Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Yahya A.Sharif on 22/03/2022 19:23:50
-
My new discovery will appear in public soon.
-
What discovery are you talking about?
-
What discovery are you talking about?
The discovery of the human body very light mass. The human body easy walking dancing, running,jumping, etc.
-
The discovery of the human body very light mass. The human body comfortable walking dancing, running,jumping, etc.
We've already been through this. There is nothing unusual about the human body's mass when compared with other objects of the same mass.
-
The discovery of the human body very light mass.
As Kryptid said we have seen this all before. You don't have a discovery, you have a misunderstanding. There is no need to go through pages of posts telling you that you are mistaken and having you deny it.
-
The discovery of the human body very light mass. The human body comfortable walking dancing, running,jumping, etc.
We've already been through this. There is nothing unusual about the human body's mass when compared with other objects of the same mass.
Great scientists, physicists, inventors didn't discover this phenomenon. If the great can't notice the ordinary can't understand. Because no one can even think of it. The idea is crazy try to think of this: my body is 60 kg and when I lift it I must exert the same force I exert to lift a heavy rock of 60 kg but I move or lift lighter body of say 20 kg even though it should be heavy like the rock.
I think like this can be thought of : people are familiar with lifting or moving heavy loads do you think you really jump, dance , walk, run, walk upside down,etc doing these with a load of your body 70 kg?
-
Great scientists, physicist, inventors didn't discover this phenomenon.
Because it doesn't exist.
The idea is crazy try to think of this: my body is 60 kg and when I lift it I must exert the same force I exert to lift a heavy rock of 60 kg but I move or lift lighter body of say 20 kg even though it should be heavy like the rock.
I think like this can be thought of : people are familiar with lifting or moving heavy loads do you think you really jump, dance , walk, run, walk upside down,etc doing these with a load of your body 70 kg?
This is the exact same argument that you made before and it's just as misguided as it was before. Go find the old thread and read the replies that you were given before.
-
do you think you really jump, dance , walk, run, walk upside down,etc doing these with a load of your body 70 kg?
Of course. You should really just stop.
-
This is an experiment that prove my discovery:
A person stands on a scale. The scale reads his mass 60 kg. Now this person moves up his body short distance like someone tries to pick a fruit from a tree. The scale will start to increase by small forces x kg in which the total read of the scale is 60+x kg. The force he exerts on the scale is x kg The force the scale pushes him up is also x kg two forces in opposite directions..The force that lifts the person is x kg which is small " you can try this" the person needed only x kg to lift his body which is less than his weight this because the human lifts his own body.
You can try this by yourself
-
I have an experiment that prove my discovery:
What is that experiment?
-
I have an experiment that prove my discovery:
What is that experiment?
This experiment shows that a human can lift his body of 60 kg with very smaller force than 60 kg which is the x kg force even though in order to lift a mass of 60 kg the force must be equal to this 60 kg.This prove the discovery I said before
-
This experiment shows that a human can lift his body of 60 kg with far smaller force than 60 kg which is the x kg force even though in order to lift a mass of 60 kg the force must be equal to this 60 kg.This prove the discovery I said before
It has been explained to you multiple times why your 'analysis' is wrong, but you refuse to learn for some reason.
Do you think a scale should read 120 kg when you stand on your toes?
-
This experiment shows that a human can lift his body of 60 kg with far smaller force than 60 kg which is the x kg force even though in order to lift a mass of 60 kg the force must be equal to this 60 kg.This prove the discovery I said before
It has been explained to you multiple times why your 'analysis' is wrong, but you refuse to learn for some reason.
Do you think a scale should read 120 kg when you stand on your toes?
It should but it doesn't doubling the weight means extra 60 kg, which is needed to lift the person 60 kg But this doesn't happen it is only x kg that lift the person.
-
It should but it doesn't doubling the weight means extra 60 kg
Absolutely 100% wrong. If you jumped up off the scale so that you were just airborne the scale would register about 120 kg as you jumped.
-
It should but it doesn't doubling the weight means extra 60 kg
Absolutely 100% wrong. If you jumped up off the scale so that you were just airborne the scale would register about 120 kg as you jumped.
In such case you add force to the scale more than needed to lift the body I am talking about exact force "must be 60 kg but it is x kg " that will lift the person not unlimited force that will make him fly.
-
In such case you add force to the scale more than needed to lift the body I am talking about exact force "must be 60 kg but it is x kg " that will lift the person not unlimited force that will make him fly.
This is hopeless. You would rather pretend you've discovered something new than engage your brain for a few moments to see the truth.
If you have a little motor and lever supporting 60 kg on a scale and then turned on the motor to lift the 60 kg a few inches, the scale still wouldn't read 120 kg.
-
This experiment shows that a human can lift his body of 60 kg with far smaller force than 60 kg
No, it does not.
-
The force that lifts the person is x kg which is small " you can try this" the person needed only x kg to lift his body which is less than his weight this because the human lifts his own body.
That's not how that works. If the upward force on a 60 kilogram object is equal to 60 kilograms, then the object will not move because the forces are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. Therefore, a force greater than 60 kilograms is necessary to lift such an object against gravity. So the force provided by your feet when you stand on your tip toes would be 60 + x, not just x.
-
So the force provided by your feet when you stand on your tip toes would be 60 + x, not just x.
When moving up you press the scale by a force increasing the scale by 60+x. So we have two forces one is 60+x kg the scale reads downward the other force is the force upward before lifting or the weight 60 kg.The net force of the two is (60+x)-60 kg or x kg which moves the body upwards.
-
The net force of the two is (60+x)-60 kg or x kg which moves the body upwards.
Yes, that is the net force upwards, but not the total force upwards.
-
The net force of the two is (60+x)-60 kg or x kg which moves the body upwards.
Yes, that is the net force upwards, but not the total force upwards.
The total force downwards is 60+x kg which is the force I exert plus the weight.The net force causes the movement not the total force. So I choose x which lifts the body..
-
The total force downwards is 60+x kg
Yes, because of Newton's third law. The force downward and the force upward must be equal and in opposite directions.
The net force causes the movement not the total force.
Right, but the only way there can be a net force upwards would be if the total force provided by your feet exceeds the force of the weight pushing downwards. So if you weigh 60 kilograms, then your feet must provide more than 60 kilograms of force upwards. If the force provided by your feet is below 60 kilograms, then you won't be lifted because the downward force provided by gravity is greater than the upward force provided by your feet. This is basic math and physics.
-
Right, but the only way there can be a net force upwards would be if the total force provided by your feet exceeds the force of the weight pushing downwards.
Yes, according to physics the force must exceed 60 kg to lift the body 60 kg. In my experiment the force to lift the mass is less than 60 kg.
This is basic math and physics.
What says so? are they experiments or somthing else?
-
Yes, according to physics the force must exceed 60 kg to lift the body 60 kg. In my experiment the force to lift the mass is less than 60 kg.
*Sighs* No...
The entire point of what I'm saying is that your feet are producing in excess of 60 kilograms of force. If your feet cannot provide more than 60 kilograms of force, there cannot be any net force upwards. Since the force downwards and the force upwards are in opposite directions, we can consider one positive and the other negative. We can consider the force down as -60 kilograms. In order to lift the body upwards, an opposing force in excess of +60 kilograms is needed. If the force was less than +60, such as +50, you would get (-60) + (+50) = -10 kilograms. That is a net downward force because it is a negative number just like the force downward provided by the body's weight.
What says so?
Math says so. Addition and subtraction are a thing I learned in elementary school.
-
What says so?
Reality.
The question is why you disagree with it.
-
What says so?
Reality.
The question is why you disagree with it.
It is real and so mine my experiment is for living things.
-
Yes, according to physics the force must exceed 60 kg to lift the body 60 kg. In my experiment the force to lift the mass is less than 60 kg.
*Sighs* No...
The entire point of what I'm saying is that your feet are producing in excess of 60 kilograms of force. If your feet cannot provide more than 60 kilograms of force, there cannot be any net force upwards. Since the force downwards and the force upwards are in opposite directions, we can consider one positive and the other negative. We can consider the force down as -60 kilograms. In order to lift the body upwards, an opposing force in excess of +60 kilograms is needed. If the force was less than +60, such as +50, you would get (-60) + (+50) = -10 kilograms. That is a net downward force because it is a negative number just like the force downward provided by the body's weight.
What says so?
Math says so. Addition and subtraction are a thing I learned in elementary school.
Math do not determine when the net force is non-zero an object should move or not it is physics
-
What says so?
Reality.
The question is why you disagree with it.
It is real and so mine some explanation must be presented to reconcile both, my experiment is for living things.
The physics of forces works the same for both living and non-living systems. What, do you think the human body suddenly becomes heavier when they die or something?
Yes, according to physics the force must exceed 60 kg to lift the body 60 kg. In my experiment the force to lift the mass is less than 60 kg.
*Sighs* No...
The entire point of what I'm saying is that your feet are producing in excess of 60 kilograms of force. If your feet cannot provide more than 60 kilograms of force, there cannot be any net force upwards. Since the force downwards and the force upwards are in opposite directions, we can consider one positive and the other negative. We can consider the force down as -60 kilograms. In order to lift the body upwards, an opposing force in excess of +60 kilograms is needed. If the force was less than +60, such as +50, you would get (-60) + (+50) = -10 kilograms. That is a net downward force because it is a negative number just like the force downward provided by the body's weight.
What says so?
Math says so. Addition and subtraction are a thing I learned in elementary school.
Math do not determine when the net force is non-zero an object should move or not it is physics
Um, it absolutely does. Math is an aspect of physics. If you have two people pushing against each other, do you really believe the weaker person will win?
-
The physics of forces works the same for both living and non-living systems. What, do you think the human body suddenly becomes heavier when they die or something?
Yes.
Um, it absolutely does. Math is an aspect of physics. If you have two people pushing against each other, do you really believe the weaker person will win?
I presented an experiment that tell the truth. is it true or not and how" not theories or arguments"?
The scale reads 60+x kg, the added force is x when a person lifts his body then he pushes with the added x so the force pushing up the body is x which is less than 60 kg
-
Yes.
That is impossible.
The mass of a body can not suddenly increase when they die.
A long time ago, people made the measurements. They were expecting the body to lose weight at the moment of death because they thought that the weight of the soul would be lost from the body.
The measurements showed that there was no change or a small loss of mass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_grams_experiment
Also, a change in mass would (because of the Einstein relation E=MC^2) require a change in energy.
But the conservation of energy makes that impossible- so there can not be a change in mass.
Reality.
The question is why you disagree with it.
-
It is real
You have not provided any evidence of this.
You just keep saying it is true.
But it is not true.
-
You have not provided any evidence of this.
What evidence?
I presented an experiment that tell the truth. is it true or not and how" not theories or arguments"?
The scale reads 60+x kg, the added force is x when a person lifts his body then he pushes with the added x so the force pushing up the body is x which is less than 60 kg
-
Quote from: Kryptid on Yesterday at 22:53:18
The physics of forces works the same for both living and non-living systems. What, do you think the human body suddenly becomes heavier when they die or something?
Yes.
Since Yahya A.Sharif has embraced magical thinking there is really no way to have a science discussion with him.
-
Since Yahya A.Sharif has embraced magical thinking
He did that long ago.
It sounds like you are still going with the argument from ignorance. You are basically saying, "If I can't figure out how he did it logically through non-magical means, then he must have used magic to do it".
It is not supposed to be "non-magical" means it is supposed to be unknown means.
If I can not know how he did it through any means then he uses what I can call it magic.
-
Yes.
You can't be serious. That would violate conservation of mass if a human body suddenly got heavier out of nowhere just because they died.
I presented an experiment that tell the truth.
An experiment that you consistently misinterpret the results of.
I'll ask you again: If you have two people pushing against each other, do you really believe the weaker person will win?
-
An experiment that you consistently misinterpret the results of.
What is the x force on the scale ?
Why an x appears when I lift my body?
When I lift my body the x force appears, what is the relation between the force I press on the scale and the value of the x on the scale?
-
An experiment that you consistently misinterpret the results of.
What is the x force on the scale ?
Why an x appears when I lift my body?
When I lift my body the x force appears, what is the relation between the force I press on the scale and the value of the x on the scale?
It is your "experiment".
You should be telling us what the outcome is.
-
An experiment that you consistently misinterpret the results of.
What is the x force on the scale ?
Why an x appears when I lift my body?
When I lift my body the x force appears, what is the relation between the force I press on the scale and the value of the x on the scale?
I'll answer that once you finally answer this:
I'll ask you again: If you have two people pushing against each other, do you really believe the weaker person will win?
-
60 kg is a mass, not a force.
-
60 kg is a mass, not a force.
True, but that's the least of his problems.
(So I'm not going to confuse the issue by talking about Kgf)
-
I'll ask you again: If you have two people pushing against each other, do you really believe the weaker person will win?
