[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 44 KB, 404x488, 4.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16006110 No.16006110 [Reply] [Original]

How is this not common sense?

>> No.16006116

>>16006110
Are these displaced volumes with us in the room right now?

>> No.16006266

>>16006116
Doesn't gas compress better then liquids? Technically not all of it since some would leak out.

>> No.16006278

The question would then be what'd happen if you put a higher dimension object in the water? Would it still displace the same volume?

>> No.16006281

>>16006110
It is. Applying it however isn't.

>> No.16006288

yes, the volume of the displaced water equals the volume of the stone
because the stone is heavier than the volume of the water it displaces, it sinks

>> No.16006298

>>16006110
It is common sense and has been known for 2 millenia

>> No.16006678

>>16006298
were people over 2 millenia ago retarded then?

>> No.16007150

>>16006278
The water rises as much as the volume of the object's 3D projection simple as.

>> No.16007334

>>16006288
how can it sink when it's attached to a rope, dumbass

>> No.16007401

>>16006110
it's used to build up to the less intuitive case where obj is less dense than water. The water displaced by floating obj has same weight as the obj.

>> No.16007608

>>16006110
Ok more importantly, how does the weight of the beaker change before and after?

>> No.16008639

>>16007608
pretty easy. assuming the stone has a density of 5 g/ml and water has a density of 1 g/ml, with a displaced volume of 340 ml, then the weight of the beaker would increase by 340*(5-1) = 1360 g

>> No.16008647

>>16007608
It’d decrease, because the rock is suspended and not actually putting a force on the beaker