How is water heavier than petrol, even though its molecular weight is less than petrol?Why is ice less dense than water?Why won't a block less dense than water fully submerge?Is a block of cotton heavier than a block of iron?How does water pressure manifest itself on the molecular level?Why is alcohol less dense than water?What is weight/mass of cumulus cloud?Mass, Weight and InertiaHow does the lowered surface tension of soapy water make it better for cleaning?When does wet cloth weigh less than dryDoes a non-buoyant (denser than water) object (such as a lead diving weight) weigh any less when submerged in water?
How to check what is breaking automatic updates kernel when use apt upgrade or dist-upgrade？
How to maintain a closed environment for one person for a long period of time
Loss of power when I remove item from the outlet
Heavily limited premature compiler translates text into excecutable python code
How do you pronounce the letter "t" before "h"?
Boss wants someone else to lead a project based on the idea I presented to him
Why does using different ArrayList constructors cause a different growth rate of the internal array?
Hit the Bulls Eye with T in the Center
Music theory behind A chord in the key of G
What is the highest voltage from the power supply a Raspberry Pi 3 B can handle without getting damaged?
What does it mean to not be able to take the derivative of a function multiple times?
How would modern naval warfare have to have developed differently for battleships to still be relevant in the 21st century?
Methodology: Writing unit tests for another developer
What is the origin of Scooby-Doo's name?
What is "industrial ethernet"?
Will generated tokens be progressively stronger when using Cathar's Crusade and Sorin, Grim Nemesis?
What is the oldest commercial MS-DOS program that can run on modern versions of Windows without third-party software?
How do I farm creepers for XP without them exploding?
I found a password with hashcat, but it doesn't work
How can I bring back a dead main character without cliches?
What is the meaning of "понаехать"?
Confusion over 220 and 230 volt outlets
Is "Busen" just the area between the breasts?
Why don't countries like Japan just print more money?
How is water heavier than petrol, even though its molecular weight is less than petrol?
Why is ice less dense than water?Why won't a block less dense than water fully submerge?Is a block of cotton heavier than a block of iron?How does water pressure manifest itself on the molecular level?Why is alcohol less dense than water?What is weight/mass of cumulus cloud?Mass, Weight and InertiaHow does the lowered surface tension of soapy water make it better for cleaning?When does wet cloth weigh less than dryDoes a non-buoyant (denser than water) object (such as a lead diving weight) weigh any less when submerged in water?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
Molecular weight of petrol is so much higher than water,
but when it comes to physical property, weight, one litre of water weighs more than one litre of petrol.
How is it possible?
mass physical-chemistry density molecules
edited Jun 4 at 2:01
Allure
2,8081028
asked Jun 3 at 4:58
Olivier LlorisOlivier Lloris
151124
$endgroup$
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
Molecular weight of petrol is so much higher than water,
but when it comes to physical property, weight, one litre of water weighs more than one litre of petrol.
How is it possible?
mass physical-chemistry density molecules
edited Jun 4 at 2:01
Allure
2,8081028
asked Jun 3 at 4:58
Olivier LlorisOlivier Lloris
151124
$endgroup$
20
$begingroup$
What do you mean "weighs more"? A kilo of water obviously weighs the same as a kilo of petrol. A molecule weighs less. I suspect you mean a liter of water weighs more. But "weight per volume" or density is a different physical property than weight. Weight by itself is only well-defined for concrete objects. I'm being hyper-precise here, but that is because understanding this starts by understanding the definitions.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Jun 3 at 15:34
3
$begingroup$
@MSalters BTW, the terminology for what you're getting at is that weight is an extensive property, while density is an intensive property. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_and_extensive_properties
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 3 at 16:19
2
$begingroup$
Note - water is not denser than all petroleum products. Some of the higher molar mass petroleum species are actually more dense than water.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 0:40
2
$begingroup$
Get a liter of macaroni and a liter of orzo and a liter of flour. Each individual macaroni weighs more than each individual orzo, which weighs massively more than each particle of flour, but the liter of macaroni weighs less than the orzo, and the orzo weighs less than the flour. How is that possible? If you can explain to me how that is possible, then you can probably answer your own question by similar logic.
$endgroup$
– Eric Lippert
Jun 4 at 22:33
4
$begingroup$
One liter of water is also heavier than one liter of ice. How is it possible? :)
$endgroup$
– JonathanReez
Jun 5 at 1:01
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
Molecular weight of petrol is so much higher than water,
but when it comes to physical property, weight, one litre of water weighs more than one litre of petrol.
How is it possible?
mass physical-chemistry density molecules
edited Jun 4 at 2:01
Allure
2,8081028
asked Jun 3 at 4:58
Olivier LlorisOlivier Lloris
151124
$endgroup$
Molecular weight of petrol is so much higher than water,
but when it comes to physical property, weight, one litre of water weighs more than one litre of petrol.
How is it possible?
mass physical-chemistry density molecules
mass physical-chemistry density molecules
edited Jun 4 at 2:01
Allure
2,8081028
asked Jun 3 at 4:58
Olivier LlorisOlivier Lloris
151124
edited Jun 4 at 2:01
Allure
2,8081028
asked Jun 3 at 4:58
Olivier LlorisOlivier Lloris
151124
edited Jun 4 at 2:01
Allure
2,8081028
edited Jun 4 at 2:01
Allure
2,8081028
edited Jun 4 at 2:01
Allure
2,8081028
2,8081028
asked Jun 3 at 4:58
Olivier LlorisOlivier Lloris
151124
asked Jun 3 at 4:58
Olivier LlorisOlivier Lloris
151124
asked Jun 3 at 4:58
Olivier LlorisOlivier Lloris
151124
151124
20
$begingroup$
What do you mean "weighs more"? A kilo of water obviously weighs the same as a kilo of petrol. A molecule weighs less. I suspect you mean a liter of water weighs more. But "weight per volume" or density is a different physical property than weight. Weight by itself is only well-defined for concrete objects. I'm being hyper-precise here, but that is because understanding this starts by understanding the definitions.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Jun 3 at 15:34
3
$begingroup$
@MSalters BTW, the terminology for what you're getting at is that weight is an extensive property, while density is an intensive property. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_and_extensive_properties
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 3 at 16:19
2
$begingroup$
Note - water is not denser than all petroleum products. Some of the higher molar mass petroleum species are actually more dense than water.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 0:40
2
$begingroup$
Get a liter of macaroni and a liter of orzo and a liter of flour. Each individual macaroni weighs more than each individual orzo, which weighs massively more than each particle of flour, but the liter of macaroni weighs less than the orzo, and the orzo weighs less than the flour. How is that possible? If you can explain to me how that is possible, then you can probably answer your own question by similar logic.
