archimedes principle?
What is the relationship between Archimedes' principle and
"volume of object = volume of water displaced by the object" ?
"volume of object = volume of water displaced by the object" ?
BUMP :c
Well Archimedes principle says the upthrust force on an object is equal to the mass of the displaced liquid.
That's true whether the object sinks or floats - a lump of stone submerged in water is easier to lift than the same lump in the air cos under the water the upthrust gives you assistance.
floating object displaces it's mass
sunken object displaces it's volume
typically it's sunk because the sunken object was more dense than water, it displaced it;s mass of water but the upthrust was still less than the weight of the object.
but you could be holding an object that's less dense than water underwater with an external force
That's true whether the object sinks or floats - a lump of stone submerged in water is easier to lift than the same lump in the air cos under the water the upthrust gives you assistance.
floating object displaces it's mass
sunken object displaces it's volume
typically it's sunk because the sunken object was more dense than water, it displaced it;s mass of water but the upthrust was still less than the weight of the object.
but you could be holding an object that's less dense than water underwater with an external force
Original post by Joinedup
Well Archimedes principle says the upthrust force on an object is equal to the mass of the displaced liquid.
That's true whether the object sinks or floats - a lump of stone submerged in water is easier to lift than the same lump in the air cos under the water the upthrust gives you assistance.
floating object displaces it's mass
sunken object displaces it's volume
typically it's sunk because the sunken object was more dense than water, it displaced it;s mass of water but the upthrust was still less than the weight of the object.
but you could be holding an object that's less dense than water underwater with an external force
That's true whether the object sinks or floats - a lump of stone submerged in water is easier to lift than the same lump in the air cos under the water the upthrust gives you assistance.
floating object displaces it's mass
sunken object displaces it's volume
typically it's sunk because the sunken object was more dense than water, it displaced it;s mass of water but the upthrust was still less than the weight of the object.
but you could be holding an object that's less dense than water underwater with an external force
thank youu this has been bothering me for a while x
Original post by Joinedup
Well Archimedes principle says the upthrust force on an object is equal to the mass of the displaced liquid.
That's true whether the object sinks or floats - a lump of stone submerged in water is easier to lift than the same lump in the air cos under the water the upthrust gives you assistance.
floating object displaces it's mass
sunken object displaces it's volume
typically it's sunk because the sunken object was more dense than water, it displaced it;s mass of water but the upthrust was still less than the weight of the object.
but you could be holding an object that's less dense than water underwater with an external force
That's true whether the object sinks or floats - a lump of stone submerged in water is easier to lift than the same lump in the air cos under the water the upthrust gives you assistance.
floating object displaces it's mass
sunken object displaces it's volume
typically it's sunk because the sunken object was more dense than water, it displaced it;s mass of water but the upthrust was still less than the weight of the object.
but you could be holding an object that's less dense than water underwater with an external force
I thought upthrust force was equal to the weight of the displaced liquid
Original post by Spannerin'moi
I thought upthrust force was equal to the weight of the displaced liquid
i think he means weight, lol, or that's what i assumed.
obviously, bc weight is a force and it should be equated to the upthrust force
Original post by stardustxx
i think he means weight, lol, or that's what i assumed.
obviously, bc weight is a force and it should be equated to the upthrust force
obviously, bc weight is a force and it should be equated to the upthrust force
Aah I see...coolio!
Original post by stardustxx
i think he means weight, lol, or that's what i assumed.
obviously, bc weight is a force and it should be equated to the upthrust force
obviously, bc weight is a force and it should be equated to the upthrust force
Oh yeah - weight not mass... thanks
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Finding a mentor
- archimedes principle
- Why is tension not equal to weight in moments questions?
- Teenagers find an "impossible" proof of Pythagoras' Theorem
- What games did everybody play on their computers at school or when they were younger
- Maths
- Maths EPQ help
- Gcse maths help
- TSR Study Together - STEM vs Humanities - Seventh Session
- The derivative
- about the workspace shortage
- How do I memorise/learn derivations for engineering
- Nhs band 2 pharmaceutical manufacturing
- A vehicle accelerates uniformly...
- Pharmacy
- Amazon Assessment Inten role
- Make it More Mathematician-ey !!
- GCSE Edexcel Maths - trigonometric ratios of angles between 0 and 360
- Unethical design in social media
- A level Physics
