[ 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: 133 KB, 1280x720, rain running.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9041482 No.9041482 [Reply] [Original]

So, do you catch more or less raindrops if you run through the rain?

>> No.9041484

>>9041482
more.

>> No.9041488

Try with a bigger bait, next time.

>> No.9041489

A running person has more surface area to catch drops because their limbs are more exposed.

>> No.9041490

>>9041482
Less.

Your going to catch the same amount regardless however more will fall off of you if your moving.

>> No.9041639

>>9041489
this

>> No.9041640

>posting a picture from the video that answers the question

>> No.9041647

>>9041482
Less, but they hit you harder.

>> No.9041732

>>9041482
well if we consider a spherical person running in vacuum, it will not catch any rain because liqud water cannot exist at zero pressure for long

>> No.9041746

>>9041489
this

>> No.9042391
File: 45 KB, 1000x1000, 1461088188817.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9042391

>>9041488

>> No.9042477

>>9041490
When you're standing still, the only water that hits you is what lands on top of you. When you're running, there's water hitting you from both the top and from the front that you're running toward.

>> No.9042478

>>9041640
>the video provides an answer
>THAT MUST BE THE RIGHT ANSWER

>> No.9042565

>Travel at light speed
>Refract into a rainbow

>> No.9042596

>>9042477
But you also reach your destination quicker and spend less time in the rain.

Unless your destination is even more rain.

>> No.9042598

>>9041482
Literally facepalming at you retards ITT. I can solve this easily with logic.

If your velocity was zero, you would just be standing in the rain and accumulating infinite wetness.

Therefore, the faster you go the less wet you are.

>> No.9042602

>>9042598
>Literally facepalming at you retards ITT. I can solve this easily with logic.
>infinite wetness
thank you

>> No.9042608

>>9042565
> Travel at nearly light speed
> die of high energy gamma radiation caused by the collision with air molecules faster than from the collision itself

>> No.9042614

You may accumulate more per second but fewer seconds in the rain = less rain fuckin duh

>> No.9042626
File: 72 KB, 488x547, 1494929284320.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9042626

Mythbusters tested this but can't remember the results.

>> No.9042643

>>9042626
damn, did they forget to film it?

>> No.9042669

>>9042643
No, they didn't forget to film it, desu.. If I recall correctly, they found that walking through rain leaves you less wet than running. I would assume this would change with greater distances, though.

>> No.9042698
File: 613 KB, 863x353, flux.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9042698

>>9041482
Less. Water that hits you horizontally is dependent only on water drop density and distanced traveled. Water that hits you vertically is dependent only on flow rate and time.

>> No.9042709

>>9042598
Well, then by the same logic, as velocity approaches infinity, the number of raindrops landed goes to zero.

>> No.9042758

>>9042709
>Well, then by the same logic
Not necessarily. All we know is that it has to decrease.

>> No.9042814

Tested by mythbusters. Running makes you more wet

>> No.9042825

>>9042709
No. The amount of water you hit at infinite speed approaches your frontal area times the distance travelled times the amount of rain per volume of air.

>> No.9042870

>>9041482
Didn't minute physics say less

>> No.9042902

>>9042825
Times the amount of time taken (=0)

>> No.9043019

>>9041482
More, so if you're running around in a circle in rain, you're an idiot
Unless you're trying to leg it for the cover, then running to minimise time in rain is better than standing around getting nowhere

>> No.9043024

>>9041732
Fukken kek

>> No.9043030

>>9042902
no, in the limit as your speed goes to infinity, basically it's like the rain is standing still. So you would be hit by every raindrop that is currently in between you and where you're going.

>> No.9043408

>>9042477
But you're not standing still. You're walking.
Imagine the rain being stationary, suspended in air. The only water that will hit you is the one you walk into. It doesn't matter if you run into it, or walk into it. It will be the same total amount.
But in reality the rain is not standing still, it is falling. The only difference here is however that now the longer you stay inside the rain, the more will hit you. And this is the only thing that matters.

>> No.9043481
File: 64 KB, 850x572, downwind.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9043481

Walking or running in the rain - a simple derivation of a general solution

The question whether to walk slowly or to run when it starts raining in order to stay as dry as possible has been considered for many years - and with different results, depending on the assumptions made and the mathematical descriptions for the situation. Because of the practical meaning for real life and the inconsistent results depending on the chosen parameters, this problem is well suited to undergraduate students learning to decide which parameters are important and choosing reasonable values to describe a physical problem. Dealing with physical parameters is still useful at university level, as students do not always recognize the connection between pure numbers and their qualitative and quantitative influence on a physical problem. This paper presents an intuitive approach which offers the additional advantage of being more detailed, allowing for more parameters to be tested than the simple models proposed in most other publications.

rain cape & boots
singing in the rain

>> No.9043509

>>9041482
less because you spend less time in the rain.

>> No.9043517

>>9041482
Running = you accumulate water faster but will have accumulated less in total than if you would have walked the same distance. That is, if your clothing isn't already completely soaked by then.

>> No.9043638
File: 160 KB, 1391x741, relevant.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9043638

after running some advanced physic simulations I can confirm that running is indeed the superior option in case of rainfall

>> No.9044062
File: 40 KB, 1042x515, New Bitmap Image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9044062

going fast minimizes the volume of water you clip

>> No.9044089

>>9041482
Depends of the direction of the wind.

>> No.9044497

>>9042477
rain doesnt fall from a 90 degrees angle. it will hit you from the sides too. rememver also wind. you are true about the exposed surfaces, but wrong about rain falling only on top when walking.

>> No.9045600

>>9044089
Depends on the direction you're running in, and whether or not there is a roof at the destination.

>> No.9045664

>>9041482
You get less wet if you run in rain that is vertically falling. This is due to reduction of the time it takes to go where needed. If you walk in vertical rain, you will catch all of the rain but if you run, you will only catch the rain in front of you and maybe some on the back of your legs.

Walking will make you soaked even on a day with a light drizzle. The did the test on myth busters and although its a meme show about science, there's not really any complexity behind the solution.