Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 26784
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/05/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
5/24    

2002/12/11 [Science/GlobalWarming, Science/Physics] UID:26784 Activity:very high
12/10   Physics question: When one lifts weights, s/he exerts more forces,
        hence the pressure the ground s/he stands on receives more
        pressure.  Is that correct?  My friend tried to tell me it is
        rather because the object (the weights) are moving, it is the
        acceration that translates into greater force hence greater
        pressure.  But shouldn't the object as a whole (the weights +
        the weight lifter) be considered a still object since the area
        touching the ground isn't moving?  Any url reference to this
        would be great.
        \_ pressure is force per area, so if the are is fixed(the area
           of the bottoms of your shoes if you are standing), then the
           force is your weight plus the weight of the weights plus
           the added force from the acceleration of the weights.  this
           added force is the mass of the weights plus your arms(measuresd
           in slugs) times the acceleration you apply.  if you don't bielive
                \_ what do you mean measured in slugs?  It doens't matter
                   what units you use.  English units are confusing.  Best
                   to use kg to measure mass, but slugs will work too.
                   \_ right. i was just making the point that slugs
                      are mass and pounds are force.  IF you use kilograms,
                      you'd better use Newtons, which most people are
                      not familiar with.
           that this aceleration adds force, accelerate the weights as
           fast as you can, and feel the burn in the knees.
           to keep the same force, but change preassure on the floor, just
           change area: stand on tiptoes or sit down.
           \_ You can also do the experiment by lifting dumbbell while standing
              on a bathroom scale.  The reading is roughly the same as the
              force (although expressed in mass units) between your feet and
              the ground when the scale is not there.  Watch the reading
              becomes higher after you grab the dumbbells and hold them steady.
              Then watch the reading changing when you accelerate and
              decelerate the dumbbells in the vertical direction.
           \_ I understand f=ma.  But ultimately, it's the weight lifter
              that needs to exert more force.  The acceration of the
              weights is caused by the extra force the lifter has to put
              out.  My friend's argument is that the accerleration generates
              more force, but isn't it really the oher way around in this
              case?  The fact of the weights moving at an accerlerated speed
              and the greater pressure are both caused by the more force
              exerted from the lifter, no?
              \_ Don't confuse energy and force.  I can slump on the sofa
                 like a big pig not spending a single calorie of energy,
                 but my fat butt would still be exerting a force on the
                 sofa.  Remember Energy = Force x Distance Moved.  I
                 am a lazy bum who don't like to move, and AnyForce x Zero
                 is still equal to Zero.
                 \_ hmm.  I am more confused with weight v.s. force.
                          Isn't weight force in the first place? _/
                    Help me settle the bet here.  My friend's arguement
                    is weight changes as objects are being lifted.  But
                    my argument is it's the force that's changing, not
                    weight.  Isn't weight simply the gravitational pull
                    on the mass?  In this case, aren't both constant?
                    \_ What the bathroom scale usually measures is the
                       gravitational attraction (a force) between your mass
                       and the fat lump of mass we call the Earth.  When you
                       hold onto two dumbbells like some dumb body builder
                       and stand on the bathroom scale, it is now measuring the
                       the gravitational attraction between "your mass
                       plus two dumbbells" and the Earth.  When you are
                       further accelerating the two dumb bells upwards,
                       the bathroom scale is now measuring the above plus
                       an additional force exerted by the accelerating
                       dumbbells on your body.  Remember "Action Reaction".
                       That's why when measuring yourself on a bathroom scale,
                       you try to be naked, so that there isn't any
                       extra mass, and you try not to jump up and down.
                       What your friend refers to as "weight" is what
                       is measured on the bathroom scale.  What you
                       refer to as "weight" is the gravitational
                       attraction between your mass and the Earth's mass.
                       As seen above, the two of you are referring to
                       different things.  The two are only one and the same
                       when you are naked and not jumping up and down.
                       I think I have been trolled.  Oh well.
                    \_ Your friend's thinking is inherently flawed, but explain
                       it to him this way:
                       When you talk about a person's weight, you imply that
                       that person isn't moving.  If he jumps up while on a
                       scale, his "weight" will increase as he jumps up.
                       This is cheating; you take weight when you're standing
                       still.  So you can't be pushing dumbbells while taking
                       your weight.
                       Likewise, you can't raise your arms up and down.  Ask
                       him if his weight is changing when he's pumping his
                       arms or jumping on the scale.
              \_ conservation of angular momentum
                 \_ Huh?
                    \_ Check an elementary physics text.  Or sit on a
                       computer chair, hold a spinning bicycle wheel and
                       twist it.
                       \_ Yeah I know what conservation of angular momentum is,
                          but what does that have to do with the questions in
                          this thread?
        \_ the overall pressure's the same but your feet exert more.
                       \- if you have flies in a jar on a scale
                          the scale wil read the same whether they are
                          sitting on the bottom, the side or flying ...
                          but at lift off it will register more.
                        \- here is a fun problem: you have a uniform gold
                           chain of legnth l ... say 1meter ... with mass
                           m ... say 100 grams. you hold the chain l units
                           above a scale and drop it. so at t0 when you
                           release the chain, the scale reads 0 and at t1
                           then the chain is resting on the scale, it reads
                           m->100g ... plot f(t) between t0->t1 where f(t)
                           is what the scale reads. this might be sort of
                           unkind as an interview problem for a software
                           guy :-)   --psb
                                \_ Birkett demonstrated and then explained
                                   this in class once, but I forgot the
                                   physical basis of it. Can you post it?
                           \_ typical physics h7a homework problem
                                \_ yeah, so typical.
                           \_ Ok, I give up.  What is the solution?
                              I got a big complicated equation
                              ( (7Mggtt)/(2l) ) which I don't think
                              is right.
2025/05/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
5/24    

You may also be interested in these entries...
2014/1/24-2/5 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:54765 Activity:nil
1/24    "Jimmy Carter's 1977 Unpleasant Energy Talk, No Longer Unpleasant"
        link:www.csua.org/u/128q (http://www.linkedin.com
	...
2012/12/7-18 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:54550 Activity:nil
12/7    Even oil exporters like UAE and Saudi Arabia are embracing solar
        energy: http://www.csua.org/u/ylq
        We are so behind.
	...
2012/6/22-7/20 [Politics/Domestic/California, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:54420 Activity:nil
6/22    "Study: The U.S. could be powered by 80% green energy in 2050"
        http://www.csua.org/u/wtz  (news.yahoo.com)
        \_ How many Republicans does it take to make green energy?
           -150,000,000! Ding ding ding!
           \_ Because having control of the White House and both houses of
              Congress wasn't enough (ie, the do nothing and blame the
	...
2012/6/26-7/20 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:54422 Activity:nil
6/26    WW2 brought us antibiotics, syringe, production capacity,
        excessive petroleum, radar, television, atomic energy,
        rocketry (HEIL VON BRAUN), synthetic rubber, microwave,
        computers (GAY TURING), jets.
        What did the Iraq war bring us?
        \_ HMMWV -> Hummer H1 the gas guzzler.
	...
2011/2/1-19 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:54022 Activity:nil
2/1     10 Industries in Which the U.S. Is No Longer No.1"
        http://www.csua.org/u/sgw (finance.yahoo.com)
        China betas us in 7 out of 10 categories, including high-tech exports
        category.
        \_ So, only 3 more to go until we declare war?
        \_ Some of those positions are simply determined by
	...
2010/12/2-2011/1/13 [Science/Space] UID:53986 Activity:nil
12/2    'Starry, starry, starry night: Star count may triple'
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101202/ap_on_sc/us_sci_starry_night
        'So the number of stars in the universe "is equal to all the cells in
        the humans on Earth, a kind of funny coincidence," Conroy said'
        Another coincidence is that 1 mole = 6.02 * 10^23.  So the number of
        stars = # of molecules in 1 gram of H2 gas.
	...
2010/12/1-2011/1/13 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:53987 Activity:nil
12/1    "US: China rise a 'Sputnik moment' for clean energy"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101130/sc_afp/unclimatewarminguschina
	...
2011/7/26-8/2 [Science/Physics] UID:54145 Activity:nil
7/26    "Hong Kong scientists 'show time travel is impossible'"
        http://www.csua.org/u/tvp (news.yahoo.com)
        \_ Rest of World Emits Collective 'duh'
        \_ I'm no physics wizard.  They may have proven that a single photon
           does not travel faster than c.  But how does this imply that
           no physical object can travel faster than c?  And how does that
	...
2010/9/8-30 [Science/Physics] UID:53950 Activity:nil
9/5     String Theory and God.
        http://www.web-books.com/GoodPost/Articles/SeeGod.htm
        \_ "My specialty was in biophysics, not in theoretical physics,"  That
           sums up the rest of his articles - a big copy-and-paste job of
           fragments that he doesn't really understand.
	...
2009/12/2-9 [Science/Physics] UID:53557 Activity:nil
12/2    Looking for a "LHC and Higgs bosom for Dummies" equivalent site.
        I'd like to learn more but most sites out there are just way
        beyond me. Is there a dummy's version for it?
        \_ W = weak force, EM = electromagnetic force, S = strong force,
           G = gravity. They're the four forces, and the holy grail of
           physics is to unify them all in a single theory -- the Grand
	...
2009/11/11-30 [Science/GlobalWarming, Science/Physics] UID:53518 Activity:low
11/11   Watch the History Channel today! It's got Oppenheimer and the atomic
        bomb history. Did you know at one time 10% of the entire electricity
        in the U.S. was used to refine U235 and weapon grade plutonium?
        Holy jesus! I wonder how much energy is used to get plutonium fuel
        that generates today's nuclear powered electric plant
        \_ it talks about the 2 different methods for getting U235. So
	...
2009/5/27-6/3 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:53048 Activity:low
5/27    Paint your roofs white.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090526/sc_afp/climatewarmingusbritainchu
        "Making roads and roofs a paler colour could have the equivalent
        effect of taking every car in the world off the road for 11 years,
        Chu said."
        \_ Did that already.  Already noticed the house is much cooler.
	...
2009/4/20-28 [Science/GlobalWarming, Science/Physics] UID:52875 Activity:kinda low
4/20    "Stephen Hawking hospitalized, reported very ill"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090420/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_hawking
        Hope he doesn't die until he solves the mystery of the universe(s) for
        all of us.
           \_ Update:
              http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30323352
	...
2009/3/29-4/3 [Computer/HW/Laptop, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:52768 Activity:high
3/29    "Leaving computers on overnight = $2.8 billion a year"
        http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/130078
        \_ Not good for hardware to power it up and down all the time. I
           always leave all my computers on all the time, except for
           laptops which I allow to sleep (but still be powered).
           \_ How is this the case for desktops but not laptops?  I don't see
	...