Goggles, depth perception, and swimming pools {Please aid a stumped student}

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the perception of depth in water when viewing an object, specifically a coin, from above and below the surface. The person without goggles perceives the coin at a greater depth due to the effects of refraction, which causes submerged objects to appear closer than they actually are. In contrast, the person wearing goggles sees the coin at its actual depth because the goggles correct for the distortion caused by the water. This highlights the impact of refraction at the air/water boundary on human perception. Understanding these principles is essential for grasping how depth perception changes in different mediums.
Makemesmart
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
1. One person wearing goggles and one person without goggles are standing at the side of a pool. Both see a coin on the bottom of the pool, and both jump into retrieve it. When they are underwater, the person without goggles sees the coin at a greater depth than it was when she was above the water. The person with goggles sees the coin at exactly the same depth as it was when she was on the poolside. Which of the two sees the coin at its actual depth? Explain the reasons for your answer.



I have no idea. I mean I can pretty much figure out that it's the person without goggles that will see the coin at its actual depth and i think it has something to do with reflection, or refraction or something? Other than that though, I'm not a science person and I barely understand any of this, plus I'm a home school student. I look to you intelligent people for help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Person without goggles doesn't see anything, as human eye is not able to accommodate under water.

My guess is this question tries to address some problems with the refraction on the air/water phase, but seems to me like it is based on wrong assumptions and is in blatant disagreement with everyones personal experience. No idea what kind of answer the person that asked the question wanted.

Most likely it is based on the fact that due to refraction on the air/water boundary submerged objects look closer then they are in reality. This can be easily explained if you try to draw path followed by light (and what our mind tries to make out of it assuming light path is always straight).
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top