Talk:Archimedes' principle

Physics Start‑class High‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

The "Explanation" section says: "the difference between the pressure up against the bottom of the cube and the pressure down against the top of the cube is the same at any depth". I think this is strictly true only if the fluid is incompressible. Perhaps the words "incompressible fluid" should be added to the section whereever appropriate. Jwpat7 (talk) 04:27, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article Rudimentary / Lacks References

This (scientific) article does not cite references, makes frequent errors (often corrected in parentheticals), uses approximations without clarification (the force of gravity varies on earth and Archimedes' principle applies in space) and is generally poor quality.

Examples:

"Thus, in short, buoyancy = weight of displaced fluid"
"the weight of 1 kilogram (technically, as a kilogram is unit of mass and not of force, the buoyant force is the weight of 1 kg, which is approximately 9.8 Newtons.)"
"10 kilograms (98 newtons)"
"Objects weigh more in air than they do in water."

As it has the tone of an editor who wrote it from first-hand experience, rather than referenced sources, this article needs a (clean?) revisit.

-Geoff (talk) 07:12, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A wooden cube in a sphere of water in space.

As Archimedes' principle doesn't depend on surface tension (as mentioned in the article), what will happen if a block of wood is shoved gently into a ball of water in space? Will it 'rise' to the surface? 121.245.112.77 (talk) 05:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to add this to the article (as your recent edits suggest) then you need to find a reliable source stating what happens in this case. Without sources, material such as this becomes original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:14, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So now any editing will require it to be published somewhere else first? Huh, ? Is not my statement provable from what is already given? What if I publish this on wordpress/blogger first? What about the Ice melting updates I did? Is that not 'Important' to the article? 121.245.65.89 (talk) 09:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient Explanation of the Involved Mechanics

The first sentence of the Formula section makes no sense unless you know that it references a submerged cube. A cube is referenced in the next sentence but even then it is not clear that this cube is completely submerged.

The first paragraph of the Formula section is the only reference to explaining the mechanics of the 'why' of Archimedes' Principle. The 'why' is as important as the observation and should be expanded on considerably. It should also appear in the Explanation section, which currently comprises of more observations and no explantion. A full diagram depicting the varying pressures and forces over the surface of a submerged body would be good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quitequick (talk • contribs) 08:33, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]