member 731016
In response to "You should have F_i = F_g - B (as B pushes up)":
I said:
"How dose F_i = F_g - B?
When I apply Newton II to the immersed object (Assuming T = 0) then B - F_g = 0 so B = mg. Then we try to decompose B into F_i the downward force from the water and F_j the upward force from the water. We get F_j - F_i = mg. However, if F_i = F_g - B as you said then:
F_i = F_g - (F_j - F_i)
-mg + F_i = -F_j+ F_i
mg = F_j
Now I can see a problem. Why dose your relation F_i = F_g - B give the upwards force from the water (F_j) to be equal to the force of gravity (F_g = mg)? It clear that if you derivation is correct then you would be neglecting the downwards force from the water (F_i). Is this a valid assumption?"
I think it clear that their derivation at least not accurate as it could be, would you agree @haruspex and @kuruman?
Many thanks!
I said:
"How dose F_i = F_g - B?
When I apply Newton II to the immersed object (Assuming T = 0) then B - F_g = 0 so B = mg. Then we try to decompose B into F_i the downward force from the water and F_j the upward force from the water. We get F_j - F_i = mg. However, if F_i = F_g - B as you said then:
F_i = F_g - (F_j - F_i)
-mg + F_i = -F_j+ F_i
mg = F_j
Now I can see a problem. Why dose your relation F_i = F_g - B give the upwards force from the water (F_j) to be equal to the force of gravity (F_g = mg)? It clear that if you derivation is correct then you would be neglecting the downwards force from the water (F_i). Is this a valid assumption?"
I think it clear that their derivation at least not accurate as it could be, would you agree @haruspex and @kuruman?
Many thanks!
Last edited by a moderator: