Question for the Physics-Minded
Dec. 20th, 2011 07:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Recently I bought a new can of coffee.
I removed its plastic lid, and admired the shiny foil seal. On one side, ordinary atmospheric pressure. On the other, "vacuum." Its rim is attached to the circular rim of the can. The forces on it balance into a smooth convex form.

I began to wonder:
What shape is this?
Paraboloid? Section of a sphere?
I'm thinking it's a catenary of rotation. Am I right?
I removed its plastic lid, and admired the shiny foil seal. On one side, ordinary atmospheric pressure. On the other, "vacuum." Its rim is attached to the circular rim of the can. The forces on it balance into a smooth convex form.

I began to wonder:
What shape is this?
Paraboloid? Section of a sphere?
I'm thinking it's a catenary of rotation. Am I right?
no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 02:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 08:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 02:37 am (UTC)(goes off to check the always there wikipedia)
Hm, that says it's not a parabola, but a hyperbolic cosine.
Ah well, not my area of expertise.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 08:55 am (UTC)The converging on an arc makes sense, in terms of this discussion of pressure acting normal to the surface, while gravity acts down. As the arc gets shallower, the distinction between "down" and "normal to the curve" gets less important.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 04:19 pm (UTC)So for a hanging cable or chain, you get a parabola in the case where the force is the same everywhere (as in an ideal suspension bridge, where the load is evenly distributed and the cable's weight and stiffness are negligible by comparison), and you get a catenary in the case where the cable is supporting its own weight, which increases with the supported length of cable.
But in both cases, we're talking about weight, not gas pressure.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 03:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 03:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 04:08 am (UTC)I don't think the coffee now has added stannous fluoride, or anything.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 01:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 05:29 am (UTC)Thought experiment to me suggests not a catenary: make the hole smaller and increase the pressure differential; does the tangent at the hole lip eventually go past vertical? I'd expect yes, which a catenary can't satisfy.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 05:36 am (UTC)Suppose the pressure were greater on the inside, and suppose the membrane were a thin sheet of rubber. If you really jacked up the interior pressure, wouldn't it inflate into a spherical balloon? Or is this not the right model to use?
no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 12:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 07:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-22 07:52 pm (UTC)(I had to visualize somebody on Mercury blowing lead bubbles to figure this out.)
no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 08:49 am (UTC)So the dome of the Pantheon in Rome (if made of equal masses everywhere and built the right way) would be whatever you call a catenoid dome upside down, dominated by its own weight, but the classic science fiction domes on the Moon and Mars are rightly spherical, dominated by internal pressure.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 12:09 pm (UTC)The practical application is using Mylar or similar reflective foil to make a cheap near-parabolic mirror.
UK amateur astronomer Maurice Gavin - who I knew back in the early 1980s as founder of an APA for swapping home computer programs for astronomy - did some experiments in this line. The results were optically awful but adequate for simple photometry.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 01:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-21 02:35 pm (UTC)This made me think of the corrector plate for a Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope. The first one of those was made by sealing a sheet of optical glass across the mouth of an old kettle, pulling a vacuum inside, polishing the glass flat, and releasing the vacuum.