$endgroup$
– Eric Lippert
Jun 4 at 22:33
4
$begingroup$
One liter of water is also heavier than one liter of ice. How is it possible? :)
$endgroup$
– JonathanReez
Jun 5 at 1:01
|
show 5 more comments
20
$begingroup$
What do you mean "weighs more"? A kilo of water obviously weighs the same as a kilo of petrol. A molecule weighs less. I suspect you mean a liter of water weighs more. But "weight per volume" or density is a different physical property than weight. Weight by itself is only well-defined for concrete objects. I'm being hyper-precise here, but that is because understanding this starts by understanding the definitions.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Jun 3 at 15:34
3
$begingroup$
@MSalters BTW, the terminology for what you're getting at is that weight is an extensive property, while density is an intensive property. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_and_extensive_properties
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 3 at 16:19
2
$begingroup$
Note - water is not denser than all petroleum products. Some of the higher molar mass petroleum species are actually more dense than water.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 0:40
2
$begingroup$
Get a liter of macaroni and a liter of orzo and a liter of flour. Each individual macaroni weighs more than each individual orzo, which weighs massively more than each particle of flour, but the liter of macaroni weighs less than the orzo, and the orzo weighs less than the flour. How is that possible? If you can explain to me how that is possible, then you can probably answer your own question by similar logic.
$endgroup$
– Eric Lippert
Jun 4 at 22:33
4
$begingroup$
One liter of water is also heavier than one liter of ice. How is it possible? :)
$endgroup$
– JonathanReez
Jun 5 at 1:01
20
20
$begingroup$
What do you mean "weighs more"? A kilo of water obviously weighs the same as a kilo of petrol. A molecule weighs less. I suspect you mean a liter of water weighs more. But "weight per volume" or density is a different physical property than weight. Weight by itself is only well-defined for concrete objects. I'm being hyper-precise here, but that is because understanding this starts by understanding the definitions.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Jun 3 at 15:34
$begingroup$
What do you mean "weighs more"? A kilo of water obviously weighs the same as a kilo of petrol. A molecule weighs less. I suspect you mean a liter of water weighs more. But "weight per volume" or density is a different physical property than weight. Weight by itself is only well-defined for concrete objects. I'm being hyper-precise here, but that is because understanding this starts by understanding the definitions.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Jun 3 at 15:34
3
3
$begingroup$
@MSalters BTW, the terminology for what you're getting at is that weight is an extensive property, while density is an intensive property. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_and_extensive_properties
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 3 at 16:19
$begingroup$
@MSalters BTW, the terminology for what you're getting at is that weight is an extensive property, while density is an intensive property. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_and_extensive_properties
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 3 at 16:19
2
2
$begingroup$
Note - water is not denser than all petroleum products. Some of the higher molar mass petroleum species are actually more dense than water.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 0:40
$begingroup$
Note - water is not denser than all petroleum products. Some of the higher molar mass petroleum species are actually more dense than water.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 0:40
2
2
$begingroup$
Get a liter of macaroni and a liter of orzo and a liter of flour. Each individual macaroni weighs more than each individual orzo, which weighs massively more than each particle of flour, but the liter of macaroni weighs less than the orzo, and the orzo weighs less than the flour. How is that possible? If you can explain to me how that is possible, then you can probably answer your own question by similar logic.
$endgroup$
– Eric Lippert
Jun 4 at 22:33
$begingroup$
Get a liter of macaroni and a liter of orzo and a liter of flour. Each individual macaroni weighs more than each individual orzo, which weighs massively more than each particle of flour, but the liter of macaroni weighs less than the orzo, and the orzo weighs less than the flour. How is that possible? If you can explain to me how that is possible, then you can probably answer your own question by similar logic.
$endgroup$
– Eric Lippert
Jun 4 at 22:33
4
4
$begingroup$
One liter of water is also heavier than one liter of ice. How is it possible? :)
$endgroup$
– JonathanReez
Jun 5 at 1:01
$begingroup$
One liter of water is also heavier than one liter of ice. How is it possible? :)
$endgroup$
– JonathanReez
Jun 5 at 1:01
|
show 5 more comments
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Because water molecules are small and pack tightly together, causing water to have a greater density than petrol.
answered Jun 3 at 5:07
G. SmithG. Smith
16.1k12753
$endgroup$
20
$begingroup$
Specifically, they're packed together tightly due to hydrogen bonds.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 3 at 14:16
4
$begingroup$
@Sanchises, when hydrogen bonds form in water, the molecules take on a hexagonal structure, ice forms, and the density goes down.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 1:41
19
$begingroup$
@David That's the case when the number of bonds increases even further, yes. But they are also present in liquid water, and are responsible for the fact that liquid water can exist at STP, as opposed to most molecules this small.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 4 at 5:47
$begingroup$
In order to evaporate water, you need break the hydrogen bonding in liquid water.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
Jun 5 at 6:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Density relates to the mass per unit volume. If your molecules are heavier but take up more space, the net result could be more or less mass per unit volume.
When you look at a typical hydrocarbon, it has a lot of carbon and hydrogen. Now atom for atom, oxygen is heavier than carbon (ignoring isotopic abundance, roughly a 16:12 ratio). So if the molecules were otherwise the same shape, if we replaced the carbons with oxygens the hydrocarbon would become heavier (you can’t do that of course - the chemistry is different).
But the larger and more complex shape of the hydrocarbon molecules has another effect. Imagine two elevators. In one elevator we cram a squad of ballet dancers - tall, elegant, and able to be packed very closely. In the other elevator there are a number of people who just went shopping - they carry big bags and generally take a lot of space. It’s quite possible you could get 15 ballet dancers into the first elevator and only five shoppers in the second. So though the dancers might weigh 100 pounds each and the shoppers 200 pounds, the first elevator car will be heavier.
The same analogy can help explain why density of most materials goes down when temperature goes up. Imagine the dancers hear music and start to dance. Suddenly 15 of them aren’t going to fit in that elevator!
Maybe that’s why elevator music is usually so awful?
answered Jun 3 at 7:59
FlorisFloris
108k11193329
$endgroup$
17
$begingroup$
You were doing so well with the elevator analogy... And then you had to stick on a Dad joke...
$endgroup$
– Oscar Bravo
Jun 3 at 9:05
40
$begingroup$
@OscarBravo sorry. Four time dad - it comes naturally...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 9:13
4
$begingroup$
@UKMonkey pics or it didn’t happen. Make that video.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 16:57
1
$begingroup$
@Floris hold my beer ... nothing bad can happen from this - no promises they all have their feet on the floor :)
$endgroup$
– UKMonkey
Jun 3 at 17:03
2
$begingroup$
@Floris This is the closest I could find, which falls dismally short of an elevator jam packed with ballerinas: i.pinimg.com/originals/8c/e5/9f/…
$endgroup$
– nasch
Jun 4 at 22:18
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
One of my Chemistry teachers had an interesting way to describe this type of phenomenon.
Because the water molecule is shaped like a triangle, it is possible for the water molecules to "snuggle up" with each other, and pack themselves close together. Like this: >>>>>>>>>
He claimed that Water molecules behave more like H(100) O(50) that H(2) O.
