Michael D. Sewell
NateTG said:Consider approximating the chain's path with a triangle.
Correct!
-Mike
NateTG said:Consider approximating the chain's path with a triangle.
I think this would only work on the educated people. Uneducated people would naturally start out with an oversimplified model and get the answer so easily. It's those of us that know it should be a catenary, for instance, that have a beet red face when they get to the answer. If it makes you feel any better, I would have gone down the same path as you if Chi Meson would not have said it's a brain teaser.I've asked a 3rd year chem honors student as well as a 2nd year mechanical engineer and neither of them can figure it out.
Very true. But, if you're already thinking about catenaries, then you would probably stare at your scribbled napkin for an embarrasingly long time in the pub.Michael D. Sewell said:In a lot of cases, there is no substitute for a pencil and a piece of paper.
turin said:If it makes you feel any better, I would have gone down the same path as you if Chi Meson would not have said it's a brain teaser.
That sure would have been a shame. I would have missed out on the good chuckle. I don't feel bad about it either. I can't imagine how many times I've been the one to provide the chuckle.Chi Meson said:To think I nearly gave it away at the start. I actually had to edit out the answer before I posted. What a "benny" I would have been.
Integral said:I think the LESS one knows about math and physics the MORE likely they are to come up with the solution quickly. If you crack a nut with a 5lb sledge hammer you don't get the meat.
Integral said:The only thing worse then losing an argument to a woman.. Is winning one.