Mad About Physics: Examining Braintwister No. 90 - The Three Hole Can

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around braintwister no. 90 from the book Mad About Physics, specifically examining a scenario involving a cylindrical can filled with water that has three holes at different heights. Participants explore why the water shoots the farthest horizontally from the middle hole, questioning the reasoning behind this claim and discussing potential variations of the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the reasoning behind the claim that the middle hole shoots water the farthest, suggesting that it may be a matter of perspective or experience.
  • Others assert that the calculation supporting the claim is straightforward, indicating that the problem aligns with ordinary experience.
  • A participant proposes that the scenario could be an optimization problem involving initial horizontal velocity and height, raising questions about the can's position (ground vs. held up) and its effect on the outcome.
  • There are references to personal experiences with similar physics demonstrations, suggesting that practical knowledge may influence understanding of the problem.
  • Some participants express a sense of humor about the discussion, sharing anecdotes related to physics experiments and their childhood experiences.
  • A later reply mentions the use of calculus in a similar physics question to determine maximum range, indicating a mathematical approach to understanding the problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the reasoning behind the claim about the middle hole. Multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of the problem and the factors influencing the water's trajectory.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the setup of the problem, such as the can's position and the implications of different heights on the water's horizontal distance. The discussion also reflects a mix of personal anecdotes and technical reasoning without definitive conclusions.

TVP45
Messages
1,041
Reaction score
5
Does anyone own the Jargodzki and Potter book Mad About Physics? If so, could you examine braintwister no. 90, the three hole can? They seem to claim that, if you have a cylindrical can filled with water and there are three identical holes, one near the top, one near the middle, and one near the bottom, that the water will shoot the farthest horizontally from the middle one.

What is the "trick" here? Have I missed a clever wording?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No trick. Did you read the solution in the back of the book? The calculation is straightforward.
 
I'm sorry. Poorly worded question. Why would someone be puzzled by this? It seems consistent with ordinary experience (except for the problem of crossing streams - that seems like more of a braintwister).
 
I guess if you've never had the experience, it might not be obvious that the illustration is incorrect and that it's the middle stream that goes the farthest. When I first came across this problem (a gazillion years ago) I had to do the calculation to fully understand it.

Maybe you're just too smart! :smile:
 
I suspect I'm too literal. I often don't get satire (On the good side, that makes it hard to insult me) or jokes.

Thanks. I just needed a second set of eyes to point out the puzzle.
 
TVP45 said:
Does anyone own the Jargodzki and Potter book Mad About Physics? If so, could you examine braintwister no. 90, the three hole can? They seem to claim that, if you have a cylindrical can filled with water and there are three identical holes, one near the top, one near the middle, and one near the bottom, that the water will shoot the farthest horizontally from the middle one.

What is the "trick" here? Have I missed a clever wording?

I don't have the book. Is this an optimization problem of initial horizontal velocity vs. initial height? Is the can placed on the ground? If you hold it up it, could it change the result?
 
A.T. said:
I don't have the book. Is this an optimization problem of initial horizontal velocity vs. initial height? Is the can placed on the ground? If you hold it up it, could it change the result?
Sure. That would make an interesting variation, that is, putting legs on the can.
 
TVP45 said:
I suspect I'm too literal. I often don't get satire (On the good side, that makes it hard to insult me) or jokes.
Well then, I guess that I won't be conversing with you much. :wink:
 
TVP45 said:
I suspect I'm too literal. I often don't get satire (On the good side, that makes it hard to insult me) or jokes.

Some may have noticed that about me as well.:biggrin:
 
  • #10
Danger said:
Well then, I guess that I won't be conversing with you much. :wink:

Actually, your post jogged my memory and I realized why I knew which hole would spurt the farthest. When I was a kid, we used to shoot holes in 55 gallon rain barrels. Thank god the steam trains went away just about the time I got my first gun or I'd probably have tried the water tanks for those.:biggrin:

Glad to see you're staying one step ahead of the Mounties.
 
  • #11
Too cool. :smile:
Despite your denial, you obviously have a great sense of humour.
 
  • #12
TVP45 said:
Actually, your post jogged my memory and I realized why I knew which hole would spurt the farthest. When I was a kid, we used to shoot holes in 55 gallon rain barrels. Thank god the steam trains went away just about the time I got my first gun or I'd probably have tried the water tanks for those.:biggrin:

Glad to see you're staying one step ahead of the Mounties.

There is no better way to demonstrate the joys and laws of physics to youth than the after effects of high pressure gas expansions via exothermic chemical reactions.
 
  • #13
Born2bwire said:
There is no better way to demonstrate the joys and laws of physics to youth than the after effects of high pressure gas expansions via exothermic chemical reactions.

Hence my diet of beans and beer.
 
  • #14
Danger said:
Too cool. :smile:
Despite your denial, you obviously have a great sense of humour.

So, do you wonder why just the sight of a post from you reminded me of doing something I absolutely should not have been doing?:blushing:
 
  • #15
TVP45 said:
So, do you wonder why just the sight of a post from you reminded me of doing something I absolutely should not have been doing?:blushing:

Naw... I'm getting used to it.
 
  • #16
Born2bwire said:
There is no better way to demonstrate the joys and laws of physics to youth than the after effects of high pressure gas expansions via exothermic chemical reactions.

I took physics back in the dark ages before safety regs and political correctness. My General Physics professor had several demos in which he used a rifle. Gone are those days...
 
  • #17
I remember getting a physics question in an assignment that was kind of like this, but we had to use calculus to find the maximum range. You end up finding that the velocity is as if the water had fallen that distance due to gravity, then you also find that the middle is the best height because of range being the maximum.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
9K
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
631
Replies
3
Views
4K