DYNOMIGHT ABOUT RSS SUBSTACK

Fahren-height

Fahren-height

Mar 2024

The Internet is well into middle-age, and yet doesn’t seem to have answered humanity’s most pressing question: If you pour boiling hot water from various heights, how much does it cool in flight?

First attempt

I figure there are two key variables: The height you pour from, and how fast you pour. To control for both of these, I built this little apparatus:

experimental apparatus

To get different heights, I cut off the top off a 2-liter bottle and drilled two holes in it. I then shoved the end of a clamp through the holes and clamped the clamp to four positions on a plank of wood.

To get different pour speeds, I took three bottle caps, and drilled different-sized holes in them.

Finally, for each height/cap-width combination, I poured some boiling water into the funnel and let it fall into a silicone ice-cube tray. I measured the peak temperature with a digital thermometer, being careful to allow the scalding-hot water to splatter onto my unprotected hand.

First results

I took five measurements in each setting. Here it is with a bit of horizontal jitter when needed to avoid overlap.

This data is quite noisy. My guess is that’s because there’s some surface tension that helps water cling to the bottom of the cap. This makes the stream of water jiggle around chaotically. (This looked the most random at higher heights, though that doesn’t appear to show up in the measured temperatures.)

Here’s a quadratic fit for each of the three cap sizes:

While the offsets vary, the shapes of these curves are pretty similar. So we can summarize these experiments like this:

  • Pouring from even a very low height cools water by 3 to 13 ºC, depending on the pour speed.
  • Pouring from 25 cm (10 in) gives an additional 1-2 ºC.
  • Pouring from 60 cm (24 in) gives an additional 5 ºC.

Also: If you conscript the people you live with into helping you with this experiment, you may find that proposing to repeat it at 100 cm results in shrieks of dismay (“please don’t pour another 10 liters of boiling water onto our counter” etc.) which are not conducive for Important Science.

Second Attempt

But how does this correspond to the real world? I decided to do a second experiment pouring water out of a kettle by hand. This time I used the clamp to hold the thermometer:

experimental apparatus

I tried to pour at different speeds, but it was hard to be consistent. So I just measured how long it took to fill the (250 ml) cup. Here’s the data:

And here’s a linear fit for each of the three heights:

(I don’t know why there’s no confidence interval for the 8 cm data.)

Finally, I fit a regression. The final fit was

    (temp) = 98.0 - 0.21 × (height) - 0.37 × (time),

where (temp) is in ºC, (height) is in cm, and (time) is the number of seconds needed to pour 1 cup (250 ml).

For example, say you pour a liter of boiling water from a height of 10 cm at a rate where it takes you 20 seconds to pour the full liter. That’s equivalent to 5 seconds per 250 ml, so this formula predicts the final temperature will be around

    98.0 - 0.21 × 10 - 0.37 × 5 ≈ 94 ºC.

Conclusion

Pouring from higher heights can make water significantly cooler. But to get much cooling from extra height, you need quite a lot of height—so much that you’d have to be very coordinated (or crazy). So for most people, your best bet is probably to pour slowly, to pour into a thick mug so the thermal mass can neutralize more of the heat, or (horror) to wait.

Notes

  • It turns out that 1 plastic ♲ does not melt when exposed to boiling water, though it does become very soft.

  • To cool the funnel between measurements, I poured some room temperature liquid through it. To the horror of the Dynomight Biologist, the closest liquid on hand happened to be a pot of expensive insect-bitten tea that I’d brewed a day earlier and not consumed. It’s hard to be sure what the insects would think about this.

  • Thank you for reading my middle-school science fair project.

new dynomight every thursday
except when not

(or try substack or rss) ×
OK, I can partly explain the LLM chess weirdness now

("make LLMs play better with one weird trick")

We recently talked about a mystery: All large language models (LLMs) are terrible at chess. All, that is, except for gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct, which for some reason can play at an advanced amateur level. This is despite the fact that this model...

Something weird is happening with LLMs and chess

are they good or bad?

A year ago, there was a lot of talk about large language models (LLMs) playing chess. Word was that if you trained a big enough model on enough text, then you could send it a partially played game, ask it...

The real data wall is billions of years of evolution

Careful with those human analogies

Say you have a time machine. You can only use it once, to send a single idea back to 2005. If you wanted to speed up the development of AI, what would you send back? Many people suggest attention or...

Fancy math doesn't make simple math stop being true

on butts and instrumental variables

What are you supposed to do when someone disagrees with you using a bunch of math you can’t understand? I’ve been thinking about that recently because of the NordICC colonoscopy trial. It took 85k Europeans aged 55-64, invited a third...

Are language models good at making predictions?

politics more than science

To get a crude answer to this question, we took 5000 questions from Manifold markets that were resolved after GPT-4’s current knowledge cutoff of Jan 1, 2022. We gave the text of each of them to GPT-4, along with these...

Grug on diet soda and autism

why bad and why so much promote

grug try to not yell about bads in science news too much because why make same yells over and over? and grug have no new learns, just feel people maybe sometimes not use old learns and grug family often plead...

My stupid noise journey

A tale of bad choices

Interested in how to be a big dumb idiot and over-complicate things and waste time and money and endure tons of stress and some real physical pain all by thinking that you’re cleverer than you actually are? (No?) Looking back,...

The second system problem

Building a safe AI ≠ preventing all unsafe AI

In The Vulnerable World Hypothesis, Nick Bostrom imagines we found a technological "black ball"—say a way to make a nuclear weapon with just some glass, some metal, and a battery. He concludes that society in our current "semi-archic default condition"—could...

I still think it's very unlikely we're observing alien aircraft

They'd have to be messing with us.

Some suggest there might be alien aircraft on Earth now. The argument goes something like this: A priori, there’s no reason there shouldn’t be alien aircraft. Earth is 4.54 billion years old, but the universe is 13.7 billion years old,...

Why didn't we get GPT-2 in 2005?

We probably could have

The ancient Romans were never great at building ships and never tried to explore the Atlantic. The basic reason seems to be—why bother? The open ocean has no resources and is a vast plane of death. But imagine that in...

First-principles on AI scaling

How likely are we to hit a barrier?

It's hard not to feel blinkered by recent AI progress. Every week there seems to be an AMAZING NEW SYSTEM with UNPRECEDENTED CAPABILITIES. It's impossible not to wonder what the future holds. Until recently, I thought progress was so dizzying...

Your friend the language model

The world is running out of khakis

I originally wrote this as part of a much longer post on LLM scaling laws and possible barriers/trajectories for progress. The idea was to provide the minimal background necessary to understand all that stuff. But in retrospect, many people probably...

Winner take all science

Is it helpful for things to work this way?

By the early 1950s, it was known thanks to people like Miescher, Levene, and Chargaff that genes were carried by long polymers in the cell nucleus. It was also known that those polymers had a sugar-phosphate backbone and were composed...