Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mit-vax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amd!vecpyr!lll-crg!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: The Mathematics of Powerlifting and the case of the Ultrasaur Message-ID: <769@mit-vax.UUCP> Date: Thu, 5-Sep-85 19:56:05 EDT Article-I.D.: mit-vax.769 Posted: Thu Sep 5 19:56:05 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 10-Sep-85 08:28:35 EDT References: <387@imsvax.UUCP> Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA Lines: 78 Ted Holden proves his ignorance of science and math thus: > Scientists > studying dinosaurs in the last century determined that the big > sauropods could not stand on land, that they were simply too > heavy, and must therefore have lived in water where water > buoyancy would help carry their huge bodies. Scientists studying electro-magnetic radiation in that last century determined that the "waves" traveled in a medium called "ether". They were wrong, Ted. > 1000 lbs = K * pie * (5 ** 2) > > using the old Fortran notation in which "*" means "times", and > "**" means "raised to the power of". K will thus be taken to be > 12.74, both for human heavyweight powerlifters, and for the > ultrasaur. I think we can all follow the notation, Ted. Thanks anyway. Also, I don't know what the "pie" constant is, but you might want to use "pi" which is a much more interesting one. Another question. Why is "K" this same for men and Ultrasaurs. Why isn't it half or something? > Of course, the > ultrasaur didn't have access to dianabol. Of course. I suppose that because humans do not produce luminous chemicals then neither do fireflyes? > This value for K is thus crude, but it gives the ultrasaur > two large benefits of doubts. First, the ratio would, in > reality, be higher for a maximally trained human athlete than for > any herbivore, particularly a laid-back one like an elephant or > sauropod which wasn't into sprints or anything amounting to > maximum efforts. You mean the same "laid-back" elephants that stampede large trucks and smash them? Be consistent, Ted! The value for K is crude. It is almost completely made up. I'm glad you follow weight-lifting Ted, but your comparing apes and lizards here. Also, I though the mighty ULTRASAUR was a mean and nasty killer (who had to out-run his prey in the lighter gravity). > Secondly, we are talking about what the human > can lift just once as a maximum total effort i.e. with no margin > for error. In reality, if Kaz or one of his pals were shooting > for a squat of 800 lbs at a meet, a practice might consist of > four or five repetitions with 500 lbs, followed after a fifteen > minute rest by two or three reps with 650 or 700, followed by the > attempt for a single squat at 800. That is to say, to have any > margin for error, you must subtract at least a hundred and fifty > lbs. or so from the human athlete's lift and then compute the > ratio. Maybe the Ultrasaurs did Aerobics. (After all, wasn't Jane Fonda around in the Velikoskian world?) > Stanley Friesen and several other commentators on the net > have replied in numerous articles that they don't really > understand the reason why a hundred foot long, three hundred > thousand pound ultrasaur would have any insurmountable problems > functioning in our gravity. This article is dedicated to them. This is no intuitive leap for anybody. We all realize that a creature like that wouldn't last very long in the world. In fact, it might even become extinct. -- Charles Forsythe CSDF@MIT-VAX "We pray to Fred for the Hopelessly Normal Have they not suffered enough?" from _The_Nth_Psalm_ in _The_Book_of_Fred_