Who knows

[Highway Man]

I'm also wondering whether the stability of the structure is affected if a lot of vessels are stationary on the aqueduct?

Nope, 100% not.

 

[noseall]

What do you think?

Same as the displacement thing, unless it's windy?
Dunno really.

 

[MNW67]

I'm also wondering whether the stability of the structure is affected if a lot of vessels are stationary on the aqueduct?

What do you think of the answers so far on the initial question. I think we've done a decent job of working out the important theoretical bits. I would be interested to know if your physics graduate friend gave similar reasoning.

 

[pete01]

No surprise lol but I don't get it...

 

[Highway Man]

What do you think of the answers so far on the initial question. I think we've done a decent job of working out the important theoretical bits. I would be interested to know if your physics graduate friend gave similar reasoning.

I don't care less what any physisist says, they are wrong and I am right regardless of their workings and silly number symbols.

 

[JohnD]

No changes are allowed - First answer is the final answer

Any changes are allowed in the light of increasing knowledge and understanding.

(Bikerboy does not get to invent rules. Even if he claims he read them in a press release)

 

[motorbiking]

Same as the displacement thing, unless it's windy?
Dunno really.

If they were already in the canal, their weight is already loaded across the whole of the water system. By bunching together over one bit of a bridge, the overall load on the bridge isn't changed. If you started dropping new barges in, the water level would rise and the additional load would be based on the increase height of the water x the length x width of the bridge "tank".

 

[Highway Man]

No surprise lol but I don't get it...

View attachment 385508

Once again, I said all of this in my opening answers. It was just before I played revalie to my neighbours on my bugle at 6am.

 

[MNW67]

I don't care less what any physisist says, they are wrong and I am right regardless of their workings and silly number symbols.

Some of the symbols are really silly.

 

[Highway Man]

Some of the symbols are really silly.

They are actually wrong in parts too I noticed.

 

[pete01]

Once again, I said all of this in my opening answers. It was just before I played revalie to my neighbours on my bugle at 6am.

I'll never understand it in a million years, so the water moves? So what the boat still has a weight?

 

[motorbiking]

Any changes are allowed in the light of increasing knowledge and understanding.

(Bikerboy does not get to invent rules. Even if he claims he read them in a press release)

JohnD doesn't know the meaning of a laughing face.

No surprise lol but I don't get it...

View attachment 385508

But the barge is moving and that makes a difference.

 

[Highway Man]

I'll never understand it in a million years, so the water moves? So what the boat still has a weight?

I know. I was the same as you with it at first. I couldn't get my head around it. But as I got further into the course I really got the hang of it all and realised at that point the penny dropped, I was a genius for understandingi it and it all made perfect sense.

 

[MNW67]

I'll never understand it in a million years, so the water moves? So what the boat still has a weight?

The argument is that exactly the same weight of water as the weight of the boat has been removed from the aqueduct, and pushed into the canals at either end of the aqueduct. So, say the boat weighs exactly 100 tonnes. You will end up with exactly 100 tonnes less water in the aqueduct. But it doesn't all happen immediately.

 

[Highway Man]

I would like this thread to end now and for everyone to recognise my superior knowledge on this subject and to also thank me for my great answers and my examples. Mods please close the thread now.