It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Researchers manage to break a piece of uncooked spaghetti in half

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: starlitestarbrite

Well, on a serious note, this is because the multiple strands of spaghetti absorb the shock of the adjacent strands breaking.

A single piece is a different story.

On a related note; I wonder how much money they spent figuring this S# out??? I mean, if you think about it these tests could have involved some pretty sophisticated equipment. The spaghetti must have been held perfectly straight (by some device) so as not to introduce other forces on it. The humidity of the spaghetti had to have been both known and tightly controlled. And each piece of spaghetti would have needed to be perfectly uniform compared to the next one and the one before it.




posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 07:36 AM
link   
Who breaks spaghetti?
RELEASE THE DOG!




posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 07:39 AM
link   
a reply to: DerBeobachter

Now that's spaghetti art at its finest.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: blackcrowe

I can't find it in writing anywhere, it was told to me by a racing buddy.
You can read this though. It will give you new respect for driveshafts! LOL

It has to do with shear strength and torsional loads as the shaft normally spins one way

pdfs.semanticscholar.org...



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: DerBeobachter

WOW!!

That is cool as heck!! I love, love, LOVE it!!

I'd love to have that framed and on the wall in the kitchen! Where can I buy it??? (I'm serious too!)






posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 08:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: starlitestarbrite
a reply to: blackcrowe


For one thing you aren't supposed to break spaghetti in half any Italian knows that...
but, I break spaghetti in half all the time for my grand kids and NEVER had it shatter into pieces it breaks right in half every time. I haven't a clue what the heck they are talking about but its okay I am in my own little world and I like it here.
Lemme guess, you're not breaking one strand at a time, right? You want to make a meal so you break a bunch at the same time, correct?

Here's my take on the research. They take a single strand, and grab each end, and start moving the ends together. The strand forms an arc and the arc distributes the tension load on the stretched side of the strand all the way from one grabbed place to the other grabbed place, so it can break anywhere along the arc. There's nothing in particular making it break in the center when they do it this way, and once the break happens it can break in multiple places. So yes that's true, try it.

But the simple home cooking fix to that is, if distributing the load along the entire strand can make it break anywhere, then don't do that, if you want to break it in half, change the method to concentrate the load right in the middle. The way I do that is take the package, typically 12 or 16 ounces, grab one end of the package with each hand, and then press the middle of the package against the edge of the countertop, right where I want it to break, in the middle, and I'd say that's at least 99.99% effective and 10,000 times easier for me to do than the method the scientists use. Why is it only 99.99% effective instead of 100%?



originally posted by: RMFX1
I didn't read the article but I assume that they are talking about microscopic pieces shattering off at the break. Which obviously would happen.
No that's not what the researchers are talking about, but that's the 0.01% issue with the home kitchen method I described. I get some tiny fragments and dust that I doubt has ever exceeded 0.1% of the mass of the package, it's probably far less than that, like 0.01%. Occasionally I'll get a third fragment of some length like 2-3 cm (an inch) instead of 2 pieces, but I could probably prevent that by not breaking the entire package at once, and just doing say, half the package at a time, which will concentrate the load in the center better.

So their research is completely useless for home cooking (since who can possibly do what they did at home, and why would they need to when a simpler method works fine?), but it may have materials science implications in certain applications.

edit on 2018818 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: blackcrowe

researchers at MIT have found that, yes, it is possible to break a piece of uncooked spaghetti into just two pieces

?!?!?! I've been able to break spaghetti in 2 pieces for quite some time - but then again, I can do it just like these 'really smaht' researchers did, and twist it anyways (you also put your hands close together where you want to break it), because THAT IS HOW YOU DO IT. It's not 100%, but it can be done, and has been done. Really... a robot?!

I wonder how many Italian mothers this could be shown- then watch them double over laughing...

Geezus. If I knew this sort of utmost sciency-ness was going on, I'd have shown up for that sweet, sweet grant cash. *facepalm*



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 08:55 AM
link   
This was the end result of a $15m Research Grant funded by the US taxpayer!

"And now for our next magical trick, we will demonstrate that ice is really just frozen water!"



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Why can't you just cut the piece of uncooked spaghetti in half with a sharp knife? No strain that would shatter more than the cut point. No build up of kinetic energy that releases sporadically. Just simple precise energy directed at a single, small focal point.




posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Great, now split it length wise!

Joking aside, after reading it, it sounds intuitive to come to this conclusion but we´re always smarter after the fact..

Italians gonna be like cosa stai facendo con la pasta ??



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: blackcrowe




posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: blackcrowe

“Why you breaka my spaghetti?!”

Shoulda been OP title.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: DerBeobachter

I'd love to have that framed and on the wall in the kitchen! Where can I buy it??? (I'm serious too!)


Right click, save image as, print.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: DerBeobachter

That's a great picture.

I love the vibrant colours.




posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:09 PM
link   
I wonder how much funding they spent on this research. The funding must have come from the spaghetti manufacturers association of America, not many foreign associations would donate to that.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: lakenheath24

That was interesting.

Although i'm not qualified to read it.

I'm not sure the shaft is twisted in your link. I think this is the bit that explains it

Finally it is found that s         45/90/45/0/90/0 laminate fulfilled all


I think that's the way the laminates lay over each other. A bit like how plywood is sheets placed over each other with 90 degree grain.

I maybe wrong and your friend correct.

Perhaps someone who reads links and who understands it can enlighten us.




posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:23 PM
link   
so instead of spaghetti we use an I-beam, or other strands to build things from buildings to car, boats, space ships you name it...



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

The maths that explains what happens will hopefully be added to other maths which might create new, or improve existing products in the future.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: wylekat




Geezus. If I knew this sort of utmost sciency-ness was going on, I'd have shown up for that sweet, sweet grant cash. *facepalm*





posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Flyingclaydisk said



This was the end result of a $15m Research Grant funded by the US taxpayer! "And now for our next magical trick, we will demonstrate that ice is really just frozen water!"


$15m isn't much really. Cheaper than a Eurofighter Typhoon.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join