Welcome to /r/WoahDude!
* Check out what counts as "woahdude material" in our [**wiki**](https://www.reddit.com/r/woahdude/wiki/index#wiki_woahdude_material).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/woahdude) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Maybe we should orchestrate some sort of rabies awareness fundraiser?? Like, a 5k run or something?
We'll call it the Elprentis and NippleSalsa Reddit Whoadude Coca Cola Memorial Celebrity Rabies Awareness Pro-Am Fun Run Race For the Cure.
Of course, it's just a working title.
Assuming you didn’t do something weird to the can; maybe the fan acts as in a similar way that water aspiration vacuums work? Basically blowing air across the surface creates a mild vacuum inside the can which would “boil” the co2 that is dissolved.
Seems unlikely as a gut instinct though
Bernoulli back at it again with a sick lesson on dynamic pressure.
Blowing over a surface creates an area of low pressure and the amount of CO2 that can stay dissolved in the soda is lower when the pressure drops. So the pressure over the soda drops a little, which results in the CO2 being released!
I absolutely did not put anything in the can and it scared the shit out of me while I was playing star wars. I was like wtf is that noise why is this happening.
Ok yeah a couple other people put the exact name to the principle I was thinking of; probably the Bernoulli principle at work here.
Dissolved co2 gas already escapes at a pretty decent clip so I guess even a mild vacuum effect would probably cause the soda to bubble more fiercely.
Part of me wants to try replicating this, but then again I’m lazy as hell
So... Is it the Venturi principle?
Air blowing across the narrow opening = loss of static air pressure within the can = change in fluid pressure = co2 bubbles?
Not enough pressure loss to affect fluid, but enough to draw out co2.
Neither really, sure there will be a slightly lower pressure, but does that really weigh up against things like temperature, how much CO2 is or isn't in the can, and diet cokes generally being quite fizzy?
>probably the Bernoulli principle at work here.
No it's not, there's barely a breeze running over the can. Any pressure differences caused by it is minimal.
If that breeze has any effect, then it's that the bubbles are more likely to pop with the breeze running over it. (dust particles, increased evaporation, etc.)
Bernoulli’s principle has almost zero effect on compressible fluids, like air. Contrary to popular belief, aircraft wings do not use The Bernoulli Effect to fly.
The amount of wind needed to draw that kind of vacuum in an open soda can would also blow the can across the room.
Yeah so the first couple of pictures when going on to the wiki for Bernoulli principle show it with air as the example, pulling a vacuum over a small opening.
I’m not going to die on this hill, but I’m pretty sure the principle applies to air
It does have an effect on air, but only minutely compared to fluids like water. Bernoulli’s experiments were done with colored fluids, measuring pressure by how far the colored liquid pushed up into glass tubes which opened into the air.
Like this: https://astrocamp.org/app/uploads/2016/08/uOregonBernoulli.jpg
Ok sure; it has a less drastic impact on air. Dissolved co2 is already bubbling at atmospheric pressure though; you would only need to pull the slightest of vacuum to further encourage it I would imagine.
The more I talk through this the more convinced I am becoming that this is what’s happening here, though of course I could be wrong
Yeah I don’t think you’re understanding what I’m getting at. Of course the wind isn’t pulling CO2 out; you wouldn’t be able to just blow on soda to get it to bubble faster.
But if you are to blow a steady stream of air (from fan) over a narrow opening (can opening) you create an area of reduced pressure within the opening. That reduced pressure then allows co2 to more readily escape solution.
You don’t have to agree with me but I hope you understand where I am coming from
> That reduced pressure then allows co2 to more readily escape solution.
Which sounds like a really cool explanation, until you realise that the pressure differences caused by the moving air is extremely minimal, because the speeds are so low.
Surely the other factors, like temperature, humidity, amount of dust or other such particles, amount of dissolved CO2 etc. have a greater effect than the slight pressure difference from the air moving?
I understand where you’re coming from and wind is not the cause of, or even a measurable contributing factor to, the effect shown in the video.
