How much ice must melt at 0 deg. C to gain 6 g of mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PhyzicsOfHockey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gain Ice Mass
AI Thread Summary
To determine how much ice must melt at 0°C to gain 6 g of mass, the discussion revolves around the concept of latent heat and energy absorption during the melting process. The calculation suggests that melting 6 g of ice requires approximately 1.617 million metric tons of ice, equivalent to a cube about 117 meters on each side. There is a debate about the appropriateness of providing full answers in homework threads, with references to forum rules. The conversation highlights the need for clarity on the rules governing homework assistance in the forum. Overall, the melting of ice involves significant energy considerations that are crucial for solving the problem.
PhyzicsOfHockey
Messages
41
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


This is all that is given.

How much ice must melt at 0 deg. C to gain 6 g of mass?

Homework Equations


I don't know any Relevant equations to this problem.


The Attempt at a Solution




I have tried leaving mass as a variable and using Latent Heat Energys too. I have no idea what to set equal to what because i don't have equations to work with this problem.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hmm I think some use of E=mc2 is needed here. If you can find the energy of 6g then assume that is the energy 'absorbed' by a block of ice to turn it to water.
 
Huh?

Kurdt said:
Hmm I think some use of E=mc2 is needed here. If you can find the energy of 6g then assume that is the energy 'absorbed' by a block of ice to turn it to water.

When the ice melts, energy is absorbed. I get an equiv of 6g = 1.3e14 cal and it takes 79.71 cal/g to melt ice. So it seems to require 1.617e6 metric tons, a cube about 117 m on a side.
 
rdx said:
When the ice melts, energy is absorbed. I get an equiv of 6g = 1.3e14 cal and it takes 79.71 cal/g to melt ice. So it seems to require 1.617e6 metric tons, a cube about 117 m on a side.

Well that's how I'd do it. If you can see any other intention in the question please feel free to contribute.

I must say if you're going to post in other peoples threads in the homework section. Do not post what could be considered full answers as this is against the rules (even if you have doubts over the method).
 
Kurdt said:
Well that's how I'd do it. If you can see any other intention in the question please feel free to contribute.

I must say if you're going to post in other peoples threads in the homework section. Do not post what could be considered full answers as this is against the rules (even if you have doubts over the method).

"Against the rules?" How very strange. I seems to assume a monolithic learning style. Where rules?
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanged mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...

Similar threads

Back
Top