Ask a physicist anything. (3)

[catzrfluffy]

1) Plant the yardstick in the ground. Measure the yardstick. It's a yard.

2) Wait until the shadow of the yardstick is the same length as the yardstick.

3) At that point measure the shadow of the big pole, then you have it's height.

4) Yes we still use feet over here.

5) I cheated and read this solution in a puzzle book years ago.


@Wiccy
I looked at the moon yesterday during daytime, it was a crescent with horns pointing to the east, the sun was setting. I noticed that something was odd. When you shine a light on a ball at an angle, the curve of reflected light corresponds to where you shined the light on it. When I looked at the moon, the curve was off-angle from the sun. Like so:

Except the angle was more obvious when I saw it, the sky being bigger than a paint window. Is the light curving round the earth? Is it some odd angle in space? I know you're not an astronomer but...What's going on here?!? Why has no-one noticed this before?

 

[AV1611VET]

1) Plant the yardstick in the ground. Measure the yardstick. It's a yard.

2) Wait until the shadow of the yardstick is the same length as the yardstick.

3) At that point measure the shadow of the big pole, then you have it's height.

4) Yes we still use feet over here.

5) I cheated and read this solution in a puzzle book years ago.

Good job --

You don't have to wait until the shadow matches the length of the yardstick though.

You can actually measure it anytime during the day (except noon), by just measuring the length of your shadow, then the length of the pole's shadow, then divide the length of the pole's shadow by the length of your shadow and multiply by 6 (since you're 6 feet tall).

L[sub]1[/sub]/L[sub]2[/sub] x h = height of pole

Where:

• L[sub]1[/sub] = length of pole's shadow
• L[sub]2[/sub] = length of your shadow
• h = your height

 

[AV1611VET]

Why has no-one noticed this before?

Are you asking why the apex of the curvature of the light shouldn't be more at 4 o'clock, than 3 o'clock?

 

[catzrfluffy]

Are you asking why the apex of the curvature of the light shouldn't be more at 4 o'clock, than 3 o'clock?

Wow, have you just eaten a whole tub of cod oil capsules?

Possibly? I don't actually know what that is, and my pic. seems broken. I mean since the sun shines on the moon from the bottom right (my perspective), shouldn't the moon be lit up from that angle? But it's not, it looks as though it's being lit up from the centre right. Is that the question to your question?

 

[AV1611VET]

Wow, have you just eaten a whole tub of cod oil capsules?

Possibly? I don't actually know what that is, and my pic. seems broken. I mean since the sun shines on the moon from the bottom right (my perspective), shouldn't the moon be lit up from that angle? But it's not, it looks as though it's being lit up from the centre right. Is that the question to your question?

LOL -- I think so.

Glad I don't have to answer it, either!

 

[Chesterton]

I mean since the sun shines on the moon from the bottom right (my perspective), shouldn't the moon be lit up from that angle? But it's not, it looks as though it's being lit up from the centre right.

I've noticed the same thing several times.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Good job --

You don't have to wait until the shadow matches the length of the yardstick though.

You can actually measure it anytime during the day (except noon), by just measuring the length of your shadow, then the length of the pole's shadow, then divide the length of the pole's shadow by the length of your shadow and multiply by 6 (since you're 6 feet tall).

L[sub]1[/sub]/L[sub]2[/sub] x h = height of pole

Where:

• L[sub]1[/sub] = length of pole's shadow
• L[sub]2[/sub] = length of your shadow
• h = your height

You have over specified the problem. You can just measure the shadow of the yardstick and multipy the shadow of the pole by 3/(shadow yardstick).

 

[catzrfluffy]

I've noticed the same thing several times.

But has it been explaaaaaiiiiiiined?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

1) Plant the yardstick in the ground. Measure the yardstick. It's a yard.

2) Wait until the shadow of the yardstick is the same length as the yardstick.

3) At that point measure the shadow of the big pole, then you have it's height.

4) Yes we still use feet over here.

5) I cheated and read this solution in a puzzle book years ago.

That's how all great scientific discoveries are made, truth be told

@Wiccy
I looked at the moon yesterday during daytime, it was a crescent with horns pointing to the east, the sun was setting. I noticed that something was odd. When you shine a light on a ball at an angle, the curve of reflected light corresponds to where you shined the light on it. When I looked at the moon, the curve was off-angle from the sun. Like so:

Except the angle was more obvious when I saw it, the sky being bigger than a paint window. Is the light curving round the earth? Is it some odd angle in space? I know you're not an astronomer but...What's going on here?!? Why has no-one noticed this before?

I've never noticed that actually, but I doubt it's light being curved. My guess is it's an optical illusion, like the one that makes the Sun and Moon seem enormous when they're low on the horizon, yet, in fact, they're the same size (hold your thumb out and remember how big the Moon is next to it, and compare when it's high in the sky and low to the horizon; it's exactly the same).

 

[AV1611VET]

You have over specified the problem. You can just measure the shadow of the yardstick and multipy the shadow of the pole by 3/(shadow yardstick).

Indeed! Good job!

 

[catzrfluffy]

How to crash CF:

1) Go to your profile page

2) Click on "Guestbook (0)" [It's at the top under your photo]

3) Enjoy!

​

 

[pgp_protector]

How to crash CF:

1) Go to your profile page

2) Click on "Guestbook (0)" [It's at the top under your photo]

3) Enjoy!

​

Well that doesn't really Crash CF, just a bad query (I wonder if it's been reported, or if reporting it would even do any good ?)

 

[Nooj]

What 'stuff' for lack of a better word was the singularity comprised of?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

What 'stuff' for lack of a better word was the singularity comprised of?

What singularity?

 

[Nooj]

What singularity?

Either the state of being single, which describes me pretty well, or the original singularity at the time of the Big Bang. Uh, the latter one.

Physics: the best field of science or the only field of science?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Either the state of being single, which describes me pretty well, or the original singularity at the time of the Big Bang. Uh, the latter one.

There are many singularities; the ones at the centre of black holes, the so-called 'technological' singularity, etc. The one way back at the start of the Big Bang contained... everything. Though in what form is unknown, since our models of reality (i.e., quantum and relativistic mechanics) don't agree on how matter behaves in those conditions. We suspect the four forces to be unified, but that's about it.

Physics: the best field of science or the only field of science?

Sociology is psychology is biology is chemistry is physics. If mathematics is the queen of the sciences, then physics is surely the king.

Biased? Me?

 

[Nooj]

Sociology is psychology is biology is chemistry is physics. If mathematics is the queen of the sciences, then physics is surely the king.

Biased? Me?

 

[AV1611VET]

The one way back at the start of the Big Bang contained... everything.

I'll bet you lived w/i five miles of the Queen then --

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I'll bet you lived w/i five miles of the Queen then --

She's actually my neighbour. When she's not on telly she has a thick scouse accent, don't you know.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Logicians are so far to the right they're out of the screen. Damn right-wing nutjobs.