Skip to content

The Length That Divides Gravity from Surface Tension Is Nobody's Size ── Water Gives 2.7273 mm ── Mercury Has 6.6621 Times the Surface Tension and Only 0.7009 Times the Capillary Length ── [Paper 309]

Aug 2026 · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

Abstract

A liquid carries one length, l_c=sqrt(gamma/rho g). This paper asks whose size that length is──the answer is nobody’s. No new mathematical theorem and no new law is claimed. Scope of this paper (scope note): No new mathematical theorem and no new law is claimed──the Laplace pressure, Jurin’s law, the Bond number and the Rayleigh--Plateau instability are all standard. We do not build fluid mechanics──all we use is one length and one square root. We do not treat the contact angle──we compute with costheta=1 (complete wetting). Real contact angles, hysteresis and roughness are not treated. We do not treat dynamics──we say whether a column breaks, never how fast. We do not build plant physiology──whether the cohesion--tension theory is right is out of scope. We give only the number showing capillarity does not suffice. We do not build lung physiology──neither surfactant composition nor real alveolar shape is treated. Only the Laplace estimate. We claim no accuracy for representative values──gamma=0.0728 N/m and rho=998 kg/m^3 are values for showing orders and move with temperature. Relation to earlier papers: Paper 258 showed that 4pi appears only when the source is a point, using capillaries as its example of a cylindrical source──this paper stays in the same capillary setting but asks about a length rather than a solid angle. 258 treats potential, this paper treats an interface, and they share not one quantity. Paper 291 showed one sea holding three lengths──the l_c here is not a fourth length but a length that is the boundary between two forces. Paper 306 showed that the number of base units is a promise──l_c is not a promise: it comes out of two material quantities. Paper 140 showed that symmetry fixes ratios and dynamics fixes the scale──l_c is on the scale side. What is added is computing l_c for five liquids, showing that surface tension and capillary length reverse their order for mercury, checking that the Bond number equals (L/l_c)^2, counting that capillarity reaches only 0.74 m against a tree’s height, and pointing out that the break-up threshold 2pi R does not contain gamma. First, water gives 2.7273 mm. Mercury 1.9116 mm, ethanol 1.6977 mm, liquid helium 0.2625 mm (Section 2). Second, this is the core of the paper. Mercury has 6.6621 times the surface tension of water and a capillary length only 0.7009 times as long──its density is 13.5611 times greater, and only the square root of the ratio survives (Section 2). Third, the length is a boundary. The Bond number Bo=(L/l_c)^2 is exactly 1 there (Section 3). Fourth, capillarity is not what raises sap. In a 20 mum vessel it lifts water only 0.74 m (Section 4). Fifth, in an alveolus it is gamma that must move. Bare water gives 1456 Pa, surfactant 500 Pa (Section 5). Sixth, the separator is whether gamma enters the formula. The break-up threshold 2pi R does not contain it (Section 6). A liquid carries one length, l_c=sqrt(gamma/rho g), and for water it is 2.7273 mm──mercury 1.9116 mm, glycerol 2.2643 mm, ethanol 1.6977 mm, liquid helium 0.2625 mm. Mercury has 6.6621 times the surface tension of water and a capillary length only 0.7009 times as long──because its density is 13.5611 times greater, and l_c takes only the square root of the ratio. A factor of 4950 in gamma becomes a factor of 10.4 in l_c. The length is a boundary──the Bond number Bo=(L/l_c)^2 is exactly 1 at L=l_c; below it surface tension wins, above it gravity does. So l_c is nobody’s size──it is whom an object’s size is compared with. Capillarity is not what raises sap──in a 20 mum vessel it lifts 0.74 m, and 100 m would need a 0.1488 mum tube, 134 times narrower than any real one. In an alveolus what acts is not R but gamma──bare water gives 1456 Pa, surfactant 500 Pa. What removes the instability is not the value but the fact that gamma is not a constant. One thing separates them──whether gamma enters the formula. The break-up threshold 2pi R does not contain it and is pure geometry. Surface tension does not decide whether a column breaks, only how fast. *Revision Record Second edition (2026-08-30): The subject of this paper has been replaced. The first edition, titled “Living Tissue Where 4pi Appears, and Where It Does Not,” treated the solid angles of point, line and sheet sources and the diffusive reach around a capillary. That content duplicated Paper 258, “4pi Appears Only When the Source Is a Point”── even the numbers (24.1144 muV, 111.0508 muV, 316.78 mum, 44.80 mum) agreed, and Paper 258 has priority. The second edition stays in the same capillary setting but moves to a quantity 258 did not treat: the interfacial length l_c. All statements about solid angle have been removed from this paper; Paper 258 is the reference for them. On the making of this work: The ideas and content of this work stem from the author's own considerations. Assistance from an AI (a large language model) was used for structuring, English translation, and checking the algebra. Any remaining errors or misinterpretations are solely the author's. Feedback and corrections are sincerely appreciated. ----- 液体には l_c=sqrt(gamma/rho g) という長さが一つある。本稿が問うのは、この長さは何の寸法かである──答は、どの物体の寸法でもないである。新しい数学定理も新しい法則も主張しない。 本稿の射程(射程注記):新しい数学定理も新しい法則も主張しない──ラプラス圧、ジュランの法則、ボンド数、レイリー=プラトー不安定は、いずれも標準的である。流体力学を作らない──使うのは一つの長さと、一つの平方根だけである。接触角を扱わない──costheta=1(完全濡れ)で計算する。実際の接触角、ヒステリシス、粗さの効果は扱わない。動的な現象を扱わない──切れるかどうかは書くが、どれだけ速く切れるかは書かない。植物生理を作らない──凝集力説の当否は扱わない。毛管だけでは足りないという数を出すだけである。肺の生理を作らない──界面活性剤の組成も、実際の肺胞の形も扱わない。ラプラス圧の見積りだけである。代表値に精度を主張しない──gamma=0.0728 N/m、rho=998 kg/m^3 は桁を見るための値であり、温度で動く。既刊との関係:論文258 は 4pi が出るのは源が点のときだけだと示し、円柱源の例として毛細血管を扱った──本稿は同じ毛細の場で、立体角ではなく長さを問う。258 が扱ったのは電位、本稿が扱うのは界面であり、共通の量を一つも持たない。論文291 は同じ海に三つの長さがあると示した──本稿の l_c は四つ目の長さではなく、二つの力の境目としての長さである。論文306 は基本単位の個数が約束だと示した──l_c は約束ではなく、材料の二つの量から出る。論文140 は対称性が比を決め力学が尺度を決めると示した──l_c は尺度の側である。加えたのは五つの液体で l_c を計算したこと、水銀で表面張力と毛管長の大小が逆転することを示したこと、ボンド数が (L/l_c)^2 に一致することを確かめたこと、木の高さに毛管が 0.74 m しか届かないと数えたこと、切れる閾値 2pi R に gamma が入らないと指摘したことである。 第一に、水では 2.7273 mm である。水銀 1.9116 mm、エタノール 1.6977 mm、液体ヘリウム 0.2625 mm(第2節)。 第二に、これが本稿の芯である。水銀は表面張力が水の 6.6621 倍なのに、毛管長は 0.7009 倍と短い──密度が 13.5611 倍だからであり、比の平方根しか効かない(第2節)。 第三に、この長さは境目である。ボンド数 Bo=(L/l_c)^2 が ちょうど 1 になる(第3節)。 第四に、木を登らせているのは毛管ではない。半径 20 mum の道管で、毛管が上げるのは 0.74 m だけである(第4節)。 第五に、肺胞では gamma を動かすほうが効く。裸の水なら 1456 Pa、界面活性剤で 500 Pa(第5節)。 第六に、分離子は「gamma が入るかどうか」である。液柱が切れる閾値 2pi R に gamma は入らない(第6節)。 液体には l_c=sqrt(gamma/rho g) という長さが一つあり、水では2.7273 mmである──水銀 1.9116 mm、グリセリン 2.2643 mm、エタノール 1.6977 mm、液体ヘリウム 0.2625 mm。水銀は表面張力が水の 6.6621 倍なのに、毛管長は 0.7009 倍と短い──密度が 13.5611 倍だからであり、l_c は比の平方根しか取らない。 gamma が 4950 倍ひらいても l_c は 10.4 倍しかひらかない。この長さは境目である──ボンド数 Bo=(L/l_c)^2 は L=l_c でちょうど 1 になり、下では表面張力が、上では重力が勝つ。だから l_c はどの物体の寸法でもない──物の大きさを比べる相手である。木を登らせているのは毛管ではない──半径 20 mum の道管で毛管が上げるのは0.74 mであり、100 m には0.1488 mum の管が要る(実際より 134 倍細い)。肺胞で効くのは R ではなく gamma である──裸の水なら 1456 Pa、界面活性剤で 500 Pa。不安定を消しているのは値ではなく、gamma が定数でないことである。分けるものは一つ──gamma が式に入るかどうか。液柱が切れる閾値 2pi R に gamma は入らず、純粋に幾何である。表面張力は「切れるかどうか」を決めず、「どれだけ速く切れるか」だけを決める。 *改訂記録 第2版(2026-08-30):本稿は主題を入れ替えた。 第1版は「4pi が出る生体と、出ない生体」と題し、点源・線源・面源の立体角と毛細血管の到達距離を扱っていた。 その内容は論文258「4pi が出るのは、源が点のときだけである」と重複していた── 数値(24.1144 muV・111.0508 muV・316.78 mum・44.80 mum)まで一致しており、 先行するのは論文258 である。第2版は同じ毛細の場に留まりつつ、 258 が扱わなかった量(界面の長さ l_c)に主題を移した。 立体角についての記述は本稿から全て削除し、論文258 を参照先とする。 作成にあたって:本稿の着想と内容は、著者自身の考察に基づくものです。文章の構成整理や英訳、数式の確認には AI(大規模言語モデル)の助力を得ました。最終的な内容の解釈や誤りがあれば、それらはすべて著者の責に帰します。お気づきの点があれば、ご教示いただければ幸いです。

