an experiment with two glasses , one round and one square with water..what is the difference in sound when hit
541336
Just an hypothesis:\n\nIn round glasses, the water ripples caused by hitting the glass travel from the wall of the glass to the center and then back, and so on. Since the shape of the ripples stays the same when going inwards or inwards (circular) the waves can amplify themselves by adding up the energy (two waves can join in a larger wave) which enhances the vibration of the walls, hence you get a long sound. \nIn a square glass, the ripples departing from opposite walls will tend to cancel each other due to their opposite directions of movement. This would dim the sound.
856454
no idea....but it could probably be cause all the sound gets sqeezed near the water surface like when you through some dough on the wall...and the ripples combine to increase thier amplitude and hence volume
577560
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_waves
253535
By placing the watch glass to cover the beaker, not only the solution can avoid being spilled, the tiny molecules (ex. H2O) will not be evaporated to mess up your calculations. If you(me too, I'm not gonna pick on you) use a very accurate measuring device that can measure mass up to the 4th decimal place(1/10,000) Those tiny water molecules make a difference in our calculations.
204729
ok. here is one "HYPOTHESIS OF SOUND"!\n\nLet me know if you want another one! I got plenty.\n\nlol
843492
depending on how big the glass is!!! do the math!!!
181822
Sound travels in a wave.  Actually travels best through a solid.
62361
Try it. CAUTION - KEEP LIQUIDS AWAY FROM ELECTRICAL CURRENT.\n\nSet up a loudspeaker next to a glass of water (a wine glass is good for this)\n\nWhat do you think will happen when you alter the sound from the speaker?\n\nInvestigate and observe.\nTry a thicker liquid such as milk.
176440
2 meters.\n\nLet s be the length of the side. Since the glass top is a square, the area is s^2.\n\ns^2 = 4\ns = +/- square root of 4\ns = 2 or -2\n\nDrop the negative 2 because a side length can't be negative.\n\nBy the way, in the future, you may want to put math problems in the Science/Mathematics category to get better answers.
642439
I assume that the light enters water through the glass since incidence is less than refracted angle also assuming refrative index of glass as 1.66 and water as 1.33\n\nWhat is the question then ? Also how can light return to where it originates ? That is dependent on the setup.
519141
you can measure the volume if you are very quick.\n\ntake a scaled glass, preferably one used in labs with a scale in mm3 or cm3, pour some water in it and read on the scale the volume of water.\nThen put the pretzel in the water and quickly read again the scale. \nThe volume of the pretzel is the difference between the second reading and the first one.\nDo it fast because the pretzel may absorb water. Or paint the pretzel with nail polish to be waterproof! :-)\n\nThe surface area is more difficult, but you can use a millimeter paper to have an approximate value. Put the pretzel on it, and draw around carefully the shape. Then count how many little squares are inside the contour lines, and multiply it with the area of one little square (= 1 mm2) :-)))\n\nHave fun!!!
971127
The sound intensity due to a point source radiating equally in all directions (spherically symmetric case) is proportional to 1/r^2, where r is the distance from the source of the sound:\n\nI = k/r^2, where k is a constant of proportionality.\n\nIf we know the intensity (I1) at one distance (r1), then the intensity (I2) at a second distance (r2) is given by:\n\nI2 = I1*(r1/r2)^2\n\nIn Q1, we are told that the sound intensity at 1 m is 10^-5 W/m^2, and we want to know the intensity at 5 m.  Plugging these values into the above equation, we have:\n\nI2 = 10^-5 W/m^2 * (1m/5m)^2 = (10^-5 W/m^2)/25 = 4*10^-7 W/m^2\n\nThe intensity of a sound wave is proportional to the square of the amplitude of the displacement of a particle in the medium through which the sound is propagating:\n\nI = m*x^2,\n\nwhere m is a constant of proportionality, and x is the amplitude of the displacement.  Plugging this into the equation above that relates intensity and distance, we have that:\n\n(x2)^2 = (x1)^2 * (r1/r2)^2\nx2 = x1*r1/r2\n\nThe amplitude of the displacement is inversely proportional to 1/r.\n\nFor Q1 we are told that x1  = 70 microns at 1 meter, and are asked what x2 is at 5 meters.  Plugging these values into the above equation, we have:\n\nx2 = 70 microns * 1/5 = 14 microns\n\nFor Q2, we are told that x1 = 10^-7 m at r1 = 3 m, and are asked what the amplitude is at 5 m.  Again plugging these into the above equation, we have:\n\nX2 = 10^-7 m * (3/5) = 6*10^-8 m
78979
None, sound is a wave not a particle. Sound is just a wave of vibrations travelling through atoms.
977052
You need a variable in any experiment to compare results. Perhaps you could use cold (ice) water in one container, warm in another and hot or boiling in another. You can then make your prediction on which will dissolve first and have an experiment that will verify whether you have made an accurate prediction.
148
In a sense, any microphone is picking up sounds from the past, due to the speed of sound. This is similar to what you mentioned with radio telescopes.\n\nThe main differences are 1) velocity -- light moves at about 1 foot per nanosecond while sound moves around 1 foot per 1/1000 second, and 2) that sound moving though a medium diffuses quite rapidly. Something really loud, like thunder, you might hear from 20-30 seconds away. For normal, everyday sounds, the delay won't be more than maybe a few tenths of a second.
225050
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/body/articles/senses/tongue_experiment.shtml
632188
Since a glass of milk contains water in it, i would say water.