A question about water and wood.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gara
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Water Wood
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a passage from Terry Pratchett's "Going Postal," which describes water as a "wetter form of air" and suggests that a sinking ship could stop at a depth where water becomes viscous enough to halt its fall. Participants clarify that this concept is not scientifically accurate, as water's density increases only slightly with pressure and does not reach extreme levels. They explain that viscosity relates to friction and does not affect the depth at which an object stops sinking, which is determined by buoyancy. The conversation highlights the differences between water and air compressibility and acknowledges the fantastical nature of Discworld. Ultimately, the inquiry is deemed reasonable, reflecting on the complexities of buoyancy in real-world physics.
Gara
Messages
152
Reaction score
0
Okay so this morning I picked up a very brand new copy of the Discworld book, "Going Postal".

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/ak_gara/Lookie.jpg

Here is a little snippit from the first page.

[snip]It runs: the sea is, after all, in many respects only a wetter form of air. And it is known that air is denser the lower you go and lighter the higher you fly. As a storm-tossed ship founders and sinks, therefore, it must reach a depth where the water below is just viscous enough to stop it's fall.[/snip]

My question is, is this even possible, if yes, why, if no, why?

I'm guessing it's just being used for the story and is not true.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
There are a couple of problems with that:

The description of water as wetter form of air is a bit bizarre in this context.

The passage indicates viscous rather than dense. Viscosity is something different than density, it has to do with the amount of friction the boat has with the water, and doesn't appreciably increase with water pressure.

Moreover, the compressibility of water is limited. Just because the density of water increases as pressure increases, does not mean that the density of water ever reaches 2.
 
Well that's that asnwered :) thanks.

Question acually seems rather silly now that I think about it.

Anyway to lock this topic?
 
No need to lock the topic, its an interesting one and a perfectly reasonable question. I just took up scuba diving and buoyancy is a bit counterintuitive: your buoyancy decreases the lower you go due to your body and buoyancy compensator (an inflatable life vest, essentially) being compressed. So you actually sink faster the lower you go.
 
Gara said:
I'm guessing it's just being used for the story and is not true.

Yes - water is not very compressible, unlike air, so water doesn't get appreciably denser as you go deeper. Air, on the other hand, is compressible, so air does get denser as one changes altitude.

Of course that's how it works in our world (reality), Discworld is a bit different, being supported on the backs of four elephants on a giant turtle and all :-)

Going back to the real world, viscosity doesn't have much to do with the issue - viscosity would affect how fast one sunk (think of it like friction), but would not change the point at which one stopped sinking. One would only stop sinking at neutral buoyancy, which would be a function of the density of the water and not its viscosity.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?

Similar threads

Replies
18
Views
25K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
8K
Back
Top