Difference between revisions of "Talk:2681: Archimedes Principle"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--> | <!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--> | ||
I started an explanation, but I can't really figure out what Archimedes' "plan" is. I guess it has something to do with swapping out the fake crown with the king's real gold crown. Heist movies and TV shows always confuse me (I liked "Leverage" for the characters, but could never understand the plans). [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 23:12, 5 October 2022 (UTC) | I started an explanation, but I can't really figure out what Archimedes' "plan" is. I guess it has something to do with swapping out the fake crown with the king's real gold crown. Heist movies and TV shows always confuse me (I liked "Leverage" for the characters, but could never understand the plans). [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 23:12, 5 October 2022 (UTC) | ||
| + | :Under the guise of demonstrating the displacement principle (the buoyancy effect has no real part in this, given the non-floating nature of any crown... I think the focus in the explanation should just be upon the displaced volume of liquid which traditionally would quantify the volume of an object of known weight and a density to be tested to ensure it is that of the purported substance) he will dunk the real crown in the water. Then ''either'': | ||
| + | :* extract the fake crown, now 'proven true', satisfying everyone but leaving him the really-true crown, or, | ||
| + | :* extract the fake crown, possibly fudging the interpretation (how much water sloshes out) to make it ''seem'' like a fake crown went in (and the fake that came out can now be destructively examined to confirm this, now having just cause to utterly ruin the craftwork in the process, and framing the original artisan for fraud), again leaving him with the crown he was given for testing. | ||
| + | :If the original crown was itself already fake then it might not be worth it (or have to lean towards the latter outcome with a bit of extra care not to 'upgrade' the fake) but that's probably covered by the typical Batman Gambit of a typical heist movie characterm [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.49|172.70.85.49]] 00:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 00:37, 6 October 2022
I started an explanation, but I can't really figure out what Archimedes' "plan" is. I guess it has something to do with swapping out the fake crown with the king's real gold crown. Heist movies and TV shows always confuse me (I liked "Leverage" for the characters, but could never understand the plans). Barmar (talk) 23:12, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Under the guise of demonstrating the displacement principle (the buoyancy effect has no real part in this, given the non-floating nature of any crown... I think the focus in the explanation should just be upon the displaced volume of liquid which traditionally would quantify the volume of an object of known weight and a density to be tested to ensure it is that of the purported substance) he will dunk the real crown in the water. Then either:
- extract the fake crown, now 'proven true', satisfying everyone but leaving him the really-true crown, or,
- extract the fake crown, possibly fudging the interpretation (how much water sloshes out) to make it seem like a fake crown went in (and the fake that came out can now be destructively examined to confirm this, now having just cause to utterly ruin the craftwork in the process, and framing the original artisan for fraud), again leaving him with the crown he was given for testing.
- If the original crown was itself already fake then it might not be worth it (or have to lean towards the latter outcome with a bit of extra care not to 'upgrade' the fake) but that's probably covered by the typical Batman Gambit of a typical heist movie characterm 172.70.85.49 00:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
