Re: [Phys-l] Finishing up with that Dead Horse.

[William Robertson <wrobert9@ix.netcom.com>]

I'll give this one more shot. First, I want the situation to be clear  
and your question to be clear. You have an aquarium filled with water  
and there is a sealed box submerged in the aquarium. The box is not  
tethered to the bottom of the aquarium. The bottom of the aquarium is  
flexible enough that if you were to somehow "pull up" or "push down"  
on one section of the bottom, it would deform a bit from its shape  
without you pulling up or pushing down on it. If, instead of pulling  
up on that section, you simply increase or reduce the size of one of  
the downward forces acting on just that section (provided other forces  
on that section would not compensate for the change in that one  
downward force) then it would also deform.

Let's stop there and make sure I have your situation and understanding  
right before continuing. We'll talk about the box then.


Bill


William C. Robertson, Ph.D.


On Nov 7, 2010, at 1:10 AM, Chuck Britton wrote:

> In previous go-rounds many of us had come to the conclusion that is
> useful to use the term 'weight' to mean 'that which is measured by a
> spring scale.'
>
> I'm tying to avoid such arguments by focusing on the flexion of the
> aquarium bottom.
> 	(Does having water under the cube dramatically change said
> flexion? I think not.))
>
> At 8:17 PM -0700 11/6/10, B___________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l