Um, not to take away from the achievement of the result, but couldn't this result have been obtained in much less time with higher force than 1G in, say, a centrifuge?
Well, where's the fun in that?
Trinity College experiment succeeds after 69 years
31–40 of 119 posts
Re: Trinity College experiment succeeds after 69 years
#32I think, after a few missed drops, that I might have added a backup camera.
Well it started in the 1940s. There weren't many webcam then, and video cameras (and tape) were expensive.
Of course, I understand that. But it lasted so long, through tenured generation after generation. Even though I'm aware it wasn't anyone's master work, it had to be quite frustrating to miss it decade after decade.
Re: Trinity College experiment succeeds after 69 years
#33It should be noted that this experiment is different than the Queensland experiment, which is still going on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitch_drop_experiment
How are they different? Both the article and the wikipedia link you gave mention they are similar experiments. It seems they are the same experiment to me.
Same class, different instances. ;)
Re: Trinity College experiment succeeds after 69 years
#34"...the scientific value was questionable..."
Re: Trinity College experiment succeeds after 69 years
#35I call shenanigans. In the time-lapse, the funnel "jumps" upward right when the drop falls (0:56). Unless the funnel's mounted on a spring (?), this is a clear indication that somebody interfered with the drip. I declare this video null and void!
...or maybe the video camera just got jostled when all scientists started dancing around in their glee =)
Re: Trinity College experiment succeeds after 69 years
#36The first thought that popped into my punny little brain was: Why didn't they use a centrifuge to accelerate results?
The one variable that could be controlled is the gravitational force on the substance. If we were on the moon the experiment, as designed, would take far longer to produce a drop. By using a centrifuge they could have easily simulated significantly greater gravitational forces and arrived at a result much sooner.
EDIT:
The Queensland experiment data says that it takes about 13 years for a drop to form and fall [1]. You'd need less than 5,000 g's to make it happen within a day or about 160 g's to get results in 30 days.
[1] http://www.nature.com/news/world-s-slowest-moving-drop-caugh...
Re: Trinity College experiment succeeds after 69 years
#37"The experiment was begun by a colleague of Nobel Prize winner Ernest Walton in the physics department of Trinity in 1944."
Am I the only one who finds this insulting? They could at least name the guy!!!
Re: Trinity College experiment succeeds after 69 years
#38While I'm fond of this type of down-to-earth experiments, I'm curious about the scientific value of waiting for decades to observe the drop falling due to Earth's gravity, versus placing the apparatus in a centrifuge, which I imagine would dramatically accelerate the process. Maybe the higher forces would affect the way the drop is formed, in a way that was deemed undesirable?
down-to-earth experiments
Bwahahahah!
Re: Trinity College experiment succeeds after 69 years
#39I call shenanigans. In the time-lapse, the funnel "jumps" upward right when the drop falls (0:56). Unless the funnel's mounted on a spring (?), this is a clear indication that somebody interfered with the drip. I declare this video null and void! ...or maybe the video camera just got jostled when all scientists started dancing around in their glee =)
More likely than not, the whole setup there is SIXTY NINE years old and a drop of pitch weighs a bit.
Or they got bored and cheated. 50/50 really.
Re: Trinity College experiment succeeds after 69 years
#40Um, not to take away from the achievement of the result, but couldn't this result have been obtained in much less time with higher force than 1G in, say, a centrifuge?
In other news students preferred "watching the pitch" over lectures by a margin of 2 to 1. :-)