I How to use physics to prove historical events?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on using physics to validate the cause of the Titanic's sinking, specifically whether it was due to an iceberg collision or a torpedo strike. Key considerations include the ship's material specifications, speed, and the characteristics of the iceberg, as well as environmental factors like water temperature. The thread also mentions the existence of photographs of the impact site. However, the discussion was ultimately closed due to forum rules prohibiting conspiracy theories, emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting alternative causes of the sinking. The conversation highlights the importance of scientific analysis in historical events.
hagopbul
Messages
397
Reaction score
45
TL;DR
We want to use physics to prove historical event
Hello all:

Watching few news , titanic came and we start to have a question , can I prove that titanic was sunk because of hitting an ice mountain, and not because of torpedo, should we use material specifications , speed of the ship , and material specifications of the ice mountain

or we need other data like temperature of water ,..etc

I remember they found the titanic is there a picture of point of impact ?

Best
Hagop
 
  • Sad
Likes weirdoguy
Physics news on Phys.org
Thread closed for Moderation...
 
  • Like
Likes hagopbul, Vanadium 50 and dlgoff
I am sorry, but our rules forbid discussions of conspiracy theories of any kind. There is simply no evidence at all, especially as the construction of the bulkheads according to the plans makes such a cause extremely unlikely.

This thread will remain closed.
 
  • Like
Likes hagopbul, russ_watters, Bystander and 1 other person

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Similar threads

I How is the order of events reversed in 1 trillion frames per second videos?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
I What false hints of new physics were most notable?
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
8K
I Understanding Ultrasound Attenuation and Reflection in Aluminum Sheets
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
I Observational Studies: What to Believe
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
What am I doing wrong while solving problems?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
I Where can I find publicly accessible data from observatories in Europe?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
An addition to respiratory Personal Protection Equipment
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Is my fictional Solar System stable and realistic?
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
How Does Historical Materialism Explain Human Development?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
A IceCube rules out last SM explanation of ANITA’s anomalous neutrinos
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K