## triple beam balance

1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data
what is the measurement

2. Relevant equations

3. The attempt at a solution
Is there something wrong with the picture or is it possible to have beam balance with two same scales (the upper and middle ones). If possible then the reading = 90 + 30 + 8 = 128 g ??

Thank you very much

 PhysOrg.com science news on PhysOrg.com >> Heat-related deaths in Manhattan projected to rise>> Dire outlook despite global warming 'pause': study>> Sea level influenced tropical climate during the last ice age
 Sure, why not? Okay, I'll admit that I don't know exactly how beam balances work, but if it works as different torques correlated to forces then all its doing is summing torques and then telling you how those torques would relate to mass.
 I don't fully understand what you mean. The pointer just shows the mass of the object when the beam is balanced. If it is possible to have a beam balance like that, then I guess I got the correct answer? Thank you very much

## triple beam balance

Sorry, but I don't fully understand what you mean. Why do you think it is not possible?

 Quote by Mindscrape Sorry, but I don't fully understand what you mean. Why do you think it is not possible?
because I think one of the scales (upper or lower one) should be in hundreds. I never encountered a problem which had the same scales and I also think that it is not very useful if the beam balance has two same scales because it can not be used to measure an object which mass is in several hundreds term (maybe around 300 gram above)

 It all depends on the context. I think that the ones not being completely accounted for is the stranger part than having 30-50 and 50-100. It's a possible scale, and without context who knows why it is configured in this manner.
 OK, I am just afraid that the scales have different meaning, such as the middle must be multiply by 10, so the reading should be 300 instead of 30. But maybe I am just overthinking about it. Thank you very much