- #1
fawk3s
- 342
- 1
Recently I started thinking about it, because apparently you get different results. At first, I thought you would weigh less on a carpet (according to the scale), because the carpet supports some of your and the scale's weigh. But thinking deeper into it, I actually figured it shouldn't make a difference, since the Earth's gravitational force is same in both cases and it doesn't really matter if the scale is supported entirely by the solid surface or the solid surface + the carpet, because they have to balance the same force anyway in order for the scale to remain still/not move.
So gaining interest in the subject, I started googling it, and to my surprise I found statements to both that "the scale shows you weigh more on a carpet" and "the scale shows you weigh less on a carpet than on a solid floor."
I also came across this interesting explanation, yet it only explains one version: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2462-people-weigh-less-on-a-hard-surface.html
So I am a tad confused here. Does the result depend on the scale itself and the way it's designed/manufactured? (Because I can think of a couple of minor details which could give both results in scales.) Or is there a better explanation out there which supports one statement and crushes the other?
Thanks in advance
So gaining interest in the subject, I started googling it, and to my surprise I found statements to both that "the scale shows you weigh more on a carpet" and "the scale shows you weigh less on a carpet than on a solid floor."
I also came across this interesting explanation, yet it only explains one version: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2462-people-weigh-less-on-a-hard-surface.html
So I am a tad confused here. Does the result depend on the scale itself and the way it's designed/manufactured? (Because I can think of a couple of minor details which could give both results in scales.) Or is there a better explanation out there which supports one statement and crushes the other?
Thanks in advance