exponential equations? Because they don’t believe in higher powers.
* Q: If H2O is the formula for water, what is the formula for ice?
A: H2O – CUBED.
* A chemistry teacher asks her class, “What is the formula for water?”
A pupil replies, “H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O”
The teacher says, “Where did you get that from? That’s not what you have been taught.”
The pupil responds, “Yes it is, you told us the formula for water was…H to O.”
* Do you know the name Pavlov? It rings a bell.
* A group of protesters in front of a physics lab are chanting:
“What do we want?”.
“When do we want it?”.
* Q: How did the blonde define hydrophobic in his chemistry exam?
A: Fear of utility bills.
* What does a subatomic duck say? Quark!
* A neutron walks into a bar and asks how much for a beer. The barman replies “For you, no charge”.
* Two atoms are walking together. One of them says:
“Oh, no, I think I lost an electron.”
“Are you sure?”
“Yes, I’m positive.”
* An optimist sees a glass half full. A pessimist sees it half empty. An engineer sees it twice as large as it needs to be.
The science theme was prompted by the story of Sir Tim Hunt who told a conference in South Korea:
“Let me tell you about my trouble with girls … three things happen when they are in the lab … You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and when you criticise them, they cry.” . . .
He has now resigned:
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Wednesday, Sir Tim said he was “really sorry that I said what I said”, adding it was “a very stupid thing to do in the presence of all those journalists”.
The British biochemist, who was knighted in 2006, said the remarks made at a conference in South Korea were “intended as a light-hearted, ironic comment” but had been “interpreted deadly seriously by my audience”.
He went on to say he stood by some of the comments.
“I did mean the part about having trouble with girls,” he said.
“I have fallen in love with people in the lab and people in the lab have fallen in love with me and it’s very disruptive to the science because it’s terribly important that in a lab people are on a level playing field.
“I found that these emotional entanglements made life very difficult.
“I’m really, really sorry I caused any offence, that’s awful. I certainly didn’t mean that. I just meant to be honest, actually.”
That an apparently intelligent man thinks like this is bemusing, but should he have resigned when universities are supposed to be bastions of freedom of thought and speech?
Especially when female scientists have shown themselves quite capable of countering his contention with their #Distractinglysexy Twitter campaign