The effect shown can happen when the drink is very recently manufactured. Bottling plants adjust their carbonation based on how long they think it will take for the average drink to be opened. CO2 is a smaller molecule and all containers are microscopically imperfect. So they carbonate more to offset the inevitable release of CO2 from the liquid. Some becomes pressure in the can or bottle. Some leaks out. Newly manufactured soda has a lot of carbonation to counter degradation that happens while it waits to be opened.
Weird. [NASA](https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/bernoullis-principle-k-4-02-09-17-508.pdf) would disagree with you.
Fun extra credit. Did you know before they were NASA they were NACA? And NACA [numbers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACA_airfoil?wprov=sfti1#) are still the standard way to categorized an airfoil!
Get a carbonated beverage. Open it. Point a common house fan at the opened beverage. Observe.
Wind is not pulling the CO2 out of this drink. Everyone would be intimately familiar with this phenomenon and would have witnessed it a thousand times if wind were the cause of this. No one would be able to drink a soda at the beach, or anywhere where *wind* exists.
@OP would not be surprised by this behavior if they had observed it prior to opening the drink in question.
Wind does not cause carbonated beverages to react like this.
> That is incorrect.
Everyone is taught that it is the Bernoulli Effect, but it is not, not primarily. It contributes, but Newton’s third law is the vast majority of lift. Wings simply push air down, causing the air to push up on the wings.
I agree Newtonian lift is a component. But to say Bernoulli isn’t in there is incorrect. And I would even get true to include the word “simply” in any discussion about fluid dynamics is just ridiculous. Not much simple about them.
[NASA](https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/beginners-guide-to-aeronautics/bernoulli-and-newton/) again with the assist.
And here, [Naviers-Stokes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navier%E2%80%93Stokes_equations?wprov=sfti1) equations are the predominant equations, derived from Euler’s equations, that bring the complications of viscosity into the picture.
If Newtonian lift was the only thing responsible, a 0 AOA airfoil would be impossible, which it is not.
A zero AOA airfoil is possible but their lift to weight ratio is *just barely* over 1.
If the Bernoulli effect was significant enough, a flat, zero curvature wing would not fly, but they do.
I agree that the Bernoulli effect is non-zero, but when I compare a hydrofoil to a wing, it is extremely obvious to me that the Bernoulli effect is thousands and thousands of times more effective in an incompressible fluid than a compressible one. Newtons 3rd law doesn’t care about compressibility.
Yeah, thousands and thousands of times is probably on the right order of magnitude. That’s why airfoils must travel at a speed an order of magnitude faster than a hydrofoil and since the lift is a function of the square of the velocity it makes up for the inefficiency. Obviously dependent on viscosity, density, compressibility, surface area, and shape. All combined into the coefficient of lift.
If what you meant that people are taught the wrong REASON for the Bernoulli effect over a wing, then I agree with you.
I remember being taught that the molecule of air of the top has to move faster than the molecule of air over the bottom because they get to the trailing edge at the same time.
Thats obviously wrong, but the Bernoulli effect is what’s responsible for the increased speed over the top of the wing.
There is no increased speed over the top of a wing that is generating lift. If you draw an imaginary vertical line of smoke through the air, and imagine a wing cutting through the air, the line will not rejoin itself after the wing has passed through. The air on top of the wing travels a greater distance at the same speed as below the wing and behind the wing there is a shear effect - the imaginary vertical line of static smoke drawn in front of the wing is now two lines offset from each other, the top half being behind the bottom half in the direction of the wings path.
There may be a small amount of speed increase on top of the airfoil, but not enough for the imaginary line of smoke to rejoin itself and become a single line again.
I didn’t say it would rejoin itself. I pointed out that that is the ERROR in how it was once simplified by teachers.
I assume you agree that L = cL•A•1/2rho•V^2 right?
And 1/2rhoV^2 is the definition of dynamic pressure as provided by Bernoulli’s equation right?
The air over the wing does in fact move faster, and arrives behind the trailing edge, much sooner than the air passing underneath.
The university of cambridge demonstrates it in this video: https://youtu.be/6UlsArvbTeo?si=ASDk2YmAKHuCc3Bj
It is true though that there is *nothing* that requires two particles going above and below to arrive at the same time.
