What would you do if you were trapped inside a bubble?

[adoidos15]

You are in your backyard. You have no sharp objects inside. You are floating up and away, but slowly, at a velocity of 0.5m/s. At the start of your escape, the bubble has 100% oxygen and is 5.5-6ft, depending on your height really (as tall as you are). The mass of the bubble skin is 1 pound, while the mass inside is 80 pounds of pressure (yes, after all, 12 hours of air is a lot inside 6 feet< ...read below) If your cell phone in there, it would take minutes for help to arrive. Assume that air supply lasts for 12 hours. So what would you do then?


Simple version: You are in your backyard. You have no sharp objects inside. You are floating up and away, but slowly. If your cell phone in there, it would take minutes for help to arrive. Assume that air supply lasts for 12 hours. So what would you do then?

[papa nurgle's pizza]

What is this bubble made of?

[PocketYoda]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

Here's how I would escape:
I always carry a coat around that has a zipper.
I would lay down, and bend the bubble with my hands just enough so it is in position to be zipped
Once a bit of the bubble is facing a bit inwards (like how you have your 2 hands on a piece of paper, and drag your hands towards each other) I would then hold that position with my knees
Then I would zip the coat up, and a bit of the bubble will get inbetween the zipper. This irregular shape should then cause the bubble to pop under tons of pressure

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย DanteYoda:

Why the hell am i trapped in a bubble?

You can make up your own story about how you got stuck then

I know thats what i'd be thinking as i floated away i'd then enjoy the ride until i died.

[adoidos15]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Malice, Hierarch of Anarchy:

What is this bubble made of?

Oxygen

[papa nurgle's pizza]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Malice, Hierarch of Anarchy:

What is this bubble made of?

Oxygen

What... How...
How can the bubble's exterior be composed of oxygen?

[adoidos15]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Malice, Hierarch of Anarchy:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

Oxygen

What... How...
How can the bubble's exterior be composed of oxygen?

Oh you're talking about that... ummm....
I don't know to be honest. I'll just stick with the usual substance that one can find on Google

[Vince ✟]

Use cell phone to control drone, take selfie (from outside the bubble, duh), post to instardgram and hope for cash to rain down, pushing my bubble down to the ground, popping it on a stick.

[papa nurgle's pizza]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Malice, Hierarch of Anarchy:

What... How...
How can the bubble's exterior be composed of oxygen?

Oh you're talking about that... ummm....
I don't know to be honest. I'll just stick with the usual substance that one can find on Google

w0t

[Quint the Alligator Snapper]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Malice, Hierarch of Anarchy:

Many people find analyzing these questions to be fun, myself one of them.

The problem is that he wants it to be like 5 paragraphs of information. A question like this is supposed to be simple. It's just a general question, with a general answer. Sometimes just pretend that if this thing were happene that will most likely not happen, answer it with a simple answer. Not demanding boatloads of information. What is the mass? What is your mass? What color is the atmosphere? What planet am I on? Can I have food? How much is 3 feet? What's the pressure?

It's the fact that do you really need all these questions to be answered? It's just a simple what if question, not a research question or essay

I think the problem is that you're trying to force people to think of the question in a certain way, while people are just wanting to figure out more of the parameters of the problem in order to properly answer the question. Like, a normal soap bubble is something that'd pop if you hit it with something harder than a gentle touch, so then it actually matters for people to figure out how this bubble thing works. (Perhaps you should instead have specified a balloon?)

I mean I get the sense that at some point you were like "okay, c'mon, stop trying to cheese this, and answer it the way it's meant to be answered!" except it wasn't even clear how it's meant to be answered. Like, the zipper thing seems to be a rather...odd answer, especially considering you have to say "I'd always carry a thing with a zipper around with me". But if I can rip the bubble with a zipper, then why can't I just pull the bubble apart with my bare hands, for example?

And both of those answers would depend in turn on the material the bubble is made of, and how flexible it is, and how slippery it is, and how thick it is, and so on and so forth.

And since we're talking the details of a realistic approach here, you need to specify if you are postulating that the bubble has certain properties that are non-negotiable and (magically?) do not depend on realistic physics/chemistry, because otherwise people are going to use real-life physics and chemistry to solve the problem.

And it's not that people aren't creative -- they'll just use things they're familiar with, run with those as appropriate assumptions, and make a solution out of that.

