Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: mmeron on 17 Dec 2006 21:40 In article <kgpbo2l6601e2mp0roe4ffudebbv3esarm(a)4ax.com>, JoeBloe <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> writes: >On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:34:14 GMT, mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu Gave us: > >>In article <1h0h54-2kb.ln1(a)sirius.tg00suus7038.net>, The Ghost In The Machine <ewill(a)sirius.tg00suus7038.net> writes: >>>In sci.physics, Eeyore >>><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> >>> wrote >>>on Sun, 17 Dec 2006 22:45:09 +0000 >>><4585C875.DCD9A857(a)hotmail.com>: >>>> >>>> >>>> The Ghost In The Machine wrote: >>>> >>>>> In sci.physics, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote >>>>> > >>>>> > As long as the ice is floating the water level will never change. >>>>> > However, if you fill the glass with enough ice so that the column >>>>> > sinks to, and is supported by the bottom of the glass, then as the >>>>> > ice melts the water level will rise until the column of ice no >>>>> > longer touches the bottom of the glass. >>>>> >>>>> I should point out that a floating ice cube is less dense >>>>> than the water bouying it; therefore, as it melts, the total >>>>> volume of ice + water will lessen. What that does to water >>>>> level in, say, a tank of water with free floating ice, >>>>> I'm not entirely certain. >>>> >>>> And you call yourself a scientist ? >>>> >>>> How about doing some basic science and see for yourself ? >>>> >>>> Graham >>>> >>> >>>As it so happens I do have a cup with a good amount of ice in it; I'll >>>fill it to the brim with tap water and then wait a few hours and see how >>>the level goes. >>> >>>It's the best I can do without more sophisticated equipment. :-) In >>>any event my computations suggest that no change should ensue in the >>>water level. >>> >>>That covers prediction and experimental setup. Results...well, we'll >>>just have to wait. >>> >>It is an elementary problem. The mass of the ice cube is equal to the >>mass of the water it displaces (Archimedes). After melting, it'll >>fill the volume it displaces. The level *will not* change. >> >>Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool, >>meron(a)cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same" > > > However, as John stated, IF the ice column of ice in the container >stacks all the way to the base of the vessel, ANY ICE above the water >line is NOT buoyed up, and will add to the water line height as the >ice recedes into the container. The moment the ice free floats again, >the ice above the water line no longer adds to that level. Yep. Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool, meron(a)cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
From: Eeyore on 18 Dec 2006 00:13 The Ghost In The Machine wrote: > In sci.physics, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote > > The Ghost In The Machine wrote: > >> In sci.physics, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote > >> > The Ghost In The Machine wrote: > >> >> In sci.physics, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote > >> >> > > >> >> > As long as the ice is floating the water level will never change. > >> >> > However, if you fill the glass with enough ice so that the column > >> >> > sinks to, and is supported by the bottom of the glass, then as the > >> >> > ice melts the water level will rise until the column of ice no > >> >> > longer touches the bottom of the glass. > >> >> > >> >> I should point out that a floating ice cube is less dense > >> >> than the water bouying it; therefore, as it melts, the total > >> >> volume of ice + water will lessen. What that does to water > >> >> level in, say, a tank of water with free floating ice, > >> >> I'm not entirely certain. > >> > > >> > And you call yourself a scientist ? > >> > > >> > How about doing some basic science and see for yourself ? > >> > > >> > Graham > >> > >> As it so happens I do have a cup with a good amount of ice in it; I'll > >> fill it to the brim with tap water and then wait a few hours and see how > >> the level goes. > >> > >> It's the best I can do without more sophisticated equipment. :-) In > >> any event my computations suggest that no change should ensue in the > >> water level. > >> > >> That covers prediction and experimental setup. Results...well, we'll > >> just have to wait. > > > > It's astonishing you even feel the need to do it. But heck, why not ? > > > > Good luck anyway. I'd stick it in a microwave oven to get it over with quickly > > but that's just me and the 'greens' would probably say that the government > > microwave rays gave a flawed result so you'd better not do that after all ! > > An interesting point, but microwaves will heat the water and thus > distort the experiment somewhat. :-) (Greens or otherwise.) > > Ideally, I'd cover the cup with a transparent dome but don't have one > handy. I look forward to hearing your result. Graham
From: Cranks Reply on 18 Dec 2006 05:19 Eeyore wrote: > > I do hope you're not really this stupid. Until now I thought you were quite > smart. i never thought you were smart you dumb donkeycnut. you are frigging clueless. there should be laws passed against you breathing oxygen.
From: Cranks Reply on 18 Dec 2006 05:21 Eeyore wrote: > John Fields wrote: > > > As long as the ice is floating the water level will never change. > > Maybe there is yet hope for science ? > > I wonder how the 'greens' think steel ships float too. No doubt by their > simpleton thinking they should sink ? > > stupid cnut.
From: Eeyore on 18 Dec 2006 05:24
Cranks Reply wrote: > Eeyore wrote: > > > > I do hope you're not really this stupid. Until now I thought you were quite > > smart. > > i never thought you were smart you dumb donkeycnut. you are frigging > clueless. > > there should be laws passed against you breathing oxygen. You presumably haven't done the ice experiment then ? :~) Graham |