Now, I'm sure we could think of a dozen reasons why this isn't correct, but: this does show a unique property of water. It relates closely to the answers provided by @Floris and @G. Smith.
If water really were H(100) O(50), would that explain the property of your original question? I believe it would.
$0.02
answered Jun 3 at 23:27
Scottie HScottie H
393
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
This is closely related to the fact that water expands when it freezes - because the molecules then find a preferred way of packing that is less dense (tarragon always structure). Not sure about the H100O50 part of the argument but tight packing is relevant.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 6:11
1
$begingroup$
When you add just a few very long thin molecules into the water, dramatic things happen. The water adjusts its hydrogen bonding to minimise energy and coordinate with the impurity. Witness jelly (Jello) which turns (mostly) water into something more like a solid than a liquid at room temperature. The 50-molecule average coordination count seems very plausible to me.
$endgroup$
– nigel222
Jun 4 at 8:18
$begingroup$
@Floris I don't think you mean tarragon.
$endgroup$
– David Conrad
Jun 4 at 20:20
2
$begingroup$
@DavidConrad indeed - I meant tetragonal. Never type on a phone with autocorrect when you are not wearing glasses...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 21:45
1
$begingroup$
@DavidRicherby>is (kinda) the structure of a simple H2O molecule.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jun 5 at 13:31
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
Another approach to answer this for youself might be to run with the idea and look at molecules with even higher molecular weight.
Like, why aren't plastics far heavier than lead? Why isn't DNA? These are truly massive molecules, yet their densities are pretty low (comparable to water).
With polymers, you should pretty quickly get the idea, that the arrangement of the atoms does matter. While the molecules themselves are very heavy, they also take up more space and hence are less dense. With petrol, the usual molecules are not that much bigger than water, so arrangement effects are not that obvious.
On top of that, intermolecular force also play a role - here water's attraction to other water molecules comes into play. Plastics on the other hand do leave holes and often are not particularly strongly attracted to each other, leading to lower densities.
answered Jun 4 at 8:15
ChieronChieron
11114
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Picture this. You have a basket of foam balls and a basket of wooden balls. Say each basket has the same volume and each ball the same volume as well. Stuff as many foam balls as you can into the 1st basket and do the same for the other basket but with wooden balls. Each of the foam balls weigh 10 grams, and each of the wooden balls weigh 20 grams. You find that you can stuff 3 times more foam balls into the basket than wooden balls. Doing the math, you find that:
10 grams * 3 times more balls > 20 grams.
30 > 20.
This means that even though the foam balls weigh less than the wooden balls, they can be packed together more densely, resulting in a larger total mass than the wooden balls. Hope this clarified anything!
answered Jun 3 at 22:21
ToeSuccToeSucc
1
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
In your analogy, you can pack more foam balls in because they can be compressed, but that's not what's happening wth water vs petrol. Both of those liquids don't compress easily.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Jun 3 at 23:36
$begingroup$
It'd be more accurate to liken the balls to two different forms - the water are wooden cubes with slightly smaller volume than the balls representing petrol. But if I stack them in the basket, the water actively reduces the space between them (they stack nice) so I can fit more cubes in there (even if the two are actually the same volume/unit). Which is much more like what water does, since the molecules themselves can't compress.
$endgroup$
– Delioth
Jun 5 at 19:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Water is denser than petrol, so there essentially more molecules of water in a given volume.
For example in a given volume, there may be 15,000 molecules of petrol but 20,000 molecules of water.
edited Jun 5 at 20:30
Martin Bonner
1034
answered Jun 5 at 0:26
Shahmeer NaqviShahmeer Naqvi
1
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're supposed to be explaining why water is denser than petrol but, instead, you pre-suppose that water is denser than petrol and conclude that water molecules must be more densely packed. This is the wrong direction. Also, typical molecules in petrol are much larger and heavier than water molecules, so an extra 30% of water molecules wouldn't be nearly enough to compensate.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
Jun 5 at 15:24
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f483992%2fhow-is-water-heavier-than-petrol-even-though-its-molecular-weight-is-less-than%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Because water molecules are small and pack tightly together, causing water to have a greater density than petrol.
answered Jun 3 at 5:07
G. SmithG. Smith
16.1k12753
$endgroup$
20
$begingroup$
Specifically, they're packed together tightly due to hydrogen bonds.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 3 at 14:16
4
$begingroup$
@Sanchises, when hydrogen bonds form in water, the molecules take on a hexagonal structure, ice forms, and the density goes down.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 1:41
19
$begingroup$
@David That's the case when the number of bonds increases even further, yes. But they are also present in liquid water, and are responsible for the fact that liquid water can exist at STP, as opposed to most molecules this small.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 4 at 5:47
$begingroup$
In order to evaporate water, you need break the hydrogen bonding in liquid water.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
Jun 5 at 6:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Because water molecules are small and pack tightly together, causing water to have a greater density than petrol.
answered Jun 3 at 5:07
G. SmithG. Smith
16.1k12753
$endgroup$
20
$begingroup$
Specifically, they're packed together tightly due to hydrogen bonds.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 3 at 14:16
4
$begingroup$
@Sanchises, when hydrogen bonds form in water, the molecules take on a hexagonal structure, ice forms, and the density goes down.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 1:41
19
$begingroup$
@David That's the case when the number of bonds increases even further, yes. But they are also present in liquid water, and are responsible for the fact that liquid water can exist at STP, as opposed to most molecules this small.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 4 at 5:47
$begingroup$
In order to evaporate water, you need break the hydrogen bonding in liquid water.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
Jun 5 at 6:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Because water molecules are small and pack tightly together, causing water to have a greater density than petrol.
answered Jun 3 at 5:07
G. SmithG. Smith
16.1k12753
$endgroup$
Because water molecules are small and pack tightly together, causing water to have a greater density than petrol.
answered Jun 3 at 5:07
G. SmithG. Smith
16.1k12753
answered Jun 3 at 5:07
G. SmithG. Smith
16.1k12753
answered Jun 3 at 5:07
G. SmithG. Smith
16.1k12753
answered Jun 3 at 5:07
G. SmithG. Smith
16.1k12753
16.1k12753
20
$begingroup$
Specifically, they're packed together tightly due to hydrogen bonds.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 3 at 14:16
4
$begingroup$
@Sanchises, when hydrogen bonds form in water, the molecules take on a hexagonal structure, ice forms, and the density goes down.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 1:41
19
$begingroup$
@David That's the case when the number of bonds increases even further, yes. But they are also present in liquid water, and are responsible for the fact that liquid water can exist at STP, as opposed to most molecules this small.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 4 at 5:47
$begingroup$
In order to evaporate water, you need break the hydrogen bonding in liquid water.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
Jun 5 at 6:11
add a comment |
20
$begingroup$
Specifically, they're packed together tightly due to hydrogen bonds.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 3 at 14:16
4
$begingroup$
@Sanchises, when hydrogen bonds form in water, the molecules take on a hexagonal structure, ice forms, and the density goes down.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 1:41
19
$begingroup$
@David That's the case when the number of bonds increases even further, yes. But they are also present in liquid water, and are responsible for the fact that liquid water can exist at STP, as opposed to most molecules this small.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 4 at 5:47
$begingroup$
In order to evaporate water, you need break the hydrogen bonding in liquid water.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
Jun 5 at 6:11
20
20
$begingroup$
Specifically, they're packed together tightly due to hydrogen bonds.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 3 at 14:16
$begingroup$
Specifically, they're packed together tightly due to hydrogen bonds.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 3 at 14:16
4
4
$begingroup$
@Sanchises, when hydrogen bonds form in water, the molecules take on a hexagonal structure, ice forms, and the density goes down.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 1:41
$begingroup$
@Sanchises, when hydrogen bonds form in water, the molecules take on a hexagonal structure, ice forms, and the density goes down.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 1:41
19
19
$begingroup$
@David That's the case when the number of bonds increases even further, yes. But they are also present in liquid water, and are responsible for the fact that liquid water can exist at STP, as opposed to most molecules this small.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 4 at 5:47
$begingroup$
@David That's the case when the number of bonds increases even further, yes. But they are also present in liquid water, and are responsible for the fact that liquid water can exist at STP, as opposed to most molecules this small.