View source

Similar papers

#computer vision Open access Jun 2016

Software Development in Startup Companies: The Greenfield Startup Model

Software startups are newly created companies with no operating history and oriented towards producing cutting-edge products. However, despite the increasing importance of startups in the economy, few scientific studies attempt to address software engineering issues, especially for early-stage startups. If anything, startups need engineering practices of the same level or better than those of larger companies, as their time and resources are more scarce, and one failed project can put them out of business. In this study we aim to improve understanding of the software development strategies employed by startups. We performed this state-of-practice investigation using a grounded theory approach. We packaged the results in the Greenfield Startup Model (GSM), which explains the priority of startups to release the product as quickly as possible. This strategy allows startups to verify product and market fit, and to adjust the product trajectory according to early collected user feedback. The need to shorten time-to-market, by speeding up the development through low-precision engineering activities, is counterbalanced by the need to restructure the product before targeting further growth. The resulting implications of the GSM outline challenges and gaps, pointing out opportunities for future research to develop and validate engineering practices in the startup context.

Carmine Giardino, Nicolò Paternoster, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 179 citations · ⚡14
#computer vision Open access Oct 2016

Software Startups - A Research Agenda

Software startup companies develop innovative, software-intensive products within limited timeframes and with few resources, searching for sustainable and scalable business models. Software startup ...

M. Unterkalmsteiner, P. Abrahamsson, Xiaofeng Wang et al. · 157 citations · ⚡17
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2016

“Failures” to be celebrated: an analysis of major pivots of software startups

In the context of software startups, project failure is embraced actively and considered crucial to obtain validated learning that can lead to pivots. A pivot is the strategic change of a business concept, product or the different elements of a business model. A better understanding is needed on different types of pivots and different factors that lead to failures and trigger pivots, for software entrepreneurial teams to make better decisions under chaotic and unpredictable environment. Due to the nascent nature of the topic, the existing research and knowledge on the pivots of software startups are very limited. In this study, we aimed at identifying the major types of pivots that software startups make during their startup processes, and highlighting the factors that fail software projects and trigger pivots. To achieve this, we conducted a case survey study based on the secondary data of the major pivots happened in 49 software startups. 10 pivot types and 14 triggering factors were identified. The findings show that customer need pivot is the most common among all pivot types. Together with customer segment pivot, they are common market related pivots. The major product related pivots are zoom-in and technology pivots. Several new pivot types were identified, including market zoom-in, complete and side project pivots. Our study also demonstrates that negative customer reaction and flawed business model are the most common factors that trigger pivots in software startups. Our study extends the research knowledge on software startup pivot types and pivot triggering factors. Meanwhile it provides practical knowledge to software startups, which they can utilize to guide their effective decisions on pivoting.

