What? 1) It dismisses all the other students as simply using boyle's law, which this student did as well. badly, at that.
2) Without knowing the derivative of the volume of hell, he has nothing. And since he doesn't, he presents his two possibilities. Of course, he's missing the one that the volume of hell is expanding at exactly the rate of incoming souls, and it has either been hot or cold forever. Furthermore, there is the possibility of hell starting out as "really hot" and has slowly been decreasing to "hot," thus making it exothermic but not yet "cold."
3) Therese Banyan is not an academic source.
4) He leaps from "souls exist" to "souls have mass" without proof. Leptons and bosons exist, don't they?
5) it's not even funny. The parts that could be funny are "every soul is going to hell" and the business with Therese Banyan, neither of which relate to the subject enough to have humor.
6) I get really annoyed when people say "Well one of this is this way, thus a mole of it is also this way." Nobody would ever say "One soul has mass, so two must have mass!" or "one soul has mass, so a dozen must have mass," and a mole is just like "two" or "a dozen". Chemists just prefer working in moles than representative particles even when they are just looking at ratios.