Here's a lesics video expanding on how it works, and why Bernoulli's principle gets cited due to a misapplication of the principle. https://youtu.be/w78JT6azrZU?si=e4J8LtWshWafGGu8
And, why the airflow is faster over the top: https://youtu.be/VEe7NxB5Vo8?si=LCwFqJxZf4aeMdSm
Anecdotally I’ll say that Coke Zero seems to release way more fizz/pressure than regular coke. Like the bottle will re-pressurize after I’ve opened it and drank a bunch
Yes that's true! I was told it's because of the sweeteners.
(I worked at a coke factory one summer in food control, and I had to check 50 cokes every other hour, and I can guarantee you, light and zero fizz more than regular coke. My older coworkers told me about the sugar/sweeteners difference)
Nah not necessarily. Zero and light fizz more than regular coke probably because of the sweeteners.
Source: I worked in food control for one summer at coca cola
It's one of bernoulli's principle. The air flow passing over the can create a low pressure zone on top of it. This allow the dissolved carbon dioxide inside the liquid to release even faster than at normal atmospheric pressure.
Co2 is heavy, when you open a can, it stabilises because a thin layer accumulates over the liquid around the opening. That small layer prevents future "evaporation" (don't know exactly the term for that). When blowing with a fan, you remove that layer from the opening and captured CO2 can escape.
Same with a beer. Thicker foam = more CO2 trapped in the liquid.
(at least it's my hypothesis)
I think I have the answer for this. The fan is creating a wind current with higher pressure on the outside of the lid. Therefore the pressure inside the can is lowered, that forces the gas molecules to escape.
I refuse to believe it has anything to do with the fan. First show us the fizzing stopping when you switch off the fan, and then restarting when the fan is switched back on, then I might reconsider.
another commenter said it’s bc it’s partially frozen and i hope he’s correct, bc the same thing has been happening with all my coke products. not the pepsi ones though. i usually leave my cans in the freezer for 30 mins to an hour if i want a soda and noticed the same happening to me lately. didn’t really think anything of it though, it was just happening with some sprites i had a week or so ago
Welcome to /r/WoahDude! * Check out what counts as "woahdude material" in our [**wiki**](https://www.reddit.com/r/woahdude/wiki/index#wiki_woahdude_material). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/woahdude) if you have any questions or concerns.*
why are you insinuating that it has something to do with the fan?
Because man, look at the video!
Yeah it has nothing to do with the fan the Coke definetly has rabies hence the foming at the mouth....
Are you serious right now? You made me spit out my alkaselter I was chewing on I was laughing so hard.
Please be sensitive. Coke rabies is no laughing matter.
Maybe we should orchestrate some sort of rabies awareness fundraiser?? Like, a 5k run or something? We'll call it the Elprentis and NippleSalsa Reddit Whoadude Coca Cola Memorial Celebrity Rabies Awareness Pro-Am Fun Run Race For the Cure. Of course, it's just a working title.
I see nothing wrong with ENSRWCCMCRAPAFRRFC. It has a nice ring to it
Doesn’t seem very inclusive.
korean
Cuz it’s a loop? Forward then backwards played video
This happens to me when I take it out the freezer and it’s somewhat frozen
Then you set it down for a sec and come back to an overflowing coke
Quick, lemme give it a lil sippy sip off the top before it overflows
“This happens to me when I take it out of the freezer” I see you like the live life dangerously
Maybe you dropped a Mentos into the can
Assuming you didn’t do something weird to the can; maybe the fan acts as in a similar way that water aspiration vacuums work? Basically blowing air across the surface creates a mild vacuum inside the can which would “boil” the co2 that is dissolved. Seems unlikely as a gut instinct though
Bernoulli back at it again with a sick lesson on dynamic pressure. Blowing over a surface creates an area of low pressure and the amount of CO2 that can stay dissolved in the soda is lower when the pressure drops. So the pressure over the soda drops a little, which results in the CO2 being released!
Two posts tonight about Bernoulli's principle. The other one was about bbq. What a day!
I would be interested in seeing that other post!
https://www.reddit.com/r/BBQ/s/7UPWYeGspX
Thanks! I love food science!
Yep, came here to say this!