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
Jun 4 at 5:47
$begingroup$
In order to evaporate water, you need break the hydrogen bonding in liquid water.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
Jun 5 at 6:11
$begingroup$
In order to evaporate water, you need break the hydrogen bonding in liquid water.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
Jun 5 at 6:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Density relates to the mass per unit volume. If your molecules are heavier but take up more space, the net result could be more or less mass per unit volume.
When you look at a typical hydrocarbon, it has a lot of carbon and hydrogen. Now atom for atom, oxygen is heavier than carbon (ignoring isotopic abundance, roughly a 16:12 ratio). So if the molecules were otherwise the same shape, if we replaced the carbons with oxygens the hydrocarbon would become heavier (you can’t do that of course - the chemistry is different).
But the larger and more complex shape of the hydrocarbon molecules has another effect. Imagine two elevators. In one elevator we cram a squad of ballet dancers - tall, elegant, and able to be packed very closely. In the other elevator there are a number of people who just went shopping - they carry big bags and generally take a lot of space. It’s quite possible you could get 15 ballet dancers into the first elevator and only five shoppers in the second. So though the dancers might weigh 100 pounds each and the shoppers 200 pounds, the first elevator car will be heavier.
The same analogy can help explain why density of most materials goes down when temperature goes up. Imagine the dancers hear music and start to dance. Suddenly 15 of them aren’t going to fit in that elevator!
Maybe that’s why elevator music is usually so awful?
answered Jun 3 at 7:59
FlorisFloris
108k11193329
$endgroup$
17
$begingroup$
You were doing so well with the elevator analogy... And then you had to stick on a Dad joke...
$endgroup$
– Oscar Bravo
Jun 3 at 9:05
40
$begingroup$
@OscarBravo sorry. Four time dad - it comes naturally...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 9:13
4
$begingroup$
@UKMonkey pics or it didn’t happen. Make that video.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 16:57
1
$begingroup$
@Floris hold my beer ... nothing bad can happen from this - no promises they all have their feet on the floor :)
$endgroup$
– UKMonkey
Jun 3 at 17:03
2
$begingroup$
@Floris This is the closest I could find, which falls dismally short of an elevator jam packed with ballerinas: i.pinimg.com/originals/8c/e5/9f/…
$endgroup$
– nasch
Jun 4 at 22:18
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Density relates to the mass per unit volume. If your molecules are heavier but take up more space, the net result could be more or less mass per unit volume.
When you look at a typical hydrocarbon, it has a lot of carbon and hydrogen. Now atom for atom, oxygen is heavier than carbon (ignoring isotopic abundance, roughly a 16:12 ratio). So if the molecules were otherwise the same shape, if we replaced the carbons with oxygens the hydrocarbon would become heavier (you can’t do that of course - the chemistry is different).
But the larger and more complex shape of the hydrocarbon molecules has another effect. Imagine two elevators. In one elevator we cram a squad of ballet dancers - tall, elegant, and able to be packed very closely. In the other elevator there are a number of people who just went shopping - they carry big bags and generally take a lot of space. It’s quite possible you could get 15 ballet dancers into the first elevator and only five shoppers in the second. So though the dancers might weigh 100 pounds each and the shoppers 200 pounds, the first elevator car will be heavier.
The same analogy can help explain why density of most materials goes down when temperature goes up. Imagine the dancers hear music and start to dance. Suddenly 15 of them aren’t going to fit in that elevator!
Maybe that’s why elevator music is usually so awful?
answered Jun 3 at 7:59
FlorisFloris
108k11193329
$endgroup$
17
$begingroup$
You were doing so well with the elevator analogy... And then you had to stick on a Dad joke...
$endgroup$
– Oscar Bravo
Jun 3 at 9:05
40
$begingroup$
@OscarBravo sorry. Four time dad - it comes naturally...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 9:13
4
$begingroup$
@UKMonkey pics or it didn’t happen. Make that video.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 16:57
1
$begingroup$
@Floris hold my beer ... nothing bad can happen from this - no promises they all have their feet on the floor :)
$endgroup$
– UKMonkey
Jun 3 at 17:03
2
$begingroup$
@Floris This is the closest I could find, which falls dismally short of an elevator jam packed with ballerinas: i.pinimg.com/originals/8c/e5/9f/…
$endgroup$
– nasch
Jun 4 at 22:18
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Density relates to the mass per unit volume. If your molecules are heavier but take up more space, the net result could be more or less mass per unit volume.
When you look at a typical hydrocarbon, it has a lot of carbon and hydrogen. Now atom for atom, oxygen is heavier than carbon (ignoring isotopic abundance, roughly a 16:12 ratio). So if the molecules were otherwise the same shape, if we replaced the carbons with oxygens the hydrocarbon would become heavier (you can’t do that of course - the chemistry is different).
But the larger and more complex shape of the hydrocarbon molecules has another effect. Imagine two elevators. In one elevator we cram a squad of ballet dancers - tall, elegant, and able to be packed very closely. In the other elevator there are a number of people who just went shopping - they carry big bags and generally take a lot of space. It’s quite possible you could get 15 ballet dancers into the first elevator and only five shoppers in the second. So though the dancers might weigh 100 pounds each and the shoppers 200 pounds, the first elevator car will be heavier.
The same analogy can help explain why density of most materials goes down when temperature goes up. Imagine the dancers hear music and start to dance. Suddenly 15 of them aren’t going to fit in that elevator!
Maybe that’s why elevator music is usually so awful?
answered Jun 3 at 7:59
FlorisFloris
108k11193329
$endgroup$
Density relates to the mass per unit volume. If your molecules are heavier but take up more space, the net result could be more or less mass per unit volume.
