[quote]elusive wrote:
Not to get involved in this argument, because its going no where… but mass x acceleration = force. Force x distance = work. [/quote]
Not to get involved in this argument either but rice + water + rice cooker = less work = more efficient
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]elusive wrote:
Not to get involved in this argument, because its going no where… but mass x acceleration = force. Force x distance = work. [/quote]
Not to get involved in this argument either but rice + water + rice cooker = less work = more efficient [/quote]
HAHA freaking great Smashingweights to funny.Read up rds,you and your pot of water.
[quote]jppage wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]elusive wrote:
Not to get involved in this argument, because its going no where… but mass x acceleration = force. Force x distance = work. [/quote]
Not to get involved in this argument either but rice + water + rice cooker = less work = more efficient [/quote]
HAHA freaking great Smashingweights to funny.Read up rds,you and your pot of water.[/quote]
what can I say? I’m old school mate
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]jppage wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]elusive wrote:
Not to get involved in this argument, because its going no where… but mass x acceleration = force. Force x distance = work. [/quote]
Not to get involved in this argument either but rice + water + rice cooker = less work = more efficient [/quote]
HAHA freaking great Smashingweights to funny.Read up rds,you and your pot of water.[/quote]
what can I say? I’m old school mate[/quote]
Gotta be adaptable big guy
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]elusive wrote:
Not to get involved in this argument, because its going no where… but mass x acceleration = force. Force x distance = work. [/quote]
Not to get involved in this argument either but rice + water + rice cooker = less work = more efficient [/quote]
Less work? Does that mean you put less force into it or distance? Maybe both? Damn science
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]jppage wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]elusive wrote:
Not to get involved in this argument, because its going no where… but mass x acceleration = force. Force x distance = work. [/quote]
Not to get involved in this argument either but rice + water + rice cooker = less work = more efficient [/quote]
HAHA freaking great Smashingweights to funny.Read up rds,you and your pot of water.[/quote]
what can I say? I’m old school mate[/quote]
Gotta be adaptable big guy[/quote]
NEVER! I’m an old dog.
And I swear you only get rice cookers in America. I literally don’t know a single person who has one.
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]jppage wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]elusive wrote:
Not to get involved in this argument, because its going no where… but mass x acceleration = force. Force x distance = work. [/quote]
Not to get involved in this argument either but rice + water + rice cooker = less work = more efficient [/quote]
HAHA freaking great Smashingweights to funny.Read up rds,you and your pot of water.[/quote]
what can I say? I’m old school mate[/quote]
Gotta be adaptable big guy[/quote]
NEVER! I’m an old dog.
And I swear you only get rice cookers in America. I literally don’t know a single person who has one.[/quote]
Lol cuz were are lazy assholes
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
So you would argue being fatter does not help leverage? Shorten stroke length? Ect? If so then it seems there are no benefits for plers to get fat [/quote]
If they gain more leverage then more weight would be used…so saying less work is done without taking the increased weight used into the equation makes the statement incorrect.
If more weight can be moved, you can not claim less work is being done.[/quote]
But if stroke length decreas and weight increases seems like they negate. Since work is distance x force [/quote]
Do you really understand the (force) part of that equation?[/quote]
Yep
[/quote]
If you say so.
definition:
force, commonly, a “push” or “pull,” more properly defined in physics as a quantity that changes the motion, size, or shape of a body. Force is a vector quantity, having both magnitude and direction. The magnitude of a force is measured in units such as the pound, dyne, and newton, depending upon the system of measurement being used
Therefore, if force is increased with the weight used, you can not say there is less work done.[/quote]
Mr physics that was. Definition of force not work. Work is force x distance as I stated. You keep trying though
[/quote]
Dear Lord, do you understand that is that increases that WORK increases?[/quote]
Not if stroke length DECREASES. [/quote]
Why is everyone obsessed with stroke length. It’s making me uncomfortable.
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
So you would argue being fatter does not help leverage? Shorten stroke length? Ect? If so then it seems there are no benefits for plers to get fat [/quote]
If they gain more leverage then more weight would be used…so saying less work is done without taking the increased weight used into the equation makes the statement incorrect.
If more weight can be moved, you can not claim less work is being done.[/quote]
But if stroke length decreas and weight increases seems like they negate. Since work is distance x force [/quote]
Do you really understand the (force) part of that equation?[/quote]
Yep
[/quote]
If you say so.
definition:
force, commonly, a “push” or “pull,” more properly defined in physics as a quantity that changes the motion, size, or shape of a body. Force is a vector quantity, having both magnitude and direction. The magnitude of a force is measured in units such as the pound, dyne, and newton, depending upon the system of measurement being used
Therefore, if force is increased with the weight used, you can not say there is less work done.[/quote]
Mr physics that was. Definition of force not work. Work is force x distance as I stated. You keep trying though
[/quote]
Dear Lord, do you understand that is that increases that WORK increases?[/quote]
Not if stroke length DECREASES. [/quote]
Why is everyone obsessed with stroke length. It’s making me uncomfortable.
[/quote]
Weren’t you the me obsessed with dick length for about 5 pages in a different thread? Not sure how this would be worse
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
So you would argue being fatter does not help leverage? Shorten stroke length? Ect? If so then it seems there are no benefits for plers to get fat [/quote]
If they gain more leverage then more weight would be used…so saying less work is done without taking the increased weight used into the equation makes the statement incorrect.
