Calculate radius of earth using a pole

AI Thread Summary
A physicist plants a vertical pole at a lake's edge and determines the radius of the Earth based on her distance from the pole when it becomes invisible due to the curvature of the Earth. She finds that at a distance of 9.4 km, the top of the 1.75 m pole is no longer visible. Various methods, including the Pythagorean Theorem and angle calculations, are discussed to derive the Earth's radius. One participant arrives at a solution of approximately 6311 km, confirming the method's validity despite initial errors. The final approach emphasizes the importance of visualizing the problem correctly to achieve accurate results.
Mk
Messages
2,039
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


**12. A physicist plants a vertical pole at the waterline on the shore of a calm lake. When she stands next to the pole, its top is at eye level, 175 cm above the waterline. She then rows across the lake and walks along the waterline on the opposite shore until she is so far away from the pole that her entire view of it is blocked by the curvature of the surface of the lake, that is, the entire pole is below the horizon (Figure 1.18). She finds that this happens when her distance from the pole is 9.4 km. From this information, deduce the radius of the Earth.2/3. Relevant equations, solution attempt
My attempt at a diagram. One of the green parts is approximated:
http://img.skitch.com/20091025-k8cm5ie32ifdecsm3fa49y3d3e.jpg

I tried a number of approaches. At first I didn't know whether to think of the 9400 meters in terms of length of a curve, or in terms of a straight line, but then I decided it was negligible considering the solution. I tried working backwards from the arc length. I tried SOHCAHTOA and the Pythagorean Theorem. Not sure quite what to do here. What is wrong about how I am thinking?

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Interesting problem.

I think the solution might be found by working out the angle between the woman, the top of the pole and the bottom of the pole. You're given the distance between the woman and the bottom of the pole. The distance between the woman and the top of the pole can be found using Pythagoras' Theorem. The angle between the two distances is related to the curvature of the earth. Dividing 360 degrees by this angle will give you the number of these chords which form the entire circumferance of the earth, and from this you can deduce the radius.

There might be a better way to do this as this method is inaccurate due to the approximations made.
 
I do not understand your diagram. Did you take into account that the pole just can not be seen from the boy's eye level? It is easier so find the solution if you imagine a very high pole and an equally high boy.
Next hint: When the boy walks away from the pole he sees it last time when the light ray traveling from the pole to his eyes just touches the surface of Earth.

ehild
 
Seannation said:
I think the solution might be found by working out the angle between the woman, the top of the pole and the bottom of the pole. You're given the distance between the woman and the bottom of the pole. The distance between the woman and the top of the pole can be found using Pythagoras' Theorem. The angle between the two distances is related to the curvature of the earth. Dividing 360 degrees by this angle will give you the number of these chords which form the entire circumferance of the earth, and from this you can deduce the radius.

There might be a better way to do this as this method is inaccurate due to the approximations made.

Nice try, but I don't think that works at all. I did this:

\tan \theta = \frac {\textrm{9400}} {\textrm{1.75}}

\theta \approx 89.989

\frac {360} {\theta} \approx 4.000

So, the circumference of the Earth is 4*9400 m = 37.6 kilometers.
I do not understand your diagram. Did you take into account that the pole just can not be seen from the boy's eye level? It is easier so find the solution if you imagine a very high pole and an equally high boy.
Next hint: When the boy walks away from the pole he sees it last time when the light ray traveling from the pole to his eyes just touches the surface of Earth.

ehild
Okay, I think I solved it!

http://img.skitch.com/20091025-b3pmg299gqtc7s5mkfu5jbtpxx.jpg

I just had to think of it in a new way. Do you think this method is correct? The final answer is nearby to the real value and I think I made no errors. Thank you ehild!
 
Last edited:
The drawing is OK, the method is correct, but you have mixed a bit Pythagoras' Theorem, so the real result is a negative value for the radius of Earth. Moreover, the hight of the person is 1.75 m. Try again. (my result is 6311 km.)

ehild
 
MK, that final solution is right. And the final diagram is right too. The problem and diagram is in Ohanian Physics, page 20. Pythagoras' theorem does the job.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
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