When you look at a typical hydrocarbon, it has a lot of carbon and hydrogen. Now atom for atom, oxygen is heavier than carbon (ignoring isotopic abundance, roughly a 16:12 ratio). So if the molecules were otherwise the same shape, if we replaced the carbons with oxygens the hydrocarbon would become heavier (you can’t do that of course - the chemistry is different).
But the larger and more complex shape of the hydrocarbon molecules has another effect. Imagine two elevators. In one elevator we cram a squad of ballet dancers - tall, elegant, and able to be packed very closely. In the other elevator there are a number of people who just went shopping - they carry big bags and generally take a lot of space. It’s quite possible you could get 15 ballet dancers into the first elevator and only five shoppers in the second. So though the dancers might weigh 100 pounds each and the shoppers 200 pounds, the first elevator car will be heavier.
The same analogy can help explain why density of most materials goes down when temperature goes up. Imagine the dancers hear music and start to dance. Suddenly 15 of them aren’t going to fit in that elevator!
Maybe that’s why elevator music is usually so awful?
answered Jun 3 at 7:59
FlorisFloris
108k11193329
answered Jun 3 at 7:59
FlorisFloris
108k11193329
answered Jun 3 at 7:59
FlorisFloris
108k11193329
answered Jun 3 at 7:59
FlorisFloris
108k11193329
108k11193329
17
$begingroup$
You were doing so well with the elevator analogy... And then you had to stick on a Dad joke...
$endgroup$
– Oscar Bravo
Jun 3 at 9:05
40
$begingroup$
@OscarBravo sorry. Four time dad - it comes naturally...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 9:13
4
$begingroup$
@UKMonkey pics or it didn’t happen. Make that video.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 16:57
1
$begingroup$
@Floris hold my beer ... nothing bad can happen from this - no promises they all have their feet on the floor :)
$endgroup$
– UKMonkey
Jun 3 at 17:03
2
$begingroup$
@Floris This is the closest I could find, which falls dismally short of an elevator jam packed with ballerinas: i.pinimg.com/originals/8c/e5/9f/…
$endgroup$
– nasch
Jun 4 at 22:18
|
show 2 more comments
17
$begingroup$
You were doing so well with the elevator analogy... And then you had to stick on a Dad joke...
$endgroup$
– Oscar Bravo
Jun 3 at 9:05
40
$begingroup$
@OscarBravo sorry. Four time dad - it comes naturally...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 9:13
4
$begingroup$
@UKMonkey pics or it didn’t happen. Make that video.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 16:57
1
$begingroup$
@Floris hold my beer ... nothing bad can happen from this - no promises they all have their feet on the floor :)
$endgroup$
– UKMonkey
Jun 3 at 17:03
2
$begingroup$
@Floris This is the closest I could find, which falls dismally short of an elevator jam packed with ballerinas: i.pinimg.com/originals/8c/e5/9f/…
$endgroup$
– nasch
Jun 4 at 22:18
17
17
$begingroup$
You were doing so well with the elevator analogy... And then you had to stick on a Dad joke...
$endgroup$
– Oscar Bravo
Jun 3 at 9:05
$begingroup$
You were doing so well with the elevator analogy... And then you had to stick on a Dad joke...
$endgroup$
– Oscar Bravo
Jun 3 at 9:05
40
40
$begingroup$
@OscarBravo sorry. Four time dad - it comes naturally...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 9:13
$begingroup$
@OscarBravo sorry. Four time dad - it comes naturally...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 9:13
4
4
$begingroup$
@UKMonkey pics or it didn’t happen. Make that video.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 16:57
$begingroup$
@UKMonkey pics or it didn’t happen. Make that video.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 3 at 16:57
1
1
$begingroup$
@Floris hold my beer ... nothing bad can happen from this - no promises they all have their feet on the floor :)
$endgroup$
– UKMonkey
Jun 3 at 17:03
$begingroup$
@Floris hold my beer ... nothing bad can happen from this - no promises they all have their feet on the floor :)
$endgroup$
– UKMonkey
Jun 3 at 17:03
2
2
$begingroup$
@Floris This is the closest I could find, which falls dismally short of an elevator jam packed with ballerinas: i.pinimg.com/originals/8c/e5/9f/…
$endgroup$
– nasch
Jun 4 at 22:18
$begingroup$
@Floris This is the closest I could find, which falls dismally short of an elevator jam packed with ballerinas: i.pinimg.com/originals/8c/e5/9f/…
$endgroup$
– nasch
Jun 4 at 22:18
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
One of my Chemistry teachers had an interesting way to describe this type of phenomenon.
Because the water molecule is shaped like a triangle, it is possible for the water molecules to "snuggle up" with each other, and pack themselves close together. Like this: >>>>>>>>>
He claimed that Water molecules behave more like H(100) O(50) that H(2) O.
Now, I'm sure we could think of a dozen reasons why this isn't correct, but: this does show a unique property of water. It relates closely to the answers provided by @Floris and @G. Smith.
If water really were H(100) O(50), would that explain the property of your original question? I believe it would.
$0.02
answered Jun 3 at 23:27
Scottie HScottie H
393
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
This is closely related to the fact that water expands when it freezes - because the molecules then find a preferred way of packing that is less dense (tarragon always structure). Not sure about the H100O50 part of the argument but tight packing is relevant.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 6:11
1
$begingroup$
When you add just a few very long thin molecules into the water, dramatic things happen. The water adjusts its hydrogen bonding to minimise energy and coordinate with the impurity. Witness jelly (Jello) which turns (mostly) water into something more like a solid than a liquid at room temperature. The 50-molecule average coordination count seems very plausible to me.
$endgroup$
– nigel222
Jun 4 at 8:18
$begingroup$
@Floris I don't think you mean tarragon.
$endgroup$
– David Conrad
Jun 4 at 20:20
2
$begingroup$
@DavidConrad indeed - I meant tetragonal. Never type on a phone with autocorrect when you are not wearing glasses...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 21:45
1
$begingroup$
@DavidRicherby>is (kinda) the structure of a simple H2O molecule.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jun 5 at 13:31
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
One of my Chemistry teachers had an interesting way to describe this type of phenomenon.
Because the water molecule is shaped like a triangle, it is possible for the water molecules to "snuggle up" with each other, and pack themselves close together. Like this: >>>>>>>>>
He claimed that Water molecules behave more like H(100) O(50) that H(2) O.
Now, I'm sure we could think of a dozen reasons why this isn't correct, but: this does show a unique property of water. It relates closely to the answers provided by @Floris and @G. Smith.
If water really were H(100) O(50), would that explain the property of your original question? I believe it would.
$0.02
answered Jun 3 at 23:27
Scottie HScottie H
393
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
This is closely related to the fact that water expands when it freezes - because the molecules then find a preferred way of packing that is less dense (tarragon always structure). Not sure about the H100O50 part of the argument but tight packing is relevant.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 6:11
1
$begingroup$
When you add just a few very long thin molecules into the water, dramatic things happen. The water adjusts its hydrogen bonding to minimise energy and coordinate with the impurity. Witness jelly (Jello) which turns (mostly) water into something more like a solid than a liquid at room temperature. The 50-molecule average coordination count seems very plausible to me.
