437
Sometimes you have to think outside of the box to save money
(media.piefed.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2026
437 points (98.2% liked)
People Twitter
9495 readers
415 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Based on 66"x12" x13", you'd need 380lbs to keep that thing under water.
So like 3 textbooks?
If it's filled with stuff then it's not filled with air. So it would be less buoyant. But yeah, probably harder to sink than people would guess
Bouyancy is based on how much water is displaced, not amount of air inside the container. 66x12x13=10,296 cubic inches. Fresh water density is about 0.0361 lb/in^3 so that case has to displace at least 372 lb to sink.
Metric would be better for this but we're talking about a stinger missile here.
I read your comment, then went to make a joke response to someone else about placing a vacuum chamber inside the case to reduce its buoyancy.
This set off a several minute long internet hunt where I learned about Archimedes Principle, which you clearly describe. It turns out the only vacuum here is the one in my head.
To wit: If placed inside the case, my empty head would reduce the buoyancy, but only by its own weight.
A Pyrrhic victory.
My boy Archie figured some stuff out a long time ago! Unfortunately he didn't get the story straight about phlogiston
@bisby@lemmy.world Absolutely, and the stuff you've filled it with should amount to 380 lbs...
What does the case weigh empty?