I don not need to answer your question.If I am wrong What is the right answers for my questions. You do not know the answers, do you?
-
It is your "experiment".
You should be telling us what the outcome is.
If you can not know the right outcome, how you can determine my explanation is wrong?
-
What is the x force on the scale ?
The force on the scale when you are not moving is about 588 N.
If you take 0.5 seconds to stand on your toes your 'X' would be about 8 N.
-
how you can determine my explanation is wrong?
Because your "explanation" is that magic did it.
And we know that magic is not real.
-
I don not need to answer your question.
If I answer your questions, will you answer mine?
-
This is a second experiment:
A rope is fixed to a horizontal bar the other end of the rope a person pulls it to lift his body up. There is a scale fixed to the rope between the bar and the person to measure the force the person lifts his body with. The scale shows the person weight 60 kg. When the person tries to lift himself up the weight on the scale will increase by x kg in which the scale shows 60+x this x kg or x*9.8 newtons is the force the human lifts his body with
-
Excuse me:
I don not need to answer your question.
If I answer your questions, will you answer mine?
-
This is a second experiment:
A rope is fixed to a horizontal bar the other end of the rope a person pulls it to lift his body up. There is a scale fixed to the rope between the bar and the person to measure the force the person lifts his body with. The person exerts exactly the force he needs to lift his body up no more. If the person is 60 kg the force he must exert to lift his body must at least equal to his weight 600 N. The force on the scale he lifts his body with is very smaller than the person's weight 600 N.
Gravity acceleration=10 m/s²
Even more wrongness.
Why can't you understand that 60Kg is 60Kg?
-
What is the x force on the scale ?
Why an x appears when I lift my body?
When I lift my body the x force appears, what is the relation between the force I press on the scale and the value of the x on the scale?
When you lift your body from a stationary position, the center of your mass must first accelerate upward.
The force x = your mass times your acceleration. But since parts of your body have different acceleration, then x must be integrated from parts of your body. Your toes are not moving, hence 0 acceleration. On the other hand, your head experiences greater acceleration.
x = ∫a dm
Once you reach highest velocity upward, you need to decelerate (or accelerate downward). Otherwise you would fly away from the scale. Gravity would normally provide this downward acceleration, and you only need to reduce your acceleration upward. The weight scale would read lower than your normal weight. In this case, it would read 60-x.
x is the effective deceleration rate, which should be calculated by integration, for the reason I said above.
We can omit the integral by saying that x = a.m, where a is acceleration of your central mass. But when your body changes stance/posture, your central mass will be located at different point in space.
When you stop moving and stay at the higher position, the weight scale will return to show your normal weight, and x=0.
-
Humans are of flesh and bones which is different from other masses. This also includes other living beings. A horse's legs can bear its massive average mass 300 kg.
-
Humans are of flesh and bones which is different from other masses. This also includes other living beings. A horse's legs can bear its massive average mass 300 kg.
Does it include preserved animals?
-
Humans are of flesh and bones which is different from other masses. This also includes other living beings. A horse's legs can bear its massive average mass 300 kg.
Does it include preserved animals?
Meat is a special matter. But the force must come from the muscles. A dead meat doesn't have force.
-
Are you ignoring me on purpose?
Excuse me:
I don not need to answer your question.
If I answer your questions, will you answer mine?
-
Meat is a special matter. But the force must come from the muscles. A dead meat doesn't have force.
What do you think about bats hanging upside down? Do they have lower weight?
-
But the force must come from the muscles. A dead meat doesn't have force.
The experiment was done.*
Dead bodies weigh the same as live bodies.
So you are wrong.
Why are you still posting as if your idea might be correct?
And I'd like to see you answer Kryptid's question too.
*There are also other problems with your idea.
People just about float in water so we know that they have a density about the same as water.
If they somehow weighed less then their density would be less and they would float "high" in water like foamed plastic does.
-
I'm still waiting.
-
Um, it absolutely does. Math is an aspect of physics. If you have two people pushing against each other, do you really believe the weaker person will win?
No. You have misunderstanding of the relation of math and physics, physics is the reality math says how, If a number 4 represent the stronger force and a number 2 represent the weaker force what makes the net force is the subtraction.
-
No.
Then you agree that the greater force will overpower the lesser force. That goes against what you have been saying.
You have misunderstanding of the relation of math and physics
No, I don't. Physics and math don't disagree with each other.
If a number 4 represent the stronger force and a number 2 represent the weaker force what makes the net force is the subtraction.
Exactly. That's how we know that the force raising you up against gravity must be greater than the force of gravity itself if you are indeed moving upwards.
-
No, I don't. Physics and math don't disagree with each other.
Who says the relation is agreeing or disagreeing
If a number 4 represent the stronger force and a number 2 represent the weaker force what makes the net force is the subtraction
Exactly.
How?
-
Who says the relation is agreeing or disagreeing
Experimentation. You honestly can't think that physics and math disagree, can you? Please tell me you don't believe that...
How?
What do you mean, "how?" I'm agreeing with what you said. So are you disagreeing with yourself?
-
If a number 4 represent the stronger force and a number 2 represent the weaker force what makes the net force is the subtraction
Exactly.
How?
-
How?
Are you asking me how to do subtraction?
-
How do you address the problem that dead bodies weigh exactly the same as live ones?
-
How do you address the problem that dead bodies weigh exactly the same as live ones?
They weigh the same The idea is dead bodies meat do not have force in it then I can not apply my concept and because the meat can not lift itself the only way is to be lift by another force which must be greater.
-
How do you address the problem that dead bodies weigh exactly the same as live ones?
They weigh the same The idea is dead bodies meat do not have force in it then I can not apply my concept and because the meat can not lift itself the only way is to be lift by another force which must be greater.
I'm sorry, but that made no sense.
-
We can detect photons, so they exist: https://spie.org/publications/fg08_p34_photon_detectors?SSO=1#:~:text=Photon%20detectors%20count%20photons%20of,Cu2O%2C%20etc.)
Scientists explain the results by accepting that photons exist.
They are real.
We have proof of them.
The question is why don't you believe that?
I presented two experiments that prove my discovery. why rejection?
-
I presented two experiments that prove my discovery. why rejection?
The rejection is due to the fact that your idea is basically insane.
-
I presented two experiments
You presented words on a screen.
Anyone can do that.
But you didn't actually show any experiment.
-
I presented two experiments that prove my discovery. why rejection?
Are you talking about photons or body mass?
In either case, you're just plain wrong.
-
I presented two experiments that prove my discovery. why rejection?
In either case, you're just plain wrong.