$endgroup$
– nigel222
Jun 4 at 8:18
$begingroup$
@Floris I don't think you mean tarragon.
$endgroup$
– David Conrad
Jun 4 at 20:20
2
$begingroup$
@DavidConrad indeed - I meant tetragonal. Never type on a phone with autocorrect when you are not wearing glasses...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 21:45
1
$begingroup$
@DavidRicherby>is (kinda) the structure of a simple H2O molecule.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jun 5 at 13:31
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
One of my Chemistry teachers had an interesting way to describe this type of phenomenon.
Because the water molecule is shaped like a triangle, it is possible for the water molecules to "snuggle up" with each other, and pack themselves close together. Like this: >>>>>>>>>
He claimed that Water molecules behave more like H(100) O(50) that H(2) O.
Now, I'm sure we could think of a dozen reasons why this isn't correct, but: this does show a unique property of water. It relates closely to the answers provided by @Floris and @G. Smith.
If water really were H(100) O(50), would that explain the property of your original question? I believe it would.
$0.02
answered Jun 3 at 23:27
Scottie HScottie H
393
$endgroup$
One of my Chemistry teachers had an interesting way to describe this type of phenomenon.
Because the water molecule is shaped like a triangle, it is possible for the water molecules to "snuggle up" with each other, and pack themselves close together. Like this: >>>>>>>>>
He claimed that Water molecules behave more like H(100) O(50) that H(2) O.
Now, I'm sure we could think of a dozen reasons why this isn't correct, but: this does show a unique property of water. It relates closely to the answers provided by @Floris and @G. Smith.
If water really were H(100) O(50), would that explain the property of your original question? I believe it would.
$0.02
answered Jun 3 at 23:27
Scottie HScottie H
393
answered Jun 3 at 23:27
Scottie HScottie H
393
answered Jun 3 at 23:27
Scottie HScottie H
393
answered Jun 3 at 23:27
Scottie HScottie H
393
393
3
$begingroup$
This is closely related to the fact that water expands when it freezes - because the molecules then find a preferred way of packing that is less dense (tarragon always structure). Not sure about the H100O50 part of the argument but tight packing is relevant.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 6:11
1
$begingroup$
When you add just a few very long thin molecules into the water, dramatic things happen. The water adjusts its hydrogen bonding to minimise energy and coordinate with the impurity. Witness jelly (Jello) which turns (mostly) water into something more like a solid than a liquid at room temperature. The 50-molecule average coordination count seems very plausible to me.
$endgroup$
– nigel222
Jun 4 at 8:18
$begingroup$
@Floris I don't think you mean tarragon.
$endgroup$
– David Conrad
Jun 4 at 20:20
2
$begingroup$
@DavidConrad indeed - I meant tetragonal. Never type on a phone with autocorrect when you are not wearing glasses...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 21:45
1
$begingroup$
@DavidRicherby>is (kinda) the structure of a simple H2O molecule.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jun 5 at 13:31
|
show 4 more comments
3
$begingroup$
This is closely related to the fact that water expands when it freezes - because the molecules then find a preferred way of packing that is less dense (tarragon always structure). Not sure about the H100O50 part of the argument but tight packing is relevant.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 6:11
1
$begingroup$
When you add just a few very long thin molecules into the water, dramatic things happen. The water adjusts its hydrogen bonding to minimise energy and coordinate with the impurity. Witness jelly (Jello) which turns (mostly) water into something more like a solid than a liquid at room temperature. The 50-molecule average coordination count seems very plausible to me.
$endgroup$
– nigel222
Jun 4 at 8:18
$begingroup$
@Floris I don't think you mean tarragon.
$endgroup$
– David Conrad
Jun 4 at 20:20
2
$begingroup$
@DavidConrad indeed - I meant tetragonal. Never type on a phone with autocorrect when you are not wearing glasses...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 21:45
1
$begingroup$
@DavidRicherby>is (kinda) the structure of a simple H2O molecule.
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jun 5 at 13:31
3
3
$begingroup$
This is closely related to the fact that water expands when it freezes - because the molecules then find a preferred way of packing that is less dense (tarragon always structure). Not sure about the H100O50 part of the argument but tight packing is relevant.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 6:11
$begingroup$
This is closely related to the fact that water expands when it freezes - because the molecules then find a preferred way of packing that is less dense (tarragon always structure). Not sure about the H100O50 part of the argument but tight packing is relevant.
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 6:11
1
1
$begingroup$
When you add just a few very long thin molecules into the water, dramatic things happen. The water adjusts its hydrogen bonding to minimise energy and coordinate with the impurity. Witness jelly (Jello) which turns (mostly) water into something more like a solid than a liquid at room temperature. The 50-molecule average coordination count seems very plausible to me.
$endgroup$
– nigel222
Jun 4 at 8:18
$begingroup$
When you add just a few very long thin molecules into the water, dramatic things happen. The water adjusts its hydrogen bonding to minimise energy and coordinate with the impurity. Witness jelly (Jello) which turns (mostly) water into something more like a solid than a liquid at room temperature. The 50-molecule average coordination count seems very plausible to me.
$endgroup$
– nigel222
Jun 4 at 8:18
$begingroup$
@Floris I don't think you mean tarragon.
$endgroup$
– David Conrad
Jun 4 at 20:20
$begingroup$
@Floris I don't think you mean tarragon.
$endgroup$
– David Conrad
Jun 4 at 20:20
2
2
$begingroup$
@DavidConrad indeed - I meant tetragonal. Never type on a phone with autocorrect when you are not wearing glasses...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 21:45
$begingroup$
@DavidConrad indeed - I meant tetragonal. Never type on a phone with autocorrect when you are not wearing glasses...
$endgroup$
– Floris
Jun 4 at 21:45
1
1
$begingroup$
@DavidRicherby
> is (kinda) the structure of a simple H2O molecule.$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jun 5 at 13:31
$begingroup$
@DavidRicherby
> is (kinda) the structure of a simple H2O molecule.$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jun 5 at 13:31
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
Another approach to answer this for youself might be to run with the idea and look at molecules with even higher molecular weight.
Like, why aren't plastics far heavier than lead? Why isn't DNA? These are truly massive molecules, yet their densities are pretty low (comparable to water).
With polymers, you should pretty quickly get the idea, that the arrangement of the atoms does matter. While the molecules themselves are very heavy, they also take up more space and hence are less dense. With petrol, the usual molecules are not that much bigger than water, so arrangement effects are not that obvious.
On top of that, intermolecular force also play a role - here water's attraction to other water molecules comes into play. Plastics on the other hand do leave holes and often are not particularly strongly attracted to each other, leading to lower densities.
answered Jun 4 at 8:15
ChieronChieron
11114
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Another approach to answer this for youself might be to run with the idea and look at molecules with even higher molecular weight.
Like, why aren't plastics far heavier than lead? Why isn't DNA? These are truly massive molecules, yet their densities are pretty low (comparable to water).
With polymers, you should pretty quickly get the idea, that the arrangement of the atoms does matter. While the molecules themselves are very heavy, they also take up more space and hence are less dense. With petrol, the usual molecules are not that much bigger than water, so arrangement effects are not that obvious.
On top of that, intermolecular force also play a role - here water's attraction to other water molecules comes into play. Plastics on the other hand do leave holes and often are not particularly strongly attracted to each other, leading to lower densities.
answered Jun 4 at 8:15
ChieronChieron
11114
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Another approach to answer this for youself might be to run with the idea and look at molecules with even higher molecular weight.
Like, why aren't plastics far heavier than lead? Why isn't DNA? These are truly massive molecules, yet their densities are pretty low (comparable to water).
With polymers, you should pretty quickly get the idea, that the arrangement of the atoms does matter. While the molecules themselves are very heavy, they also take up more space and hence are less dense. With petrol, the usual molecules are not that much bigger than water, so arrangement effects are not that obvious.
On top of that, intermolecular force also play a role - here water's attraction to other water molecules comes into play. Plastics on the other hand do leave holes and often are not particularly strongly attracted to each other, leading to lower densities.
answered Jun 4 at 8:15
ChieronChieron
11114
$endgroup$
Another approach to answer this for youself might be to run with the idea and look at molecules with even higher molecular weight.
Like, why aren't plastics far heavier than lead? Why isn't DNA? These are truly massive molecules, yet their densities are pretty low (comparable to water).
With polymers, you should pretty quickly get the idea, that the arrangement of the atoms does matter. While the molecules themselves are very heavy, they also take up more space and hence are less dense. With petrol, the usual molecules are not that much bigger than water, so arrangement effects are not that obvious.
On top of that, intermolecular force also play a role - here water's attraction to other water molecules comes into play. Plastics on the other hand do leave holes and often are not particularly strongly attracted to each other, leading to lower densities.
answered Jun 4 at 8:15
ChieronChieron
11114
answered Jun 4 at 8:15
ChieronChieron
11114
answered Jun 4 at 8:15
ChieronChieron
11114
answered Jun 4 at 8:15
ChieronChieron
11114
11114
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Picture this. You have a basket of foam balls and a basket of wooden balls. Say each basket has the same volume and each ball the same volume as well. Stuff as many foam balls as you can into the 1st basket and do the same for the other basket but with wooden balls. Each of the foam balls weigh 10 grams, and each of the wooden balls weigh 20 grams. You find that you can stuff 3 times more foam balls into the basket than wooden balls. Doing the math, you find that:
10 grams * 3 times more balls > 20 grams.
30 > 20.
This means that even though the foam balls weigh less than the wooden balls, they can be packed together more densely, resulting in a larger total mass than the wooden balls. Hope this clarified anything!
answered Jun 3 at 22:21
ToeSuccToeSucc
1
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
In your analogy, you can pack more foam balls in because they can be compressed, but that's not what's happening wth water vs petrol. Both of those liquids don't compress easily.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Jun 3 at 23:36
$begingroup$
It'd be more accurate to liken the balls to two different forms - the water are wooden cubes with slightly smaller volume than the balls representing petrol. But if I stack them in the basket, the water actively reduces the space between them (they stack nice) so I can fit more cubes in there (even if the two are actually the same volume/unit). Which is much more like what water does, since the molecules themselves can't compress.
$endgroup$
– Delioth
Jun 5 at 19:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Picture this. You have a basket of foam balls and a basket of wooden balls. Say each basket has the same volume and each ball the same volume as well. Stuff as many foam balls as you can into the 1st basket and do the same for the other basket but with wooden balls. Each of the foam balls weigh 10 grams, and each of the wooden balls weigh 20 grams. You find that you can stuff 3 times more foam balls into the basket than wooden balls. Doing the math, you find that:
10 grams * 3 times more balls > 20 grams.
30 > 20.
This means that even though the foam balls weigh less than the wooden balls, they can be packed together more densely, resulting in a larger total mass than the wooden balls. Hope this clarified anything!
answered Jun 3 at 22:21
ToeSuccToeSucc
1
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
In your analogy, you can pack more foam balls in because they can be compressed, but that's not what's happening wth water vs petrol. Both of those liquids don't compress easily.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Jun 3 at 23:36
$begingroup$
It'd be more accurate to liken the balls to two different forms - the water are wooden cubes with slightly smaller volume than the balls representing petrol. But if I stack them in the basket, the water actively reduces the space between them (they stack nice) so I can fit more cubes in there (even if the two are actually the same volume/unit). Which is much more like what water does, since the molecules themselves can't compress.
$endgroup$
– Delioth
Jun 5 at 19:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Picture this. You have a basket of foam balls and a basket of wooden balls. Say each basket has the same volume and each ball the same volume as well. Stuff as many foam balls as you can into the 1st basket and do the same for the other basket but with wooden balls. Each of the foam balls weigh 10 grams, and each of the wooden balls weigh 20 grams. You find that you can stuff 3 times more foam balls into the basket than wooden balls. Doing the math, you find that:
10 grams * 3 times more balls > 20 grams.
30 > 20.
This means that even though the foam balls weigh less than the wooden balls, they can be packed together more densely, resulting in a larger total mass than the wooden balls. Hope this clarified anything!
answered Jun 3 at 22:21
ToeSuccToeSucc
1
$endgroup$
Picture this. You have a basket of foam balls and a basket of wooden balls. Say each basket has the same volume and each ball the same volume as well. Stuff as many foam balls as you can into the 1st basket and do the same for the other basket but with wooden balls. Each of the foam balls weigh 10 grams, and each of the wooden balls weigh 20 grams. You find that you can stuff 3 times more foam balls into the basket than wooden balls. Doing the math, you find that:
10 grams * 3 times more balls > 20 grams.
30 > 20.
This means that even though the foam balls weigh less than the wooden balls, they can be packed together more densely, resulting in a larger total mass than the wooden balls. Hope this clarified anything!
answered Jun 3 at 22:21
ToeSuccToeSucc
1
answered Jun 3 at 22:21
ToeSuccToeSucc
1
answered Jun 3 at 22:21
ToeSuccToeSucc
1
answered Jun 3 at 22:21
ToeSuccToeSucc
1
1
4
$begingroup$
In your analogy, you can pack more foam balls in because they can be compressed, but that's not what's happening wth water vs petrol. Both of those liquids don't compress easily.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Jun 3 at 23:36
$begingroup$
It'd be more accurate to liken the balls to two different forms - the water are wooden cubes with slightly smaller volume than the balls representing petrol. But if I stack them in the basket, the water actively reduces the space between them (they stack nice) so I can fit more cubes in there (even if the two are actually the same volume/unit). Which is much more like what water does, since the molecules themselves can't compress.