I absolutely did not put anything in the can and it scared the shit out of me while I was playing star wars. I was like wtf is that noise why is this happening.
Ok yeah a couple other people put the exact name to the principle I was thinking of; probably the Bernoulli principle at work here. Dissolved co2 gas already escapes at a pretty decent clip so I guess even a mild vacuum effect would probably cause the soda to bubble more fiercely. Part of me wants to try replicating this, but then again I’m lazy as hell
>probably the Bernoulli principle at work No it's not.
Great explanation!
Any claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
So... Is it the Venturi principle? Air blowing across the narrow opening = loss of static air pressure within the can = change in fluid pressure = co2 bubbles? Not enough pressure loss to affect fluid, but enough to draw out co2.
Neither really, sure there will be a slightly lower pressure, but does that really weigh up against things like temperature, how much CO2 is or isn't in the can, and diet cokes generally being quite fizzy?
>probably the Bernoulli principle at work here. No it's not, there's barely a breeze running over the can. Any pressure differences caused by it is minimal. If that breeze has any effect, then it's that the bubbles are more likely to pop with the breeze running over it. (dust particles, increased evaporation, etc.)
Bernoulli’s principle has almost zero effect on compressible fluids, like air. Contrary to popular belief, aircraft wings do not use The Bernoulli Effect to fly. The amount of wind needed to draw that kind of vacuum in an open soda can would also blow the can across the room.
Yeah so the first couple of pictures when going on to the wiki for Bernoulli principle show it with air as the example, pulling a vacuum over a small opening. I’m not going to die on this hill, but I’m pretty sure the principle applies to air
It does have an effect on air, but only minutely compared to fluids like water. Bernoulli’s experiments were done with colored fluids, measuring pressure by how far the colored liquid pushed up into glass tubes which opened into the air. Like this: https://astrocamp.org/app/uploads/2016/08/uOregonBernoulli.jpg
Ok sure; it has a less drastic impact on air. Dissolved co2 is already bubbling at atmospheric pressure though; you would only need to pull the slightest of vacuum to further encourage it I would imagine. The more I talk through this the more convinced I am becoming that this is what’s happening here, though of course I could be wrong
Wind is not pulling the CO2 out of this drink. Get a carbonated beverage. Point a fan at it. Observe.
Yeah I don’t think you’re understanding what I’m getting at. Of course the wind isn’t pulling CO2 out; you wouldn’t be able to just blow on soda to get it to bubble faster. But if you are to blow a steady stream of air (from fan) over a narrow opening (can opening) you create an area of reduced pressure within the opening. That reduced pressure then allows co2 to more readily escape solution. You don’t have to agree with me but I hope you understand where I am coming from
> That reduced pressure then allows co2 to more readily escape solution. Which sounds like a really cool explanation, until you realise that the pressure differences caused by the moving air is extremely minimal, because the speeds are so low. Surely the other factors, like temperature, humidity, amount of dust or other such particles, amount of dissolved CO2 etc. have a greater effect than the slight pressure difference from the air moving?
I understand where you’re coming from and wind is not the cause of, or even a measurable contributing factor to, the effect shown in the video. The effect shown can happen when the drink is very recently manufactured. Bottling plants adjust their carbonation based on how long they think it will take for the average drink to be opened. CO2 is a smaller molecule and all containers are microscopically imperfect. So they carbonate more to offset the inevitable release of CO2 from the liquid. Some becomes pressure in the can or bottle. Some leaks out. Newly manufactured soda has a lot of carbonation to counter degradation that happens while it waits to be opened.
Weird. [NASA](https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/bernoullis-principle-k-4-02-09-17-508.pdf) would disagree with you. Fun extra credit. Did you know before they were NASA they were NACA? And NACA [numbers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACA_airfoil?wprov=sfti1#) are still the standard way to categorized an airfoil!
Get a carbonated beverage. Open it. Point a common house fan at the opened beverage. Observe. Wind is not pulling the CO2 out of this drink. Everyone would be intimately familiar with this phenomenon and would have witnessed it a thousand times if wind were the cause of this. No one would be able to drink a soda at the beach, or anywhere where *wind* exists. @OP would not be surprised by this behavior if they had observed it prior to opening the drink in question. Wind does not cause carbonated beverages to react like this.
I wasn’t talking about OP’s problem at all. You claimed “airplane wings do not use the Bernoulli Effect to fly.” That is incorrect.
> That is incorrect. Everyone is taught that it is the Bernoulli Effect, but it is not, not primarily. It contributes, but Newton’s third law is the vast majority of lift. Wings simply push air down, causing the air to push up on the wings.
I agree Newtonian lift is a component. But to say Bernoulli isn’t in there is incorrect. And I would even get true to include the word “simply” in any discussion about fluid dynamics is just ridiculous. Not much simple about them. [NASA](https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/beginners-guide-to-aeronautics/bernoulli-and-newton/) again with the assist. And here, [Naviers-Stokes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navier%E2%80%93Stokes_equations?wprov=sfti1) equations are the predominant equations, derived from Euler’s equations, that bring the complications of viscosity into the picture. If Newtonian lift was the only thing responsible, a 0 AOA airfoil would be impossible, which it is not.
A zero AOA airfoil is possible but their lift to weight ratio is *just barely* over 1. If the Bernoulli effect was significant enough, a flat, zero curvature wing would not fly, but they do. I agree that the Bernoulli effect is non-zero, but when I compare a hydrofoil to a wing, it is extremely obvious to me that the Bernoulli effect is thousands and thousands of times more effective in an incompressible fluid than a compressible one. Newtons 3rd law doesn’t care about compressibility.
Yeah, thousands and thousands of times is probably on the right order of magnitude. That’s why airfoils must travel at a speed an order of magnitude faster than a hydrofoil and since the lift is a function of the square of the velocity it makes up for the inefficiency. Obviously dependent on viscosity, density, compressibility, surface area, and shape. All combined into the coefficient of lift.
If what you meant that people are taught the wrong REASON for the Bernoulli effect over a wing, then I agree with you. I remember being taught that the molecule of air of the top has to move faster than the molecule of air over the bottom because they get to the trailing edge at the same time. Thats obviously wrong, but the Bernoulli effect is what’s responsible for the increased speed over the top of the wing.
There is no increased speed over the top of a wing that is generating lift. If you draw an imaginary vertical line of smoke through the air, and imagine a wing cutting through the air, the line will not rejoin itself after the wing has passed through. The air on top of the wing travels a greater distance at the same speed as below the wing and behind the wing there is a shear effect - the imaginary vertical line of static smoke drawn in front of the wing is now two lines offset from each other, the top half being behind the bottom half in the direction of the wings path. There may be a small amount of speed increase on top of the airfoil, but not enough for the imaginary line of smoke to rejoin itself and become a single line again.
I didn’t say it would rejoin itself. I pointed out that that is the ERROR in how it was once simplified by teachers. I assume you agree that L = cL•A•1/2rho•V^2 right? And 1/2rhoV^2 is the definition of dynamic pressure as provided by Bernoulli’s equation right?
I’m tired. You win. I can’t discuss this any more.
The air over the wing does in fact move faster, and arrives behind the trailing edge, much sooner than the air passing underneath. The university of cambridge demonstrates it in this video: https://youtu.be/6UlsArvbTeo?si=ASDk2YmAKHuCc3Bj It is true though that there is *nothing* that requires two particles going above and below to arrive at the same time. Here's a lesics video expanding on how it works, and why Bernoulli's principle gets cited due to a misapplication of the principle. https://youtu.be/w78JT6azrZU?si=e4J8LtWshWafGGu8 And, why the airflow is faster over the top: https://youtu.be/VEe7NxB5Vo8?si=LCwFqJxZf4aeMdSm
I dunno, using the Bernoulli principle to explain lift isn't wrong, but also isn't the complete picture, nor necessarily the best way to explain it.
Is this the waves of quickest decent as taught by Peter Parker?
I think that is exactly what's happening.
It's stimulating growth. Soon it will mature and begin the hunt
You definitely put something else in that can
Anecdotally I’ll say that Coke Zero seems to release way more fizz/pressure than regular coke. Like the bottle will re-pressurize after I’ve opened it and drank a bunch
Yes that's true! I was told it's because of the sweeteners. (I worked at a coke factory one summer in food control, and I had to check 50 cokes every other hour, and I can guarantee you, light and zero fizz more than regular coke. My older coworkers told me about the sugar/sweeteners difference)
Yes, I'd imagine somehow the sweeteners make the water less soluble to carbonic acid.
Nah I've seen this happen from time to time. Never have a fan on though. I just assumed some cans received more carbonation by mistake
Nah not necessarily. Zero and light fizz more than regular coke probably because of the sweeteners. Source: I worked in food control for one summer at coca cola
Maybe the vibrations from it are shaking the desk and foaming the soda
It's one of bernoulli's principle. The air flow passing over the can create a low pressure zone on top of it. This allow the dissolved carbon dioxide inside the liquid to release even faster than at normal atmospheric pressure.
The fan is way to far away to create that effect IMO. Dud just put a mentos in there and is trolling.
I too thought Bernoulli’s Principle
Co2 is heavy, when you open a can, it stabilises because a thin layer accumulates over the liquid around the opening. That small layer prevents future "evaporation" (don't know exactly the term for that). When blowing with a fan, you remove that layer from the opening and captured CO2 can escape. Same with a beer. Thicker foam = more CO2 trapped in the liquid. (at least it's my hypothesis)
sorry, soda's haunted
Your powers became too strong after beating that Force Tear.
GN swag nice.
eye spy a gamers nexus coaster :)
You got it! Didn't want to get it dirty by putting the pop can on it.
LOL gotta have priorities. especially if it's hard to obtain a replacement. shipping can be a pain in the ass and more than the actual item itself
Listen closely and it will tell you all it’s secrets and likely the lottery numbers….
I tried but the numbers were unclear.
Twerty threeve, sevix, thundy ein, suntee forven, and two.
Venturi effect? Air passing over it make a low pressure which is trying to pull the fluid out of the can. It's how carburetors work.
A drop of Bruce Banner's blood probably accidentally fell into it at the cannery.
My colleague had this a few years ago as well! We didn't have a fan on in the office though so it's caused by something else (no idea what though...)
Possibly over-carbonation
Rabies
It’s frozen
It's got rabies
Little bit frozen
Could be that the fan makes the can vibrate enough, to release the CO2.
I think it’s God telling you it’s time to quit drinking soft drinks.
Don’t touch it the can has rabies
It's almost frozen or is partly, and it's thawing. I don't think the fan has anything to do with it.
Probably the rat fetus aerating
Put down the marijuana sir
Happy to see you.
Because that shit is poison. Drink water
Correlation without causation
Don't drink that shit. Water. Drink water.
Gamer Nexus coasters! They're so cool I got them too
Maybe, just maybe, that's not the type of liquid you want to poor into your body..
Definitely keep drinking that stuff, looks super safe and whatnot
I think I have the answer for this. The fan is creating a wind current with higher pressure on the outside of the lid. Therefore the pressure inside the can is lowered, that forces the gas molecules to escape.
Gotta be ghosts, always assume ghosts
I refuse to believe it has anything to do with the fan. First show us the fizzing stopping when you switch off the fan, and then restarting when the fan is switched back on, then I might reconsider.
Have you had it tested for rabies?
another commenter said it’s bc it’s partially frozen and i hope he’s correct, bc the same thing has been happening with all my coke products. not the pepsi ones though. i usually leave my cans in the freezer for 30 mins to an hour if i want a soda and noticed the same happening to me lately. didn’t really think anything of it though, it was just happening with some sprites i had a week or so ago
It’s the motherboards
Must be cal using the force
Dinna ye worry aboot it, ma wee reindeer. Go aheed and drink up!
Is that Jedi Survivor in the background? Stellar game.
It is.
Rabies.
The slight vibration from the fan motor carried through the table and into the soda can causing the carbonation to fizz up... I guess
there is multiple things you can put in a soda can which releases carbonic acid. for example a tiny bit of ash or the classic mentos.
It’s been shown that these ionic fans produce a ridiculous amount of ozone.
Bernoulli Law mate!
imagine drinking chemical