TL;DR the problem statement was too open-ended to force a certain method of resolution.

[Corbin Bleu]

Enjoy it while it lasts


I can get away from all the morons in life it would stop me from accidentally reading a post about how some feminist got steam banned in russia or some ♥♥♥♥


and then when i'm ready to get out i pull out my pocket knife

and pop it...


Boom back to reality where i can go back to being a depressed cuck

[adoidos15]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Malice, Hierarch of Anarchy:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

Oh you're talking about that... ummm....
I don't know to be honest. I'll just stick with the usual substance that one can find on Google

w0t

Never thought about the outer layer of the bubble. I guess maybe soap?

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Quint, Queen of the Giant Rabbit:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

The problem is that he wants it to be like 5 paragraphs of information. A question like this is supposed to be simple. It's just a general question, with a general answer. Sometimes just pretend that if this thing were happene that will most likely not happen, answer it with a simple answer. Not demanding boatloads of information. What is the mass? What is your mass? What color is the atmosphere? What planet am I on? Can I have food? How much is 3 feet? What's the pressure?

It's the fact that do you really need all these questions to be answered? It's just a simple what if question, not a research question or essay

I think the problem is that you're trying to force people to think of the question in a certain way, while people are just wanting to figure out more of the parameters of the problem in order to properly answer the question. Like, a normal soap bubble is something that'd pop if you hit it with something harder than a gentle touch, so then it actually matters for people to figure out how this bubble thing works. (Perhaps you should instead have specified a balloon?)

I mean I get the sense that at some point you were like "okay, c'mon, stop trying to cheese this, and answer it the way it's meant to be answered!" except it wasn't even clear how it's meant to be answered. Like, the zipper thing seems to be a rather...odd answer, especially considering you have to say "I'd always carry a thing with a zipper around with me". But if I can rip the bubble with a zipper, then why can't I just pull the bubble apart with my bare hands, for example?

And both of those answers would depend in turn on the material the bubble is made of, and how flexible it is, and how slippery it is, and how thick it is, and so on and so forth.

And since we're talking the details of a realistic approach here, you need to specify if you are postulating that the bubble has certain properties that are non-negotiable and (magically?) do not depend on realistic physics/chemistry, because otherwise people are going to use real-life physics and chemistry to solve the problem.

And it's not that people aren't creative -- they'll just use things they're familiar with, run with those as appropriate assumptions, and make a solution out of that.

TL;DR the problem statement was too open-ended to force a certain method of resolution.

It's the fact that people take it a bit too seriously. I mean a few questions here and there is fine. But like boatloads is not fun really. And makes the whole scenario too limited. Most people dont associate getting trapped in a balloon, they associate getting trapped inside a bubble. In games, TV shows, movies, there have been more people trapped in bubbles vs balloons, and people would probably be more confused then if I said balloon. The scenario is like a realistic fiction. This will probably never happen to a person, but using some thinking skills, what can you do if this were to happen in real life?

[adoidos15]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Pumpkin Succubus:

The only bubbles I like are the ones in bubble bobble

????

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Toast:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

Actually, it's all condensed down to 6ft < in diameter, but with a ton of pressure

Then I'm dead right off the bat because the air pressure is too high inside the bubble.

Not really. Those submarines deep underwater have TONS of pressure on them. Are the people inside them dead?

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

wow , I've played that game so much back when I was a kid ...

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Pumpkin Succubus:

The only bubbles I like are the ones in bubble bobble

[papa nurgle's pizza]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Pumpkin Succubus:

The only bubbles I like are the ones in bubble bobble

????

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Toast:

Then I'm dead right off the bat because the air pressure is too high inside the bubble.

Not really. Those submarines deep underwater have TONS of pressure on them. Are the people inside them dead?

ON them, not IN them.

[adoidos15]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Malice, Hierarch of Anarchy:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

????



Not really. Those submarines deep underwater have TONS of pressure on them. Are the people inside them dead?

ON them, not IN them.

Well that just proves how strong the bubble is. Simple punching and pounding won't break it

[papa nurgle's pizza]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย adoidos15:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Malice, Hierarch of Anarchy:

ON them, not IN them.

Well that just proves how strong the bubble is. Simple punching and pounding won't break it

That is a moot point, as you will be dead from the air pressure.