Re: Challenger Deep reached again
If it hit you after dropping 35,000 + feet would it hurt more than from, say, 35 feet?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Challenger Deep reached again
Collapse
Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
X

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
does it make a difference if you drop it with the spin style as opposed to the glide?
Leave a comment:

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
Originally posted by DrJay60 minutes seemed a bit long to me. I can picture a shot descending a lot more rapidly than 7 mph.
Anyone want to experiment in their bathtub? :lol:
Leave a comment:

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
60 minutes seemed a bit long to me. I can picture a shot descending a lot more rapidly than 7 mph.
Leave a comment:

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
The key thing for shrinking under pressure is the density of the shot, which is about the same for all of them, and the ability of the material to resist compaction (the surface material on the indoor shot would become thinner, however). I would guess that most of the materials will not shrink much because they have a lot of internal support. [note how little water compacts]
As for the surface area/volume, since the mass factors as the cube and the crosssection as the square of the linear dimension, it should have increased force per unit of area offering resistance.
Leave a comment:

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
Originally posted by kuhaAnd, by the time it got to the bottom, how much would the pressure reduce the ball's diameter?
But seriously, it is about 15 lbs per square inch at sea level and 35,000 ft. deep is about 1200 atmospheres. So about 9 tons per square inch. So a little smaller assuming it is solid steel, or better even iron. As for one of those indoor shots? Forget it. I think it would like a vitamin pill by the time it hit bottom.
Leave a comment:

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
Originally posted by kuhaAnd, by the time it got to the bottom, how much would the pressure reduce the ball's diameter?
Leave a comment:

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
And, by the time it got to the bottom, how much would the pressure reduce the ball's diameter?
Leave a comment:

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
Originally posted by MarlowOriginally posted by catson52Making various simplifying assumptions, I get something like 30 min. to reach bottom for the 16 lb shot. If made of the same material, the 12 lb shot should reach a slightly lower terminal velocity, take ~5% longer to make the same journey.
Terminal velocity appears to depend on both the mass and the "surface area" of the object. In the given case, the mass difference (in the numerator), seemed to more than offset the "surface area" difference (in the denominator).
Leave a comment:

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
Originally posted by catson52Making various simplifying assumptions, I get something like 30 min. to reach bottom for the 16 lb shot. If made of the same material, the 12 lb shot should reach a slightly lower terminal velocity, take ~5% longer to make the same journey.
Leave a comment:

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
Making various simplifying assumptions, I get something like 30 min. to reach bottom for the 16 lb shot. If made of the same material, the 12 lb shot should reach a slightly lower terminal velocity, take ~5% longer to make the same journey.
Leave a comment:

Re: Challenger Deep reached again
I dropped out of HS physics (made my head ache, didn't' need the credits), but.... would it take longer or shorter for a 12pound shot to drop?
Leave a comment:

Challenger Deep reached again
http://wonderwall.msn.com/movies/james ... 3267.story
A T&F connection (well, kind of a stretch.) I read somewhere long ago that a 16 lb shot, dropped in the Pacific over the Deep, would take 60 minutes to reach the bottom.Tags: None
Leave a comment: