Is Hell exothermic or endothermic?

The following is an actual question given on a McGill University chemistry mid-term Exam paper:
Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)? Support your answer with a proof.

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyles Law (gas cools off when it expands and heats up when it is compressed) or some variant.

One student, however, wrote the following:
First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So, we need to know the rate that souls are moving into Hell and the rate they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that most people and their souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially.
Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyles Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand as souls are added.
This gives two possibilities.
If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.
Of course, if Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.
So which is it?
If we accept the postulate given to me by Ms. Celine LeBlanc during my Freshman year - that "it will be a cold night in Hell before I go out with you" - and take into account the fact that I still have not succeeded in developing even a cordial relationship with her, then (2) cannot be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic.

The student got the only A!

Faster than light?

The other day i was explaining the relativity theory to a friend. At the speed of light, any object would have infinite mass so would need infinite energy to make it go faster."This means that there is a maximum speed at which anything can travel, and only massless things like light can travel at that speed," I explained.My friend is very bright, and after a little thought he came up with three situations that semmed to contradict Einstein. Is any of them valid?

1. The poles outside barber shops have helical stripes painted round them. If the pole is rotated, its stripes are seen to travel along it. If the rotation is fast enough the stripes should travel faster than light.
2. If you shine a flashlight on a wall, you will see a spot of light. You can make this spot move along the wall by rotating the flashlight. The speed of the spot depends on the distance from the wall and the speed of rotation of the flashlight. If you shine a laser on a target some miles away, the spot of light formed could be made to move faster than the speed of light by rotating the laser.
3. Very small particles, like neutrons, can penetrate matter very easily. Imagine such a particle, travelling at nearly the speed of light, entering a block of glass. The particle is so small that it will not be impeded by the glass, but light is slowed down to about two-thirds of its speed in air. Therefore, the particle would be travelling faster in glass than the light.


My conclusion:
My friend correctly identified three situations in which something travels faster that light. However, none of them contradicts Einstein, whose work could be more correctly summarized as: " The maximum speed at which INFORMATION can travel is represented by the speed of light in a vacuum. "In the first two examples, nothing physical moves faster than light.

The barber's pole stripes only appear to move along the pole.

The spot of light at one end of the sweep is different from the one at the other end as it is made up of different photons. Neither system could be used to carry INFORMATION.
The third example has been observed experimentally. Such particles break the "light barrier" and produce minute photonic flashes equivalent to sonic booms.