$endgroup$
– Delioth
Jun 5 at 19:35
add a comment |
4
$begingroup$
In your analogy, you can pack more foam balls in because they can be compressed, but that's not what's happening wth water vs petrol. Both of those liquids don't compress easily.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Jun 3 at 23:36
$begingroup$
It'd be more accurate to liken the balls to two different forms - the water are wooden cubes with slightly smaller volume than the balls representing petrol. But if I stack them in the basket, the water actively reduces the space between them (they stack nice) so I can fit more cubes in there (even if the two are actually the same volume/unit). Which is much more like what water does, since the molecules themselves can't compress.
$endgroup$
– Delioth
Jun 5 at 19:35
4
4
$begingroup$
In your analogy, you can pack more foam balls in because they can be compressed, but that's not what's happening wth water vs petrol. Both of those liquids don't compress easily.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Jun 3 at 23:36
$begingroup$
In your analogy, you can pack more foam balls in because they can be compressed, but that's not what's happening wth water vs petrol. Both of those liquids don't compress easily.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Jun 3 at 23:36
$begingroup$
It'd be more accurate to liken the balls to two different forms - the water are wooden cubes with slightly smaller volume than the balls representing petrol. But if I stack them in the basket, the water actively reduces the space between them (they stack nice) so I can fit more cubes in there (even if the two are actually the same volume/unit). Which is much more like what water does, since the molecules themselves can't compress.
$endgroup$
– Delioth
Jun 5 at 19:35
$begingroup$
It'd be more accurate to liken the balls to two different forms - the water are wooden cubes with slightly smaller volume than the balls representing petrol. But if I stack them in the basket, the water actively reduces the space between them (they stack nice) so I can fit more cubes in there (even if the two are actually the same volume/unit). Which is much more like what water does, since the molecules themselves can't compress.
$endgroup$
– Delioth
Jun 5 at 19:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Water is denser than petrol, so there essentially more molecules of water in a given volume.
For example in a given volume, there may be 15,000 molecules of petrol but 20,000 molecules of water.
edited Jun 5 at 20:30
Martin Bonner
1034
answered Jun 5 at 0:26
Shahmeer NaqviShahmeer Naqvi
1
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're supposed to be explaining why water is denser than petrol but, instead, you pre-suppose that water is denser than petrol and conclude that water molecules must be more densely packed. This is the wrong direction. Also, typical molecules in petrol are much larger and heavier than water molecules, so an extra 30% of water molecules wouldn't be nearly enough to compensate.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
Jun 5 at 15:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Water is denser than petrol, so there essentially more molecules of water in a given volume.
For example in a given volume, there may be 15,000 molecules of petrol but 20,000 molecules of water.
edited Jun 5 at 20:30
Martin Bonner
1034
answered Jun 5 at 0:26
Shahmeer NaqviShahmeer Naqvi
1
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're supposed to be explaining why water is denser than petrol but, instead, you pre-suppose that water is denser than petrol and conclude that water molecules must be more densely packed. This is the wrong direction. Also, typical molecules in petrol are much larger and heavier than water molecules, so an extra 30% of water molecules wouldn't be nearly enough to compensate.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
Jun 5 at 15:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Water is denser than petrol, so there essentially more molecules of water in a given volume.
For example in a given volume, there may be 15,000 molecules of petrol but 20,000 molecules of water.
edited Jun 5 at 20:30
Martin Bonner
1034
answered Jun 5 at 0:26
Shahmeer NaqviShahmeer Naqvi
1
$endgroup$
Water is denser than petrol, so there essentially more molecules of water in a given volume.
For example in a given volume, there may be 15,000 molecules of petrol but 20,000 molecules of water.
edited Jun 5 at 20:30
Martin Bonner
1034
answered Jun 5 at 0:26
Shahmeer NaqviShahmeer Naqvi
1
edited Jun 5 at 20:30
Martin Bonner
1034
edited Jun 5 at 20:30
Martin Bonner
1034
edited Jun 5 at 20:30
Martin Bonner
1034
1034
answered Jun 5 at 0:26
Shahmeer NaqviShahmeer Naqvi
1
answered Jun 5 at 0:26
Shahmeer NaqviShahmeer Naqvi
1
answered Jun 5 at 0:26
Shahmeer NaqviShahmeer Naqvi
1
1
$begingroup$
You're supposed to be explaining why water is denser than petrol but, instead, you pre-suppose that water is denser than petrol and conclude that water molecules must be more densely packed. This is the wrong direction. Also, typical molecules in petrol are much larger and heavier than water molecules, so an extra 30% of water molecules wouldn't be nearly enough to compensate.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
Jun 5 at 15:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You're supposed to be explaining why water is denser than petrol but, instead, you pre-suppose that water is denser than petrol and conclude that water molecules must be more densely packed. This is the wrong direction. Also, typical molecules in petrol are much larger and heavier than water molecules, so an extra 30% of water molecules wouldn't be nearly enough to compensate.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
Jun 5 at 15:24
$begingroup$
You're supposed to be explaining why water is denser than petrol but, instead, you pre-suppose that water is denser than petrol and conclude that water molecules must be more densely packed. This is the wrong direction. Also, typical molecules in petrol are much larger and heavier than water molecules, so an extra 30% of water molecules wouldn't be nearly enough to compensate.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
Jun 5 at 15:24
$begingroup$
You're supposed to be explaining why water is denser than petrol but, instead, you pre-suppose that water is denser than petrol and conclude that water molecules must be more densely packed. This is the wrong direction. Also, typical molecules in petrol are much larger and heavier than water molecules, so an extra 30% of water molecules wouldn't be nearly enough to compensate.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
Jun 5 at 15:24
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f483992%2fhow-is-water-heavier-than-petrol-even-though-its-molecular-weight-is-less-than%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
20
$begingroup$
What do you mean "weighs more"? A kilo of water obviously weighs the same as a kilo of petrol. A molecule weighs less. I suspect you mean a liter of water weighs more. But "weight per volume" or density is a different physical property than weight. Weight by itself is only well-defined for concrete objects. I'm being hyper-precise here, but that is because understanding this starts by understanding the definitions.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
Jun 3 at 15:34
3
$begingroup$
@MSalters BTW, the terminology for what you're getting at is that weight is an extensive property, while density is an intensive property. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_and_extensive_properties
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
Jun 3 at 16:19
2
$begingroup$
Note - water is not denser than all petroleum products. Some of the higher molar mass petroleum species are actually more dense than water.
$endgroup$
– David White
Jun 4 at 0:40
2
$begingroup$
Get a liter of macaroni and a liter of orzo and a liter of flour. Each individual macaroni weighs more than each individual orzo, which weighs massively more than each particle of flour, but the liter of macaroni weighs less than the orzo, and the orzo weighs less than the flour. How is that possible? If you can explain to me how that is possible, then you can probably answer your own question by similar logic.
$endgroup$
– Eric Lippert
Jun 4 at 22:33
4
$begingroup$
One liter of water is also heavier than one liter of ice. How is it possible? :)
$endgroup$
– JonathanReez
Jun 5 at 1:01