• NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    112
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    On further inspection, it was found that the mathematician had assumed an ideal sphere of constant radius, while the real object was in fact oblate. The mathematician had neglected to take any measurements, leading to an incorrect value. The physicist’s answer was correct, but only at sea level at nominal temperature.

    The engineer is currently using calipers to measure the diameter of the object at many different angles in order to build a CAD model. He said we could expect results next year.

    • BartyDeCanter@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Anywhere with gravity sufficient to overcome the surface tension of the water from forming around the object or clinging to the container.

    • tyler@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      52
      ·
      13 hours ago

      The physicist’s answer would be correct anywhere, no matter the temperature or density of the fluid.

      • montechristo@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Supposing that the measurements with and without the sphere are taken under identical circumstances. But you deserve the upvote either way.

      • untorquer@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Assuming the time between submersion and observation is greater than zero, increasing temperatures above boiling would give increasing error.

        Conversely the physicist may get other error at/near freezing.

        And yet another option is the fluid being above the Ball’s melting and/or boiling point, assuming changes in density with phase change.

        • Aqivex@fedinsfw.app
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          All of which the physicist can trivially account for, control and variable test around, should the requested question be updated to require it.

          The requested question did not include “In all possible scenarios”, thus determining the volume of the sphere via physics calculation at the most average of conditions, is the most correct valid solution, absent further requirement parameters.

          • untorquer@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            12 hours ago

            You’re right in terms of grading a student’s homework or whatever.

            In research/publication/career these assumptions must be stated unless given.

            But I was responding to:

            The physicist’s answer would be correct anywhere, no matter the temperature or density of the fluid.

            Which includes non-standard conditions.

      • OwOarchist@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Interestingly, the physicist’s answer would always be correct, but not always consistent.

        If the sphere is compressible, then air pressure will slightly affect its volume. And unless the thermal expansion rate of the sphere is zero, the amount of fluid displaced will also vary with temperature.

        However, even if the physicist gets different answers in different environments, it’s always still a correct answer, because they correctly measured the volume of the sphere at that time.