LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
parent
  • drunkenninja
    +6

    I think this article will help to answer your question, and for bonus points, there is also a youtube video :)

    • ohtwenty
      +6

      That just left me with more questions! So apparently the nucleation sites and the surface area at the top (where gas can leave directly) are what drives the loss of CO2. Buuuuuut where's the balance? As in, if you've got a weird glass that's really wide at the bottom but small at the top (small surface area) will the nucleation sites at the sides of the glass be more important? Or a martini glass, that's hugely surface area-y at the top, with relatively little glass? For that matter, if you've got martini glasses (cone shapes) that are steeper or 'flatter', how does it influence it? When does it go one way or the other?