English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

when i was in school, they dont this experament to show that sound travels throu air but thats not what im asking about. to show that sound travels through the air they put a noisy toy (battery opparated of course) into a tank thing and with another special tool removed all the air. you couldnt hear the toy anymore. but still if there wasnt any air in there i thought that the tank would have smashed into its self. because you cant put nothing into a jaqr can you. and if you can techniqy its somthing so that its not nothing!!! anyone explain this please?

2006-09-28 04:17:02 · 7 answers · asked by ? 2 in Science & Mathematics Other - Science

7 answers

The tank wasn't truly "empty," in the sense that modern science only enables a certain minimum density of gas to be achieved in a laboratory setting. Any experiment you saw in school would have been an even less "hard" vacuum, far less pure than the vacuum of space, which itself is not even a perfect vacuum. If a laboratory quality vacuum could have been achieved at your school, let alone a space quality vacuum or a perfect vacuum, it would indeed have shattered the tank. However, the "emptiness" of the tank was sufficient to reduce the density of air enough that the particles achieved a wide enough separation that they failed to propogate sound waves.

2006-09-28 04:20:36 · answer #1 · answered by DavidK93 7 · 1 1

The bell jar was strong enough to resist the atmospheric pressure crushing down on it despite the significantly reduced atmospheric pressure inside. Simple as that. There was not "nothing" in the jar, there was only a RELATIVE vacuum.

That being said, there is really nothing stopping a space from being devoid of atoms; if there was a carefully crafted volume that was already in a fairly hard vacuum in distant space it would be possible to bump the atoms out gradually by zapping them, with a laser or similar device.

THAT being said, even if you managed to remove all the atoms, the space would STILL not be truly empty! That is because of the quantum mechanical phenomenon known as "vacuum energy", where a photon flying through otherwise empty space spontaneously breaks into a particle of matter and its corresponding antiparticle; typically they fly apart and then immediately collide (due to their opposite electrical charges) and annihilate each other, resulting in a photon indistinguishable from the original photon, but traveling in a randomly changed direction. This is happening all the time, everywhere in the Universe, and it is the effect responsible for "Hawking radiation": the effect that causes black holes to slowly evaporate.

So, ultimately, the answer to your question is that there can NOT be nothing. The hardest vacuum is boiling with 'virtual pairs' of particles which appear and disappear before the 'Universe's accountants' can notice. If we could somehow tap the vacuum energy, we could fly to the stars in a spaceship that needs no fuel supply; it would be fueled by the Universe itself.

One other side note: at the Exploratorium in San Francisco they had a plexiglass cylinder which you could add water to (at room temperature) and then evacuate the air. As the pressure dropped, the boiling point of the water dropped and the water started to boil. That in turn cooled the water down, and in 30 seconds or so it would be turned into a chunk of ice! Ever seen freezing boiling water?

2006-09-28 05:08:58 · answer #2 · answered by poorcocoboiboi 6 · 0 0

What you are hearing/not hearing is the resonant capabilities of the elements making up the atmosphere of the tank. Think of it like this. "Air" as we know it is around 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, trace amounts of other gases, and water vapor, so "air" in itself is a substance, so when that motor vibrates, the energy waves generated eminate sound due to the elemental field (air in this case) they are resonating throughout.

If the tank was filled with Helium, which is comprised of different components, and is the 2nd lightest known element in the universe, the vibrations then have less resistance in that field, and can travel at a higher frequency/rate, so technically, the "sound" will sound at a higher rate, or "pitch". And if there is absence of elements, it may not resonate/sound at all ;), depending on what elements it is surrounded by you will have a different collective affect, and not necesarilly only in the sound resonance capabilities in some cases.

2006-09-28 06:21:29 · answer #3 · answered by twocircuits 2 · 0 0

Now that was a pretty confused question. I _think_ that you stated that a noise maker was put into a bell jar which subsequently had air removed, creating a partial vacuum.
Then you may have asked, 'why did the jar not implode?'
Ok, here goes:
The jar did not implode because it was able to resist, due to its shape, thickness, etc., the approximately 15psi (assuming a 'perfect' vacuum---not possible BTW) on its outer surface.
There was not "nothing" in the jar, there was only a reduced amount of air and the noisemaker. There is not 'nothing' anywhere in the universe. Even intergalactic space has cosmic particles, hydrogen atoms, bits of matter, etc all through.

2006-09-28 04:24:53 · answer #4 · answered by credo quia est absurdum 7 · 0 0

The tank would smashed into itself if the pressure on it (difference of outside pressure and inside pressure) is stronger than the tank material can resist to. If you make it empty, the difference is equal to atmospheric pressure.

To have an idea of what is it, it is the same as roughly 10 m of water, that is you will bear the same if you go down to 10m of water. Diving to 10m (without pressure bottle!) is something very feasible... Or if you take the tank full of air (so inside pressure is 1 atm.) and out it down to 10m deep in water (where pressure is 1 atm. more), you don't expect it to be smashed... So, same thing for your experience, the pressure is not SO big to smash it, that's all.

Edit: Making the tank "almost" empty or completely empty changes "almost" nothing to the pressure difference, thus for you it doesn't matter.

2006-09-28 04:27:02 · answer #5 · answered by bloo435 4 · 0 0

The absence of something equals nothing. As far as nothing ever being achieved, I doubt it. Even empty space is something. So you might say "nothing doesn't exist".

2006-09-28 04:29:55 · answer #6 · answered by Dan 2 · 0 0

wish i could answer i would like the same question answered but for other reason they say the big bang created all this(?) but what was before that everyone i ask just says nothing but nothing is something so what was it.

2006-09-28 04:23:01 · answer #7 · answered by PAUL C 1 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers