Bernoulli does in fact contradict continuity PROVED

[StrongG]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I was trying to look at the relationship between Bernoulli's Eq and the Continuity Eq that I came across this anomaly. This is a very important concept and I need help with this specific case attached.

 

[theonlytycrane]

explain?

Edit: Can't read the scratch.

 

[StrongG]

It is in the image attached to the post.

 

[The8]

@StrongG @theonlytycrane hey guys, I was looking over some bernoullis stuff today and I think I have also noticed that contradiction and it is extremely frustrating.... Take a look at this problem, I posted just today at http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/can-someone-please-explain-this-pressure-question.1211959/ Got the right answer but the more I looked at it, just confused me even more, if you guys can understand it please let me know!

 

[The8]

Continuity only works in a pipe that is closed, once you have an open hole for instance it is useless and only bernoullis works.... continuity is a very specific property and only works in certain cases, bernoullis is more universal.

 

[SpaceBuff12]

nvm

 

[StrongG]

Nope! According to the Eq Rho*g*h(1) is on the left side with a positive value, and Rho*g*h(2) on the right side with a positive value. And since h1 > h2 according to my case, Rho*g*h will end up being positive on the left side.

 

[StrongG]

nvm

Nope! According to the Eq Rho*g*h(1) is on the left side with a positive value, and Rho*g*h(2) on the right side with a positive value. And since h1 > h2 according to my case, Rho*g*h will end up being positive on the left side.

 

[wizzed101]

Your assumption is wrong. P2> P1

 

[StrongG]

Your assumption is wrong. P2> P1

I thought P is the external pressure on the fluid rather than being internally caused by the system itself.

 

[wizzed101]

The pressure measured at point A is smaller than the pressure measured at point B.

 

[StrongG]

The pressure measured at point A is smaller than the pressure measured at point B.

Thanks for the correction! Now I get it