If more weight can be moved, you can not claim less work is being done.[/quote]
But if stroke length decreas and weight increases seems like they negate. Since work is distance x force [/quote]
Do you really understand the (force) part of that equation?[/quote]
Yep
[/quote]
If you say so.
definition:
force, commonly, a “push” or “pull,” more properly defined in physics as a quantity that changes the motion, size, or shape of a body. Force is a vector quantity, having both magnitude and direction. The magnitude of a force is measured in units such as the pound, dyne, and newton, depending upon the system of measurement being used
Therefore, if force is increased with the weight used, you can not say there is less work done.[/quote]
Mr physics that was. Definition of force not work. Work is force x distance as I stated. You keep trying though
[/quote]
Dear Lord, do you understand that is that increases that WORK increases?[/quote]
Not if stroke length DECREASES. [/quote]
Why is everyone obsessed with stroke length. It’s making me uncomfortable.
[/quote]
Weren’t you the me obsessed with dick length for about 5 pages in a different thread? Not sure how this would be worse
[/quote]
Apples and oranges dude.
I feel like T-Nation has become home to two groups. One, the group of individuals who like to do things the lean way, which is respectable. Two, the group of individuals who like to do things the not-so-lean way, which is also respectable. However, the problem arises when a good deal of the “lean guys” make fun of most of the “not-so-lean guys”, saying that they are “too fat to see their muscles”, “too out of shape to do lunges”, etc. etc. and then the “not-so-lean guys” strike back by saying that most of “lean guys” are much smaller than them, weaker than them, and possess less muscle than them.
Really, all this does is make everyone look like a bunch of little boys on the playground arguing about who has the biggest stick. When posters like pushharder and X are spending more of their time telling all of the “little guys” how little they are than actually trying to help, I fear for the future of this site. Just as much as when people like Utah, Brick and others spend more of their time clowning on X than helping greenhorns like myself get big, strong, and lean.
I’m not saying my hands are completely clean, as I like to give 'ole X and others some trouble, but I can say I’ve never in all of my whopping 60 or something posts made a personal attack on someone here.
Woah, sorry, 80 posts. I need to slow it down. Ha.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
When posters like pushharder…spending more of their time telling all of the “little guys” how little they are than actually trying to help…
[/quote]
You’ll have to point out where I’ve done this.
Copy and paste or GTFO.[/quote]
Done
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]jppage wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]elusive wrote:
Not to get involved in this argument, because its going no where… but mass x acceleration = force. Force x distance = work. [/quote]
Not to get involved in this argument either but rice + water + rice cooker = less work = more efficient [/quote]
HAHA freaking great Smashingweights to funny.Read up rds,you and your pot of water.[/quote]
what can I say? I’m old school mate[/quote]
Gotta be adaptable big guy[/quote]
NEVER! I’m an old dog.
And I swear you only get rice cookers in America. I literally don’t know a single person who has one.[/quote]
Lol cuz were are lazy assholes
[/quote]
I have got to get me one of these rice cookers. I despise cooking rice and it is a staple for me.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
When posters like pushharder…spending more of their time telling all of the “little guys” how little they are than actually trying to help…
[/quote]
You’ll have to point out where I’ve done this.
Copy and paste or GTFO.[/quote]
You missed it. These are “youtube writers”. They will lie and keep lying and then that becomes the “internet truth” on facebook.
Twisting the truth is the new “discussion”.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
When posters like pushharder…spending more of their time telling all of the “little guys” how little they are than actually trying to help…
[/quote]
You’ll have to point out where I’ve done this.
Copy and paste or GTFO.[/quote]
I know your sarcasm Push…this is what you are doing here.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
I know one thing… there’s some fellers posting in this thread who flat out need to start eating more. A whole lot more. Good grief.[/quote]
You think a guy is too little to listen to…tell him to eat more(sarcastically)
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
When posters like pushharder…spending more of their time telling all of the “little guys” how little they are than actually trying to help…
[/quote]
You’ll have to point out where I’ve done this.
Copy and paste or GTFO.[/quote]
I know your sarcasm Push…this is what you are doing here.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
I know one thing… there’s some fellers posting in this thread who flat out need to start eating more. A whole lot more. Good grief.[/quote]
You think a guy is too little to listen to…tell him to eat more(sarcastically)
[/quote]
He was not telling “the little guys” how little they are. He was telling "the little guys"how to STOP being little.
It would seem some of you miss obvious points lately in favor of youtube jokes.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
When posters like pushharder…spending more of their time telling all of the “little guys” how little they are than actually trying to help…
[/quote]
You’ll have to point out where I’ve done this.
Copy and paste or GTFO.[/quote]
I know your sarcasm Push…this is what you are doing here.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
I know one thing… there’s some fellers posting in this thread who flat out need to start eating more. A whole lot more. Good grief.[/quote]
You think a guy is too little to listen to…tell him to eat more(sarcastically)
[/quote]
He was not telling “the little guys” how little they are. He was telling "the little guys"how to STOP being little.
It would seem some of you miss obvious points lately in favor of youtube jokes.[/quote]
Not addressing you…unlike yourself I have a great deal of respect for Push…so kindly stick to your own butthurt.