No. I am not.
-
I presented two experiments that prove my discovery. why rejection?
In either case, you're just plain wrong.
No. I am not.
You are clearly wrong about saying you have shown experiments.
Why should we believe you about anything else?
-
I presented two experiments
You presented words on a screen.
Anyone can do that.
But you didn't actually show any experiment.
I can do them. I can show them. Any-one can do them and verify them by himself. But I am sure 100% no scientist will care.
-
But I am sure 100% no scientist will care.
Now that I agree with.
-
I can do them.
Go on then.
But remember that simple equipment like bathroom scales are not able to make reliable measurements in all conditions.
-
I can do them.
Go on then.
What do you think will happen then? will any university try to do the experiment to make it public?
-
What do you think will happen then? will any university try to do the experiment to make it public?
If I am on a scale and I weigh 60 kg, if I raise up on my toes the scale will not read 120 kg as I am rising up, I believe that is your experiment. But that result is the expected out come based on simple physics. You seem to think the scale should read 120 kg but no one who has a basic grasp of mechanics would come to that conclusion.
-
This is more explanation to my two experiments:
A human mass can be treated as a smaller mass when a human lifts or moves his own body.
All mechanics equations can be applied for a smaller mass . If a human pushes a wall " he pushes his own body" In the equation of Newton's second law F=ma m equals x kg which is smaller than 60 kg
In my experiments the person lifts a smaller mass of his body equals x kg I can treat the human mass as x kg when he lifts his body.
If a person jumps "he moves his own body " he will jump with a smaller mass x smaller than 60 kg that why he can jump high but he will barely move a rock of 60 kg
-
A human mass can be treated as a smaller mass when a human lifts or moves his own body.
No it can't.
Imagine hanging a ladder from a spring balance or putting it on a bathroom scale.
If I climb the ladder at a constant speed the weight is (in my case) about 70Kg plus the weight of the ladder.
There's really now way round this.
It's just that you don't understand that people's muscles are stronger than you think they are.
will any university try to do the experiment to make it public?
Of course not. It is ludicrous.
-
he will jump with a smaller mass x smaller than 60 kg that why he can jump high but he will barely move a rock of 60 kg
I am completely baffled by the fact that you don't seem to understand that carrying a 60 kilogram rock means your legs are carrying more total weight than if they only had to carrying your own body weight without a rock.
-
A human mass can be treated as a smaller mass when a human lifts or moves his own body.
No it can't.
There are two options in the experiment:
Whether the person lifts his body mass 60 kg with x kg or the x kg lifts a smaller mass of human body x kg
I chose the body to be smaller mass x kg because of the observation below:
I am completely baffled by the fact that you don't seem to understand that carrying a 60 kilogram rock means your legs are carrying more total weight than if they only had to carrying your own body weight without a rock.
I said jump high and barely move the rock
Doubling the load 120 kg must not give the big difference but it did, a very easy 60 kg"body" vs a very difficult 120 kg"body+the rock"
can't you see the difference between jumping with high speed against gravity with even exerting your greatest force to lift a rock of 60 kg.
-
You are failing to understand the nature of reality here.
Doubling the load 120 kg must not give the big difference but it did,
You have that the wrong way round.
Doubling the load does make a big difference.
You can tell- because it does.
You should look at the evidence.
The evidence says that you weigh 60Kg and you can jump around. So your muscles can carry 60Kg easily.
But that your muscles are not able to carry you and another 60Kg making a total of 120 Kg easily.
Why don't you just accept that 120 is a lot more than 60?
-
The evidence says that you weigh 60Kg and you can jump around. So your muscles can carry 60Kg easily.
You didn't add this: my experiments say: as I can jump around easily I can lift my body with small force x*9.8 N too.
Why don't you just accept that 120 is a lot more than 60?
Soon or later you will know the truth.
-
I can lift my body with small force
You keep saying that.
It is not true.
Soon or later you will know the truth.
We do know it.
We are just waiting for you to catch up with us.
-
Doubling the load 120 kg must not give the big difference
You think that doubling the weight that your legs must carry shouldn't make a big difference? That makes no sense at all.
-
Doubling the load 120 kg must not give the big difference
You think that doubling the weight that your legs must carry shouldn't make a big difference?
It shouldn't make that big difference of jumping fast against gravity and barely moving the rock
-
It shouldn't make that big difference of jumping fast against gravity and barely moving the rock
Okay, prove it (and do it with an actual, good argument, not mere intuition).
-
It shouldn't make that big difference of jumping fast against gravity and barely moving the rock
Again, you are looking at the experiment and ignoring what it tells you.
It obviously DOES make a big difference.
And yet you refuse to accept the evidence of your own senses.
-
Do you work out, Yahya? Try doing squats with no weight, then try using a squat machine with a mass equal to your own as the resistance. Report back on your findings.
-
Do you work out, Yahya? Try doing squats with no weight, then try using a squat machine with a mass equal to your own as the resistance. Report back on your findings.
Hello
Unfortunately We don't have the machine in my country.
-
Do you work out, Yahya? Try doing squats with no weight, then try using a squat machine with a mass equal to your own as the resistance. Report back on your findings.
Hello
Unfortunately We don't have the machine in my country.
Then accept the findings of someone like Kryptid who does have access to such machines.
Or just get a sack with 60 Kg of sand, put it across your shoulders and try doing squats.
There's nothing magical about the machine.
-
Then accept the findings of someone like Kryptid who does have access to such machines.
What are his findings?
-
Do you work out, Yahya?
If I lift my body 60 kgf alone I will exert x kgf. If a weight of 60 kg is on my shoulders I will need an x kgf for my body and 60 kgf for the other mass I will lift my body and the rock with 60+x kgf. According to what you say to lift the rock I need 60 kgf to lift my body and a 60 kg to lift the rock a total of 120 kg.
First of all the scale will not show a 60 kg for lifting the body it will show smaller than this " x kgf"
Second we will have two scenarios:
The person lifts his body alone with x kgf and lifts both the rock and his body with 60+x kgf. What I say
Or the person lifts his body with 60 kgf and lifts the rock with 60 kgf a total 120 kgf what you say.
The scale shows the lifting force is x kgf. The difference between 60+x/x lifting the body alone x kgf and lifting both 60+x kgf is far greater than the difference 120/60 lifting the body alone 60 kg and lifting both 120 kg. I only doubled the weight.
-
This is hopeless...
-
Then accept the findings of someone like Kryptid who does have access to such machines.
What are his findings?
THAT YOU ARE WRONG!
-
If I lift my body 60 kgf alone I will exert x kgf.
Yes.
x =60.
That's it.
-
If a weight of 60 kg is on my shoulders I will need an x kgf for my body and 60 kgf for the other mass
Yes.
And x is still 60
-
First of all the scale will not show a 60 kg for lifting the body
Yes it does.
-
my experiments say: as I can jump around easily I can lift my body with small force x*9.8 N too.
Sorry to jump in.
However, what is so unique in your jump?
I can offer you several animals with a similar mass that can jump and lift much better than you do.
So why do you focus on the human body mass?
Why don't you focus on the human brain ability/mass?
Just think about it - You won't find any creature/animal in the entire planet that would claim that its body mass is special.
-
According to what you say to lift the rock I will need 60 kgf to lift my body and a 60 kg to lift the rock a total of 120 kg.
Your soles lift that amount. Your knees lift less, since they don't lift your lower legs.
Your waist lifts less, because it doesn't lift your body parts below it.
If you lift the rock using your hands, your head doesn't lift anything.
-
It shouldn't make that big difference of jumping fast against gravity and barely moving the rock
Okay, prove it (and do it with an actual, good argument, not mere intuition).
A person stands on a scale he holds a15 kg block on his hands and his arms are stretched out in front of his body in which his arms make a lever its fulcrum is at the elbow. The position is equivalent to trying to pick a fruit on a tree in which the fulcrum is at the toes . If he lifts the rock up as a lever the scale will read 15+60 kg that is the 15 kgf is the force he lifts the rock with which equals to the mass of the rock 15 kg. As the rock 15 kg needed 15 kgf, a rock of 60 kg will need a 60 kgf.
Lifting the rock will need a 60 kgf lifting or jumping with his body will need a very smaller force x kgf. That why he can jump fast against gravity but he will barely move a rock of 60 kg.
-
It shouldn't make that big difference of jumping fast against gravity and barely moving the rock
Okay, prove it (and do it with an actual, good argument, not mere intuition).
A person stands on a scale he holds a15 kg block on his hands and his arms are stretched out in front of his body in which his arms make a lever its fulcrum is at the elbow. The position is equivalent to trying to pick a fruit on a tree in which the fulcrum is at the toes . If he lifts the rock up as a lever the scale will read 15+60 kg that is the 15 kgf is the force he lifts the rock with which equals to the mass of the rock 15 kg. As the rock 15 kg needed 15 kgf, a rock of 60 kg will need a 60 kgf.
Lifting the rock will need a 60 kgf lifting or jumping with his body will need a very smaller force x kgf. That why he can jump fast against gravity but he will barely move a rock of 60 kg.
None of that made any real sense.
my experiments say: as I can jump around easily I can lift my body with small force x*9.8 N too.
Sorry to jump in.
However, what is so unique in your jump?
I can offer you several animals with a similar mass that can jump and lift much better than you do.
So why do you focus on the human body mass?
Why don't you focus on the human brain ability/mass?
Just think about it - You won't find any creature/animal in the entire planet that would claim that its body mass is special.
You won't hear me say this often, but Dave just made a very good point.
-
jumping with his body will need a very smaller force x kgf.
You haven't shown why this should be the case.
-
A person stands on a scale he holds a15 kg block on his hands and his arms are stretched out in front of his body in which his arms make a lever its fulcrum is at the elbow. The position is equivalent to trying to pick a fruit on a tree in which the fulcrum is at the toes . If he lifts the rock up as a lever the scale will read 15+60 kg
No, you don't have to lift the 15 kg weight. If you hold perfectly still holding the 15 kg weight your combined weight will measure 15 + 60 kg. If you raise the 15 kg weight the scale will read 15 + 60 + x kg. The 'x' will be a small percentage of the weight while you are lifting it but when you stop lifting it the scale will return to the 15 + 60 kg.
-
A person stands on a scale he holds a15 kg block on his hands and his arms are stretched out in front of his body in which his arms make a lever its fulcrum is at the elbow. The position is equivalent to trying to pick a fruit on a tree in which the fulcrum is at the toes . If he lifts the rock up as a lever the scale will read 15+60 kg
No, you don't have to lift the 15 kg weight. If you hold perfectly still holding the 15 kg weight your combined weight will measure 15 + 60 kg.
Thanks for correction
The scale will show 15+60=75 kg instead of 60 kg. The body 60 kg plus the rock he carries 15 kg.
If you raise the 15 kg weight the scale will read 15 + 60 + x kg. The 'x' will be a small percentage of the weight while you are lifting it but when you stop lifting it the scale will return to the 15 + 60 kg
It will read 75+15+x this is if he raises the total, his body and the rock with his feet. 75 kg what the scale first reads adding to it x kgf to lift the body and 15 kgf to lift the rock a total of 75+15+x kg
But if he raises the rock up by his arms he lifts the 15 kg alone because his body didn't move upwards.
The scale will show 75+15 the force the scale shows 75 kgf plus the force he lifts the rock with 15 kgf. The force needed to lift the rock is 15 kgf and the force needed to lift a 60 kg rock will be 60 kgf which is very big compared to the force needed to lift a human x kgf
-
It will read 75+15+x this is if he raises the total, his body and the rock with his feet. 75 kg what the scale first reads adding to it x kgf to lift the body and 15 kgf to lift the rock a total of 75+15+x kg
No that is not correct. It would be 75 + x kg.
But if he raises the rock up by his arms he lifts the 15 kg alone because his body didn't move upwards.
The scale will show 75+15 the force the scale shows 75 kgf plus the force he lifts the rock with 15 kgf.
No that is not correct. When you are on the scale holding the rock the force on the scale is 75 kg (60 + 15). You can look at it like this; when the rock is held steady, your body and the rock are accelerating at 9.8 m/s^2.
So when the rock is not moving:
F = (60 x 9.8 m/s^2) + (15 x 9.8 m/s^2) = 735 N
Let's say you raise the rock 1 meter in a second. That is roughly an acceleration of 2 m/s^2.
So the overall acceleration of the rock is:
9.8 m/s^2 + 2 m/s^2 = 11.8 m/s^2
So when the rock is moving:
F = (60 x 9.8 m/s^2) + (15 x 11.8 m/s^2) = 765 N
So when the rock is moving the scale will read about (765 N) / (9.8 m/s^2) = 78 kg, which is 60 + 18 kg.
-
It will read 75+15+x this is if he raises the total, his body and the rock with his feet. 75 kg what the scale first reads adding to it x kgf to lift the body and 15 kgf to lift the rock a total of 75+15+x kg
You seem to be missing the point.
In science, just saying "This will happen" is not good enough.
You have to actually show that it does happen.
And, from what we already know, it will not actually happen.
Just typing words on teh internet does not change reality.
-
It will read 75+15+x this is if he raises the total, his body and the rock with his feet. 75 kg what the scale first reads adding to it x kgf to lift the body and 15 kgf to lift the rock a total of 75+15+x kg
No that is not correct. It would be 75 + x kg.
The person instead of consisting of human body 75 kg he is 60 kg human and carries an object 15 kg I will not be able to add the 15 kg to the 60 kg because one of them is human and the other is object .So he will need a force to lift the object 15 kgf plus the force to lift his body x kgf so the force will be 15+x kgf and the scale will show 75+15+x
No that is not correct. When you are on the scale holding the rock the force on the scale is 75 kg (60 + 15). You can look at it like this; when the rock is held steady, your body and the rock are accelerating at 9.8 m/s^2.
So when the rock is not moving:
F = (60 x 9.8 m/s^2) + (15 x 9.8 m/s^2) = 735 N
Let's say you raise the rock 1 meter in a second. That is roughly an acceleration of 2 m/s^2.
So the overall acceleration of the rock is:
9.8 m/s^2 + 2 m/s^2 = 11.8 m/s^2
So when the rock is moving:
F = (60 x 9.8 m/s^2) + (15 x 11.8 m/s^2) = 765 N
So when the rock is moving the scale will read about (765 N) / (9.8 m/s^2) = 78 kg, which is 60 + 18 kg.
The rock is not at speed it is barely moved up. This is like you stand on a scale and push a roof over you. When I lift the rock it will resist like the roof, the resistance will appear on the scale, the resistance will stop at 15 kg as soon as I lift the rock
When I lift the rock I will have reaction on the scale that push me up with 15 kgf so I will only add 15 kg to what the scale actually shows
-
will not be able to add the 15 kg to the 60 kg because one of them is human and the other is object .
You seem to be missing the point.
In science, just saying "This will happen" is not good enough.
You have to actually show that it does happen.
And, from what we already know, it will not actually happen.
Just typing words on teh internet does not change reality.
-
The person instead of consisting of human body 75 kg he is 60 kg human and carries an object 15 kg I will not be able to add the 15 kg to the 60 kg because one of them is human and the other is object
Since you are not using physics or any science to come up with this, no amount of physics can convince you otherwise.
Members have shown you in multiple ways why you are wrong. You have ignored all efforts to help you to understand and your only reply is to repeat your own incorrect conclusions. You apparently are not trying or not capable of understanding your error so this really is pointless.
I recommend to close this thread since the only thing we will see is for Yahya just keep repeating his inaccurate claims.
-
The person instead of consisting of human body 75 kg he is 60 kg human and carries an object 15 kg I will not be able to add the 15 kg to the 60 kg because one of them is human and the other is object .
If you drink 1 kg of water, your weight becomes 61 kg. How can the scale distinguish between your original weight and the weight of the water?
-
If you drink 1 kg of water, your weight becomes 61 kg. How can the scale distinguish between your original weight and the weight of the water?
Are you serious?!
Here is the answer, it is a tough one but I will try and answer it - before you drink the water you weigh 60kg and after you drink the water you will weigh 61kg and scales measure weight!
-
If you drink 1 kg of water, your weight becomes 61 kg. How can the scale distinguish between your original weight and the weight of the water?
Are you serious?!
Here is the answer, it is a tough one but I will try and answer it - before you drink the water you weigh 60kg and after you drink the water you will weigh 61kg and scales measure weight!
It's a serious question if it's addressed to the OP.
-
Nobody understand.
Yes we do. It's just that you are wrong.
-
If you drink 1 kg of water, your weight becomes 61 kg. How can the scale distinguish between your original weight and the weight of the water?
Are you serious?!
Here is the answer, it is a tough one but I will try and answer it - before you drink the water you weigh 60kg and after you drink the water you will weigh 61kg and scales measure weight!
It looks like you are missing the context.
-
If you drink 1 kg of water, your weight becomes 61 kg. How can the scale distinguish between your original weight and the weight of the water?
Are you serious?!
Here is the answer, it is a tough one but I will try and answer it - before you drink the water you weigh 60kg and after you drink the water you will weigh 61kg and scales measure weight!
It looks like you are missing the context.
It looks like your idea is wrong.
What context is there where that extra 1Kg is part of the body (so it weighs less than 1Kg) , but not part of the body (so it weighs 1Kg)?
-
The person instead of consisting of human body 75 kg he is 60 kg human and carries an object 15 kg I will not be able to add the 15 kg to the 60 kg because one of them is human and the other is object .
If you drink 1 kg of water, your weight becomes 61 kg. How can the scale distinguish between your original weight and the weight of the water?
It is simple. No magical scales are needed. It is just a matter of calculations:
A human weight is 60 kg doesn't change. Water weight is 1 kg doesn't change. The scale shows 61 kg, water weight plus human weight. He lifts his body alone before drinking water with x kgf and 1 kg mass needs 1 kgf to be lifted . So the force to lift both after drinking is x+1 kgf The scale will change from first measurement 61 kg to 61+(x+1) kgf
-
A human weight is 60 kg doesn't change. Water weight is 1 kg doesn't change. The scale shows 61 kg, water weight plus human weight.
You figured it out. Good.
-
It is simple. No magical scales are needed. It is just a matter of calculations:
A human weight is 60 kg doesn't change. Water weight is 1 kg doesn't change. The scale shows 61 kg, water weight plus human weight. He lifts his body alone before drinking water with x kgf and 1 kg mass needs 1 kgf to be lifted . So the force to lift both after drinking is x+1 kgf The scale will change from first measurement 61 kg to 61+(x+1) kg, the force he lifts his body with x+1 kgf plus the first read 61 kgf.
All of the mass in your body used to be in the form of non-living material (food, water, and perhaps surgical implants if you have them). Please explain how that matter somehow magically requires less force to lift merely because its atoms have been arranged into the form of living tissue.
-
A human weight is 60 kg doesn't change. Water weight is 1 kg doesn't change. The scale shows 61 kg, water weight plus human weight.
You figured it out. Good.
You misquoted. Bad.
-
The scale will change from first measurement 61 kg to 61+(x+1) kg, the force he lifts his body with x+1 kgf plus the first read 61 kgf.
Have you tried this simple experiment?
Don't you want to know the truth?
-
It looks like your idea is wrong.
