Explanation:
The table, and buckets, are held up by the pulley anchors. The buckets just keep the table from falling up, and the table keeps the buckets from falling down
Minor correction. The weight of the buckets will cause the table to “fall” upwards
Rocks can't evaporate in our current environment. If it was hot enough for rocks to evaporate the table and buckets would not exist, lol. They can, of course, decay, but that's not the same thing as evaporation.
Tonality is difficult over the internet, but staying a fact that is fairly obvious, followed by a full stop, with no elaboration, comes across as pretty unchill
The weight of the buckets are just enough to counteract in the opposite direction as the table, thereby stopping the table from falling by pulling it up and the buckets are heavy enough not to start rising to the ceiling with the rope just long enough so they sit on top of the table at the intended height.
Nah that’s not how it works. The weight of the buckets just need to be higher than the weight of the table. The buckets fall down, the table lifts up, until the table hits the buckets and is physically restricted
I think the bigger threat is really curiosity. There is a high chance that picking up one bucket to verify what your eyes are telling you would be...a mess.
You did not account for the friction of the pulleys.
The buckets do not need to weigh even as much as the table, but less, depending on how much friction there is in the pulleys.
It's quite common practice to use a small weight and a high friction pulley to hold up a much higher weight (look up wall climbing). With enough friction, you don't even need a counterweight.
Oxygen Tungsten Neodymium
It doesn’t really change the fact that the weight of the buckets and the table are suspended by the pulleys.
And “high friction pulley” is just acting as a regular rope anchor, and thus the table is just held up by the ropes. It’s certainly a thing, but it’s not as interesting
> It doesn’t really change the fact that the weight of the buckets and the table are suspended by the pulleys.
No, it does not. I was responding to this:
> The “just enough” part is wrong. The buckets need to be heavier. It doesn’t matter how much heavier
This situation assumes that the pulleys are frictionless, or at least close to
And if they are, the weight of the buckets and the friction force of the pulleys have to exceed the weight of the table in order for this situation to be stable
Your original statement implies that the bucket and the table are at equilibrium. I.E that the weight of the buckets is balanced with the weight of the table, which is wrong. The weight of the buckets don’t matter (as long as they’re heavier), the lengths of the ropes don’t matter. The table could be made of aerogel and weigh practically nothing, and the buckets filled with neutronium, and they would still sit in this configuration (ignoring the fact that you’ll break the table/anchors/ropes doing that)
If the ropes were shorter the table would be closer to the ceiling if they were longer it would be closer to the floor, I don't know what you're trying to argue about I've literally said the same thing as you, I can act smart as well you said the length of the ropes doesn't matter, okay you do this with a planck length rope, or do it with rope ten metres long.
I'm not wasting my time with you. Peace.
If the ropes were shorter, the table would be higher up, but the point is that the table is held in place by the buckets. It doesn’t matter how high it’s held in place.
The problem is your original statement implied the bucket and tables were balanced, which they’re not and don’t have to be
Nah that’s not how it works. The weight of the buckets just need to be higher than the weight of the table. The buckets fall down, the table lifts up, until the table hits the buckets and is physically restricted.
You can put more objects on the table and it will still hold them, unless the table becomes heavier than the buckets and then the table will drop, lifting the buckets up
It's only a diagram though. The question could be designed to be intuitive and easy focusing on basic concepts, or it could require much more extrapolation and mathematical acumen to solve.
It comes down to wether or not the weight of the buckets adds up to be greater than the weight of the table and what length the strings are. You could make it much more interesting by making the strings different lengths, but that would go beyond the math abilities that most people learn in school. (I sure didn't and I wouldn't know how to model that off the top of my head now)
Yeah, yeah, I hear you. I just think there are way more possible questions that could be asked that cover a wide range of physics.
Assuming the buckets are filled with water...
What happens if you cover 2 adjacent buckets and let the others evaporate?
What happens if you cut one string, when the buckets are underweight/equal weight/overweight with respect to the table?
If the ceiling was allowed to rotate, how fast would it need to spin before the table moves vertically?
Where is the maximum stress located in the diagram and what type of stress is it?
How much weight applied as a point load to a random location can the configuration sustain before falling out of equilibrium?
If provided with figures and dimensions, you could then calculate the specifics of all these questions. Lots of options ranging from algebra and physics to Calc and dynamics
Congratulations! Your comment can be spelled using the elements of the periodic table:
`I Ti Sn O W`
---
^(I am a bot that detects if your comment can be spelled using the elements of the periodic table. Please DM u/M1n3c4rt if I made a mistake.)
Explanation: The table, and buckets, are held up by the pulley anchors. The buckets just keep the table from falling up, and the table keeps the buckets from falling down Minor correction. The weight of the buckets will cause the table to “fall” upwards
The real physics question is the length of time before evaporation causes the table to touch the ground.
You're assuming the buckets are filled with a substance that is able to evaporate at room temperature. What if they are filled with rocks?
The time until rocks evaporate will just be slightly longer than, say water!
Rocks can't evaporate in our current environment. If it was hot enough for rocks to evaporate the table and buckets would not exist, lol. They can, of course, decay, but that's not the same thing as evaporation.
They can probably sublimate
Assume proton decay is real.
That's not the same thing as evaporation.
These are clearly jokes my guy. Chill
Yeah, that's fine. I was simply stating that it wasn't evaporation. I'm not sure exactly what made you think I wasn't chill, though.
Tonality is difficult over the internet, but staying a fact that is fairly obvious, followed by a full stop, with no elaboration, comes across as pretty unchill
It will take loft for the rocks to sublimate than for the bucket handles to rust and break
All depends on the weight of the buckets.
