Real Life Brain-Teaser

Mar 14, 2007 14:02

Earlier today, I encountered an enigma that prompted me to send the following email to Cartwright and my brother who's a doctor ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 33

Hint wintermute_ca March 14 2007, 21:15:18 UTC
The responses from my brother & Cartwright:

"I see only one way to know for sure.

1. Get a large light styrofoam container, something that weighs only a few ounces.
2. Weigh it.
3. Weigh yourself.
4. Take a piss in it.
5. Reweigh yourself.
6. Reweigh the container.
7. Empty the container.
8. Repeat 2-7, but take a shit instead of a piss.

Not only will you sort out this puzzle, but you'll be testing shit-related conservation of mass. If the numbers don't add up, you can measure how much energy is consumed or created in each transaction.

Happy to be of help,

[brother]"

"I think the only way to get to the bottom of this is a large box of 24oz jars, a box of latex gloves, and a food scale.

Cartwright"

Neither of them is thinking far enough outside the box here.

Reply


tbgoldman March 14 2007, 22:45:35 UTC
excel graphs pls

Reply

wintermute_ca March 15 2007, 00:47:57 UTC
I only have 2 days worth of data so far, so it would be useless. I may share later though

Reply


tbgoldman March 14 2007, 22:50:31 UTC
Q: do you eat/drink while taking shits?

Reply

wintermute_ca March 15 2007, 00:48:11 UTC
Not in these cases.

Reply


Porous Turds anonymous March 15 2007, 00:40:55 UTC
Problem: Turds weigh half of piss, with similar volume. Yet turds sink, appearing to be more dense.

The turds may be porous. They sink like a roll of barbed wire because they absorb water. But clearly a tangle of wire is quite light. You could weigh the turds in a dry container, soak them in water, and weigh again.

For less mess you could just measure the actual volume of the turds using the Archimedian principle by seeing how much water they displace. Just put marks on the inside of your toilet bowl. They probably displace less than the piss.

Or you could stop eating all those Ritz crackers. Add a little more fiber and you won't wait weeks between dumps.

Finally you could eat the turds and weigh yourself again. This would control for any nuclear effects during defecation.

Kim Lee

Reply

Re: Porous Turds wintermute_ca March 15 2007, 00:53:17 UTC
"The turds may be porous. They sink like a roll of barbed wire because they absorb water."

This is an interesting idea, and theoretically could be confounded with the effect I discovered. But from visual inspection, I would claim that the porosity of my turd was negligible, or at least could not alone account for the disparity between shit volume and weight. Your point does illuminate a potential path of research into deconvolution of shit porosity and the effect (unmentioned, as of yet) that I discovered regarding the surprising apparent lightness of my turd.

"For less mess you could just measure the actual volume of the turds using the Archimedian principle by seeing how much water they displace. Just put marks on the inside of your toilet bowl. They probably displace less than the piss."

Not a bad idea. But again, although the question of volume of shit vs. volume of piss is likely part of the answer to this question, you are still barking up the wrong tree.

Reply

Re: Porous Turds anonymous March 15 2007, 14:15:36 UTC
Archimedian wont work unless you can capture the water that flows from the unseen end of the u bend in the bowl.

Reply


Piss must weigh more than water deitelc March 15 2007, 02:24:56 UTC
Piss must weigh significantly more than water. I assume the more hydrated you are, the less you piss will weigh in comparison to water. If you're dehydrated, you're piss will weigh much more in comparison to water and thus be quite yellow.

Deitelc

Reply

Re: Piss must weigh more than water wintermute_ca March 15 2007, 02:45:57 UTC
Another possible concomitant, but also not the correct answer here.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up