What context is there where that extra 1Kg is part of the body (so it weighs less than 1Kg) , but not part of the body (so it weighs 1Kg)?
It's not my idea.
It's an implication of OP's idea which can be easily tested, so he can get a first hand experience.
-
It looks like your idea is wrong.
What context is there where that extra 1Kg is part of the body (so it weighs less than 1Kg) , but not part of the body (so it weighs 1Kg)?
It's not my idea.
It's an implication of OP's idea which can be easily tested, so he can get a first hand experience.
Sorry, I messed up the quote.
It's the OP who is hopelessly wrong.
Your point about adding a kilo of water pretty neatly proves that.
-
This is an important new discovery.
This forum belongs to the university of Cambridge I guess.
Why The university of Cambridge ignores my new discovery?
Why at least exerting tiny effort to do my experiments?
-
Hi.
Firstly, I'm not staff or involved with this website in any official capacity. This is just my opinion and limited experience of the site.
This is printed on the front page of the website:
©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2020 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.
More generally, the site is just loosely supported by Cambridge University but it is not part of the main function of the University.
Most of the moderators are volunteers and may not have any involvement with the University at all.
So, you are simply not speaking to or presenting your "new theories" to Cambridge University but just to a collection of users who are from the general public.
It is very difficult to present a new idea or new discovery to the professional community of scientists. The main way would be to try and get an article published in a recognized journal. This has been discussed elsewhere in the forum but overall it is just very difficult for a member of the general public to do this. The most common way to get a new idea to the attention of the scientific community would involve doing something like registering for a research degree with an already recognized institution and presenting your ideas through that institution.
Depending on how you look on this, it's good and bad news. The good news is that there are some people here (not every user perhaps but some of them) who do have some expertise and are giving up their time to discuss issues and engage with the general public. The bad news is ... well... you can fill that in for yourself.
Best Wishes.
-
Why The university of Cambridge ignore my new discovery?
You have not made a discovery.
-
Happy to consider promoting your discovery. What have you discovered that was previously unknown to science?
-
Why at least exerting tiny effort to do my experiments?
Would you accept the results if the experiment proved you wrong?
-
Happy to consider promoting your discovery. What have you discovered that was previously unknown to science?
Thanks
1) I observed that a human when lifting his body like someone trying to pick a fruit from a tree he exerts very small force by his weak feet and calves muscles to lift his body
The force to lift a mass must be slightly greater than the weight my discovery is the force of human to lift his own body" same muscles on the same human" is very smaller than the weight and this a special case in organisms.
The experiment:
A person stands on a scale. The scale reads his weight 60 kg. When the person lifts his body up like someone trying to pick a fruit from a tree the scale will increase by x kilograms in which the total read of the scale is 60+x kg. Although a mass needs a force greater than the mass weight to be lifted, the x kgf force in the scale is very smaller* than the 60 kgf but it lifts the body.
2) I observed that a human of 60 kg can jump fast and high against gravity but he will barely move a rock of 60 kg and this is also because a human can jump with a very small force **
The experiment:
While you are on the scale hold a 15 kg rock on your hands.Try to lift it up, the scale will measure the force you lift the rock with which is 15 kgf in which the scale will read 60+15 kg the force to to lift the 15 kgf equals to its weight 15 kgf " what physics says" but the force to lift the human body is very smaller than body weight which is x kgf. So the person needs a 60 kgf to lift the rock 60 kg and he needs only the small x kgf force to lift his body 60 kg that why a person of 60 kg can jump fast and high against gravity but he will not be able to even move a rock of 60 kg.
Although a force to lift an object must be slightly greater than the object weight, a human needs very smaller force than body weight to lift his own body. This also includes other movements : jumping, walking,running, dancing,etc with little effort
*I do not know how very small but the constant of any equation is just a small fraction.
**jumping needs more force than x kgf but it is the same idea
-
Why at least exerting tiny effort to do my experiments?
Would you accept the results if the experiment proved you wrong?
Of course.
-
he exerts very small force by his weak feet and calves muscles to lift his body
How did you measure that force?
If you did not measure it, how do you know it is weak?
-
I observed that a human of 60 kg can jump fast and high against gravity but he will barely move a rock of 60 kg and this is also because a human can jump with a very small force
You observed that it is much harder to move 120 Kg than 60 Kg.
Why did you think that was surprising?
-
A person stands on a scale. The scale reads his weight 60 kg. When the person lifts his body up like someone trying to pick a fruit from a tree the scale will increase by x kilograms in which the total read of the scale is 60+x kg.
Most scales (particularly simple bathroom scales) suffer from errors if the weight on them is not in the middle of the scales.
By moving your arms, you move your centre of gravity and that affects the reading on the scales.
It is an error, not a real effect.
When people test scales they measure the size of this error.
https://www.precisionsolutionsinc.com/resources/shift-and-corner-test/
You might be able to test for it yourself if you have a small but heavy weight like a block of metal.
Put it in the middle of the scales and see what they read, then move it to one side- or to the front r back- and see if it still gives the same reading.
Ultimately, we know you are wrong, because we actually measure the forces in bones and tendons.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10645365/
-
the x kgf force in the scale is very smaller* than the 60 kgf but it lifts the body.
That is not a discovery. I learned that in the first semester of physics, mechanics.
-
Hi again.
It looks like you @Yahya A.Sharif have had replies about your new theory - it seems to have been in the "new theories" section under the title "The theory of the human body special mass". They may not have said exactly what you wanted to hear and some of them weren't even all that friendly - but that's a slightly different issue.
Your new idea and your time and effort to write it down wasn't just ignored.
I'm sorry if the comments weren't what you may have wanted to hear. Most new proposals are challenged, quite often a new proposal does not survive this sort of scrutiny and the work is never published.
Best Wishes.
-
some of them weren't even all that friendly
This is probably the 4th or 5th time he has started a thread on this same subject. I think many of us are rather exasperated, I certainly am...
-
Happy to consider promoting your discovery. What have you discovered that was previously unknown to science?
Thanks
1) I observed that a human when lifting his body like someone trying to pick a fruit from a tree he exerts very small force by his weak feet and calves muscles to lift his body
The force to lift a mass must be slightly greater than the weight my discovery is the force of human to lift his own body" same muscles on the same human" is very smaller than the weight and this a special case in organisms.
The experiment:
A person stands on a scale. The scale reads his weight 60 kg. When the person lifts his body up like someone trying to pick a fruit from a tree the scale will increase by x kilograms in which the total read of the scale is 60+x kg. Although a mass needs a force greater than the mass weight to be lifted, the x kgf force in the scale is very smaller* than the 60 kgf but it lifts the body.