Sohaib Shahid Bajwa, Xiaofeng Wang, Anh Nguyen-Duc et al. · 127 citations · ⚡15
#computer vision Review Open access May 2015

A survey study on major technical barriers affecting the decision to adopt cloud services

In the context of cloud computing, risks associated with underlying technologies, risks involving service models and outsourcing, and enterprise readiness have been recognized as potential barriers for the adoption. To accelerate cloud adoption, the concrete barriers negatively influencing the adoption decision need to be identified. Our study aims at understanding the impact of technical and security-related barriers on the organizational decision to adopt the cloud. We analyzed data collected through a web survey of 352 individuals working for enterprises consisting of decision makers as well as employees from other levels within an organization. The comparison of adopter and non-adopter sample reveals three potential adoption inhibitor, security, data privacy, and portability. The result from our logistic regression analysis confirms the criticality of the security concern, which results in an up to 26-fold increase in the non-adoption likelihood. Our study underlines the importance of the technical and security perspectives for research investigating the adoption of technology.

Nattakarn Phaphoom, Xiaofeng Wang, S. Samuel et al. · 111 citations · ⚡8
#computer vision Conference Open access Dec 2013

Affordable and Energy-Efficient Cloud Computing Clusters: The Bolzano Raspberry Pi Cloud Cluster Experiment

We present our ongoing work building a Raspberry Pi cluster consisting of 300 nodes. The unique characteristics of this single board computer pose several challenges, but also offer a number of interesting opportunities. On the one hand, a single Raspberry Pi can be purchased cheaply and has a low power consumption, which makes it possible to create an affordable and energy-efficient cluster. On the other hand, it lacks in computing power, which makes it difficult to run computationally intensive software on it. Nevertheless, by combining a large number of Raspberries into a cluster, this drawback can be (partially) offset. Here we report on the first important steps of creating our cluster: how to set up and configure the hardware and the system software, and how to monitor and maintain the system. We also discuss potential use cases for our cluster, the two most important being an inexpensive and green test bed for cloud computing research and a robust and mobile data center for operating in adverse environments.

P. Abrahamsson, S. Helmer, Nattakarn Phaphoom et al. · 110 citations · ⚡7
#computer vision Book Open access Mar 2017

On the Unhappiness of Software Developers

The happy-productive worker thesis states that happy workers are more productive. Recent research in software engineering supports the thesis, and the ideal of flourishing happiness among software developers is often expressed among industry practitioners. However, the literature suggests that a cost-effective way to foster happiness and productivity among workers could be to limit unhappiness. Psychological disorders such as job burnout and anxiety could also be reduced by limiting the negative experiences of software developers. Simultaneously, a baseline assessment of (un)happiness and knowledge about how developers experience it are missing. In this paper, we broaden the understanding of unhappiness among software developers in terms of (1) the software developer population distribution of (un)happiness, and (2) the causes of unhappiness while developing software. We conducted a large-scale quantitative and qualitative survey, incorporating a psychometrically validated instrument for measuring (un)happiness, with 2 220 developers, yielding a rich and balanced sample of 1318 complete responses. Our results indicate that software developers are a slightly happy population, but the need for limiting the unhappiness of developers remains. We also identified 219 factors representing causes of unhappiness while developing software. Our results, which are available as open data, can act as guidelines for practitioners in management positions and developers in general for fostering happiness on the job. We suggest considering happiness in future studies of both human and technical aspects in software engineering.

D. Graziotin, Fabian Fagerholm, Xiaofeng Wang et al. · 84 citations · ⚡6

Related blog posts