[At' Pressure] Glass of water held upsidedown

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the physics of an inverted glass of water sealed with a cover. When the glass is turned upside down, gravity pulls the water downward, creating a potential vacuum at the top. This vacuum formation is resisted by atmospheric pressure, which pushes up against the water, keeping the seal intact. In contrast, when the glass is upright, gravity simply holds the water at the bottom, preventing any pressure difference. Understanding this interaction between gravity and atmospheric pressure clarifies why the seal remains effective in the inverted position.
BitterX
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Hey,
I'm sure you are all familiar with the experiment where you take a glass of water , put a some seal on it and then turn it upside down.
Due to the (atmospheric pressure) - (the air pressure in the glass) exerting a force on the seal upwards greater than the [mg] of the water, the seal stays in place.

here's a demonstration - physicscentral.com

What I don't understand is why there's a pressure difference in the first place.
As far as I know - if I seal the cup then the air pressure is the same there as it is outside (with minor difference - ρgh ) what makes it change when I turn it upside down?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
BitterX said:
What I don't understand is why there's a pressure difference in the first place.
As far as I know - if I seal the cup then the air pressure is the same there as it is outside (with minor difference - ρgh ) what makes it change when I turn it upside down?

The pressure difference develops because gravity is pulling the mass of the water down in the inverted glass, trying to open up a bubble of vacuum at the top. Air pressure resists the formation of that bubble, pushing the water back up against the force of gravity.

This doesn't happen when the glass is right-side-up, because then gravity is holding the water down in the bottom of the glass.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top