Rest In Publications

That moment when your physics professor asks you to demonstrate the right-hand thumb rule and your brain goes completely blank! 🧠💨 The rule is actually super handy for figuring out the direction of magnetic fields around current-carrying wires - point your thumb in the direction of the current, and your curled fingers show you which way the magnetic field wraps around. But in the heat of the moment? Total mental shutdown, and all you can do is awkwardly stick your thumb up like "is this science?" Physics students everywhere just felt this in their souls!

Engineering students know the drill - Callister's textbook isn't just reading material, it's emotional support . That crystalline structure on the cover isn't just showing atomic bonding - it's bonding with your soul during those 3AM study sessions. Nothing says "I've hit rock bottom" like finding companionship in a book that explains why actual rocks have their bottom... properties. The crystal lattice won't ghost you, unlike your social life during finals week!

The real question isn't finding the perimeter—it's finding whether this triangle can even exist ! With sides (3a+7), (a-14), and (2a-1), you'd need to satisfy the triangle inequality theorem: the sum of any two sides must exceed the third side. For most values of 'a', that (a-14) side is going negative faster than my motivation during finals week. The student's answer "6a-8" is technically correct for the perimeter, but they skipped the existential crisis of whether this shape is even possible in our reality. Math teachers love throwing these geometric paradoxes at us just to watch our souls leave our bodies.

This flowchart is what happens when career counselors have a mental breakdown. Engineering? Only if you're "good with things." Chemistry? Congratulations on your future as a "fussy pedant." And let's not forget Computer Science, perfect for those who prefer "slow, indirect evil" over the more efficient varieties. The beautiful part is how it nails the existential crisis of every STEM student. "Why do you want to major in a STEM field?" Options include "curiosity" (adorable), "to save the planet" (delusional), or my personal favorite, the dawning realization that STEM was supposed to involve actual plants for Biology majors. After 30 years of teaching, I can confirm this is approximately 87% accurate. The missing 13% is the path where you choose your major based on which department has the least uncomfortable chairs in the lecture hall.

The gap between "3 input logic gates" and "custom CPU architecture" is like saying "here's a hammer, now build me the Empire State Building." Engineering professors really think throwing students a transistor bone while expecting a full digital buffet is merciful. The cognitive dissonance is *chef's kiss* - like giving someone a tricycle for their cross-country journey. Computer engineering students everywhere are having PTSD flashbacks to their digital design finals right now.

Nothing quite like watching a kid's scientific awakening happen in real-time! The classic "we didn't come from monkeys" parental warning followed by an actual teacher explaining common ancestry instead of perpetuating misconceptions. The punchline is *chef's kiss* - trying to shield a kid from evolution only to have them embrace it because someone actually took the time to explain the science properly. Funny how accurate information tends to be more compelling than vague warnings. The fossil record wins again!