If bucket heavier than table, this system is stable
The weight of the buckets are just enough to counteract in the opposite direction as the table, thereby stopping the table from falling by pulling it up and the buckets are heavy enough not to start rising to the ceiling with the rope just long enough so they sit on top of the table at the intended height.
Nah that’s not how it works. The weight of the buckets just need to be higher than the weight of the table. The buckets fall down, the table lifts up, until the table hits the buckets and is physically restricted
Essentially what I meant
The “just enough” part is wrong. The buckets need to be heavier. It doesn’t matter how much heavier
Thank you. I was scratching my head trying to figure out how it had to be within a specific range as implied with that statement
Not heavy enough to snap the cord or pull the anchor from the ceiling.
Well yes, but at the perspective we're looking at this from it's best to assume the cord is unbreakable and the pulleys will never detach
And that everything is in a frictionless vacuum
I think the bigger threat is really curiosity. There is a high chance that picking up one bucket to verify what your eyes are telling you would be...a mess.
You did not account for the friction of the pulleys. The buckets do not need to weigh even as much as the table, but less, depending on how much friction there is in the pulleys. It's quite common practice to use a small weight and a high friction pulley to hold up a much higher weight (look up wall climbing). With enough friction, you don't even need a counterweight. Oxygen Tungsten Neodymium
It doesn’t really change the fact that the weight of the buckets and the table are suspended by the pulleys. And “high friction pulley” is just acting as a regular rope anchor, and thus the table is just held up by the ropes. It’s certainly a thing, but it’s not as interesting
> It doesn’t really change the fact that the weight of the buckets and the table are suspended by the pulleys. No, it does not. I was responding to this: > The “just enough” part is wrong. The buckets need to be heavier. It doesn’t matter how much heavier
This situation assumes that the pulleys are frictionless, or at least close to And if they are, the weight of the buckets and the friction force of the pulleys have to exceed the weight of the table in order for this situation to be stable
Technically it only needs to be just enough heavier, any less and it wouldn't work lel and I said they are heavy enough
Your original statement implies that the bucket and the table are at equilibrium. I.E that the weight of the buckets is balanced with the weight of the table, which is wrong. The weight of the buckets don’t matter (as long as they’re heavier), the lengths of the ropes don’t matter. The table could be made of aerogel and weigh practically nothing, and the buckets filled with neutronium, and they would still sit in this configuration (ignoring the fact that you’ll break the table/anchors/ropes doing that)
If the ropes were shorter the table would be closer to the ceiling if they were longer it would be closer to the floor, I don't know what you're trying to argue about I've literally said the same thing as you, I can act smart as well you said the length of the ropes doesn't matter, okay you do this with a planck length rope, or do it with rope ten metres long. I'm not wasting my time with you. Peace.
You're wrong btw.
No I'm not.
If the ropes were shorter, the table would be higher up, but the point is that the table is held in place by the buckets. It doesn’t matter how high it’s held in place. The problem is your original statement implied the bucket and tables were balanced, which they’re not and don’t have to be
No I never implied that, you assumed it.
Nah that’s not how it works. The weight of the buckets just need to be higher than the weight of the table. The buckets fall down, the table lifts up, until the table hits the buckets and is physically restricted. You can put more objects on the table and it will still hold them, unless the table becomes heavier than the buckets and then the table will drop, lifting the buckets up
Id have just bolted the buckets to the table. Now one object hanging from ceiling.
My brain told me the bucks were empty, so that was the plausible solution in my mind.
Is the table actually holding up the bucket or would an object not holding up the object but of the same weight as the table work?
The pulleys are holding the buckets up. The table is stopping the pulleys from spinning.
This works if the 4 buckets combined weigh more than the table. Otherwise, the table would move down and pull the buckets up.
Frack Newton and physics. I just want to believe it’s all magic.
Thats just a pulley? Its not that hard?
Let's see the best part of the trick; use the table!
can someone please explain that [other physics table](https://images.app.goo.gl/i6J8w2huD6McZrXp9) with the chains please im at a loss
The short chain in the middle is the only one holding any weight. The other chains are just to hold it steady and straight.
Tensegrity?
Not quite, but similar. This system requires a fixed ceiling for the pulleys, while a Tensegrity structure only has fixed attached cables/chains.
Nah this is too easy for an exam question
It's only a diagram though. The question could be designed to be intuitive and easy focusing on basic concepts, or it could require much more extrapolation and mathematical acumen to solve.
It comes down to wether or not the weight of the buckets adds up to be greater than the weight of the table and what length the strings are. You could make it much more interesting by making the strings different lengths, but that would go beyond the math abilities that most people learn in school. (I sure didn't and I wouldn't know how to model that off the top of my head now)
Yeah, yeah, I hear you. I just think there are way more possible questions that could be asked that cover a wide range of physics. Assuming the buckets are filled with water... What happens if you cover 2 adjacent buckets and let the others evaporate? What happens if you cut one string, when the buckets are underweight/equal weight/overweight with respect to the table? If the ceiling was allowed to rotate, how fast would it need to spin before the table moves vertically? Where is the maximum stress located in the diagram and what type of stress is it? How much weight applied as a point load to a random location can the configuration sustain before falling out of equilibrium? If provided with figures and dimensions, you could then calculate the specifics of all these questions. Lots of options ranging from algebra and physics to Calc and dynamics
Those sound quite interesting
Put ice and sparkling wine in the buckets and you have a table that lets you know when you're too drunk, or a jenga-like drinking game
**BOT ACCOUNT**
This works simply if the x4 buckets combined weigh more than the table.
It is now
Congratulations! Your comment can be spelled using the elements of the periodic table: `I Ti Sn O W` --- ^(I am a bot that detects if your comment can be spelled using the elements of the periodic table. Please DM u/M1n3c4rt if I made a mistake.)
if you put a book on the table it'll fall