Difference between revisions of "Talk:2681: Archimedes Principle"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 12: Line 12:
 
::Which could indicate that the successful execution of Archimedes' plan is what leads to the legend as we have it today.[[User:MarquisOfCarrabass|MarquisOfCarrabass]] ([[User talk:MarquisOfCarrabass|talk]]) 05:40, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 
::Which could indicate that the successful execution of Archimedes' plan is what leads to the legend as we have it today.[[User:MarquisOfCarrabass|MarquisOfCarrabass]] ([[User talk:MarquisOfCarrabass|talk]]) 05:40, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 
:::Yes agreed. The King was paranoid and his crown made of gold. And the reason the legend says he proved the crown to be false, is that he did this heist to steal the real gold crown. So for a bit of gold and some silver he gained the same volume of gold, that could be either melted or sold to a secret bitter --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 
:::Yes agreed. The King was paranoid and his crown made of gold. And the reason the legend says he proved the crown to be false, is that he did this heist to steal the real gold crown. So for a bit of gold and some silver he gained the same volume of gold, that could be either melted or sold to a secret bitter --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 +
::The buoyancy does matter, the buoyant force is still there regardless of whether it is greater than the weight of the crown or not. If you place a crown weighing one pound and a one-pound bar of gold on a scale, they will balance in the air, but in the water if the crown is part silver the buoyant force on it will be greater and the gold bar will show as being heavier. In ancient Greece without precision measuring glassware, this would be much easier to do than measuring a small difference in the displacement if only a small part of the crown was replaced with silver. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.54|172.70.91.54]] 00:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
  
 
:xkcd does Archimedes's Heureka, Gotlib does Newton's apple...any more examples of (not necessary comic medium) parodies of famous science history anecdotes? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.242.7|172.70.242.7]] 06:27, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 
:xkcd does Archimedes's Heureka, Gotlib does Newton's apple...any more examples of (not necessary comic medium) parodies of famous science history anecdotes? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.242.7|172.70.242.7]] 06:27, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:33, 21 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)
The first of the two options makes way more sense. I don't like this plan at all though. How do you hide a colored shiny thing in a bucket of transparent water?!? I feel like we're missing something obvious. 172.69.34.80 01:53, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Megan says "hidden IN the bottom" , so I think there is some kind of false floor/double bottom at play here; allowing the fake crown to be hidden from view and allowing for a crown-swap in the middle of the demonstration. Flekkie (talk) 02:02, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Nobody said that it was clear water.  Pond water could be dirty or murky enough that the scam would work without the need of a false-bottomed bucket. RAGBRAIvet (talk) 04:24, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
According to legend, Archimedes is given the king's crown in order to test for its purity without breaking it; he suspects that the goldsmith he hired replaced most of the gold with silver and kept the excess to himself. Archimedes uses his displacement principle to measure the volume (figuring the principle out in his "Eureka" moment) and weighs the crown to determine its density; his results imply that the crown is in fact fake.
Here it's implied that the real crown is actually gold, and Archimedes is taking advantage of the king's paranoia; he's likely planning to switch it out, perform his experiment on the fake crown, and keep the real gold to himself. --Account (talk) 03:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Which could indicate that the successful execution of Archimedes' plan is what leads to the legend as we have it today.MarquisOfCarrabass (talk) 05:40, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Yes agreed. The King was paranoid and his crown made of gold. And the reason the legend says he proved the crown to be false, is that he did this heist to steal the real gold crown. So for a bit of gold and some silver he gained the same volume of gold, that could be either melted or sold to a secret bitter --Kynde (talk) 14:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
The buoyancy does matter, the buoyant force is still there regardless of whether it is greater than the weight of the crown or not. If you place a crown weighing one pound and a one-pound bar of gold on a scale, they will balance in the air, but in the water if the crown is part silver the buoyant force on it will be greater and the gold bar will show as being heavier. In ancient Greece without precision measuring glassware, this would be much easier to do than measuring a small difference in the displacement if only a small part of the crown was replaced with silver. 172.70.91.54 00:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
xkcd does Archimedes's Heureka, Gotlib does Newton's apple...any more examples of (not necessary comic medium) parodies of famous science history anecdotes? 172.70.242.7 06:27, 6 October 2022 (UTC)