Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Raindrop - tear drop or inner tube

  1. Jul 28, 2004 #1
    I was reading a physic book the other day that said that rain drops were inner tube shaped and they showed a picture my advanced phys teacher said that is false because they are tear drop shaped and if you probe it. ie look for its shape, vel, pos. you will alter it that is why it looks like a inner tube then is because the walls can't hold the gravity or i dunno what he said but the thing about probing it is he talked Quantum on me and does that hold for something as large as a rain drop that once you define it or examine it it changes?

    thanx
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 29, 2004 #2
    NO, the uncertanty principle only holds true for particles that are about smaller than the wavelength of light. A rain drop is way to large to have the uncertanty principle applied to it. If you do examine it in a vacum, without the friction, then you would see what it really looks like. I dont even think gravity has anything to do with the uncertanty principle.
     
  4. Jul 29, 2004 #3

    Doc Al

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    raindrops are not shaped like teardrops

    The myth that raindrops are shaped like teardrops is so prevalent that there are web pages devoted to it! Here's one: http://www.ems.psu.edu/~fraser/Bad/BadRain.html

    (And it's got nothing to do with quantum uncertainty! :grumpy: )
     
  5. Jul 29, 2004 #4

    Njorl

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    That was truly interesting. Thanks.

    Njorl
     
  6. Jul 29, 2004 #5

    LURCH

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I can't help but notice that the largest raindrop illustrated is shown as to teardrop shapes joined by a thin film of water, which according to the text will break, forming to smaller drops. These two, according to the illustration, are teardrop shaped.
     
  7. Jul 29, 2004 #6

    Njorl

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I think it is just showing a cross-section of rotation. It is not 2 teardrops joined by a film, it is a ring with a teardrop cross-section, and a half a bubble attached to it.

    Njorl
     
  8. Jul 29, 2004 #7

    Doc Al

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    read the fine print :-)

    Read the caption off to the left:
    :wink:
     
  9. Jul 29, 2004 #8

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Very interesting - I've never thought abut it before despite having some aero classes. The highest pressure is of course at the stagnation point, dead center in the bottom of the (spherical) dropplet. Air moving around the sides doesn't push the sides in, it creates a low pressure, pulling the sides out. Thus the parachute.

    Good link.
     
  10. Jul 29, 2004 #9
    so what is it?

    so I am confused is it a tear drop, a hamburger bun shape, or an inner tube.
     
  11. Jul 30, 2004 #10

    Doc Al

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Did you check the link I provided? Raindrops "evolve" from sphere to hamburger bun to inner tube--then break up back into spheres! :smile:

    Seriously, the teardrop shape is a myth.
     
  12. Jul 30, 2004 #11
    thanx

    yayyyy. i was right then
     
  13. Jul 30, 2004 #12
    that sounds like quantum uncertanty to me. Srry, I got confused, I thought he was telling you that the uncertanty principle applied. :confused:
     
  14. Jul 31, 2004 #13
    that is what he said

    My prof did say that quantum uncertainty applied but that can't be seen for things as large as rain droplets.
     
  15. Jul 31, 2004 #14

    Mk

    User Avatar

    Yay! I know this one

    Yay, I know this one:
    Depending on the altitude and mass of the rain drops formed, they have varying shapes, fatter higher altitude raindrops are of the "doughnut" shape. Those formed those with less mass and lower altitude are of the classical raindrop shape. It might be vice versa though. I don't know what happens when smaller ones are formed higher and fatter ones are formed lower. I'll have to check my book, its in the garage somewhere.
     
  16. Jul 31, 2004 #15

    Mk

    User Avatar

    Well, the point is both are true. The shape depends on the altitude in which they were formed.
     
  17. Jul 31, 2004 #16
    thanx

    thanx to all of you for your help
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?