2) I observed that a human of 60 kg can jump fast and high against gravity but he will barely move a rock of 60 kg and this is also because a human can jump with a very small force **
The experiment:
While you are on the scale hold a 15 kg rock on your hands.Try to lift it up, the scale will measure the force you lift the rock with which is 15 kgf in which the scale will read 60+15 kg the force to to lift the 15 kgf equals to its weight 15 kgf " what physics says" but the force to lift the human body is very smaller than body weight which is x kgf. So the person needs a 60 kgf to lift the rock 60 kg and he needs only the small x kgf force to lift his body 60 kg that why a person of 60 kg can jump fast and high against gravity but he will not be able to even move a rock of 60 kg.
Although a force to lift an object must be slightly greater than the object weight, a human needs very smaller force than body weight to lift his own body. This also includes other movements : jumping, walking,running, dancing,etc with little effort
*I do not know how very small but the constant of any equation is just a small fraction.
**jumping needs more force than x kgf but it is the same idea
Nope that's accelleration due to gravity, at present you are resisting about 10Newtons per kg of accelleration, if you try to counter this accelleration even more the force, as you rightly deduce is even greater, suuh as walking up a hill, this means you do have to increace the effort required rather than just standing still.
-
some of them weren't even all that friendly
This is probably the 4th or 5th time he has started a thread on this same subject. I think many of us are rather exasperated, I certainly am...
Does he know the proper means to becoming academically accepted? Peeer reviewed papers etc. Cambridge uni cannot bestow on him a new discovery award.
-
This has become a clone of the other thread about the same subject. As such, I'm merging them.
-
I don't have a degree in physics so I can 't make it accepted. It is an excellent important idea it mustn't bury forever . How I solve this?
-
I don't have a degree in physics so I can 't make it accepted. It is an excellent important idea it mustn't bury forever . How I solve this?
What if Newton's laws are still unknown and someone with only mechanics background discovered them how it will be accepted if he do not have a physics degree?
-
I don't have a degree in physics so I can 't make it accepted. It is an excellent important idea it mustn't bury forever . How I solve this?
The solution is for you learn a little bit of physics so you can realize that when you stand on your toes the reading on the scale should not double. In other words your idea is incorrect.
-
What if Newton's laws are still unknown and someone with only mechanics background discovered them how it will be accepted if he do not have a physics degree?
Newtonian physics is correct, your interpretation is wrong, so there is nothing to be concerned about.
-
so you can realize that when you stand on your toes the reading on the scale should not double. In other words your idea is incorrect.
Why it should not double ? I press the scale with the force I lift my body with which should make the scale read double it is basic physics.
-
Why it should not double ?
I have already shown you. Would you like me to find the post for you?
I press the scale with the force I lift my body with which should make the scale read double it is basic physics.
No that is not basic physics, you are wrong.
-
What if Newton's laws are still unknown and someone with only mechanics background discovered them how it will be accepted if he do not have a physics degree?
Newtonian physics is correct, your interpretation is wrong, so there is nothing to be concerned about.
Newton's laws will not be known if they are correct or not if they are not tested.
-
Why it should not double ?
I have already shown you. Would you like me to find the post for you?
If it is not doubled what value should be and why? What is the x?
-
Hi.
When you stand on the scales and just do nothing, there is a force upwards on your body. It's called the reaction force and it comes from the floor you're standing on. So that woud be the bathroom scales if you are standing on those. This will precisely match the downward force from gravity.
Your body won't accelerate until there is a net force on it. Gravity and the normal reaction force are in equal proportion but opposite directions, so there is no net force on your body.
When you stand on tip toes you only need to produce the tiniest amount of additional upward force. Since there was no net force to start with, ANY extra force will be a net force on your body. So your body starts to accelerate and you effectively lift yourself up on to your toes.
That's it that's all there is to it. I would imagine this has explained by several people before.
If it is not doubled what value should be and why?
As explained above, when you lift yourself on to your toes the scales barely change at all. You only needed the smallest extra force and only for a brief moment of time to start accelerating your body upwards.
Your skeleton or body was already providing a force that kept your body un-accellerating despite gravity, it hardly needs to do any more. Any tiny extra force will cause a net acceleration.
I think one problem with your ( @Yahya A.Sharif ) understanding is that you think an object of large mass needs a larger force to accelerate. It doesn't, even a tiny net force will accelerate a large mass. The only thing about a large mass is that a tiny force would accelerate it slowly, meanwhile the same force will accelerate a small mass quickly.
Best Wishes.
-
If it is not doubled what value should be and why?
So when you are not moving the scale will read:
60 kg. F = (60 x 9.8 m/s^2) = 588 N
Let's say you then stand on your toes. You will elevate your body about 15cm. Let's assume it takes 1/2 second to raise on your toes. That would give you roughly an acceleration of 30 cm/s^2 or about 0.3 m/s^2.
So the overall acceleration will be:
9.8 m/s^2 + 0.3 m/s^2 = 10.1 m/s^2
So the scale should read:
F = (60 x 10.1 m/s^2) = 606 N
Convert Newtons to to kg: (606N/9.8 m/s^2) = 61.8 kg
So the scale will read 61.8 kg while you are raising on your toes not 120 kg.
-
Let's say you then stand on your toes. You will elevate your body about 15cm. Let's assume it takes 1/2 second to raise on your toes. That would give you roughly an acceleration of 30 cm/s^2 or about 0.3 m/s^2.
You can not accelerate against gravity with 0.3 m/s² you need at least gravity acceleration 9.8 m/s² so the rest of the calculations are wrong. So what is this extra x?
-
Your body won't accelerate until there is a net force on it. Gravity and the normal reaction force are in equal proportion but opposite directions, so there is no net force on your body.
When you stand on tip toes you only need to produce the tiniest amount of additional upward force. Since there was no net force to start with, ANY extra force will be a net force on your body. So your body starts to accelerate and you effectively lift yourself up on to your toes.
If you have a block on the ground of 20 kg it has gravity force and normal force yet you need at least a net force equals the weight 196 N to accelerate it upwards.
Any tiny extra force will cause a net acceleration.
The least force must be the weight 9.8*60=588 N. So do you think I can lift a 20 kg with a 0.1 N?
-
Hi.
@Origin , your calculation had some minor errors but it doesn't really matter too much. In some places you were mixing the average speed required to reach 15cm in ½ second with the acceleration that would be required.
If you have a block on the ground of 20 kg it has gravity force and normal force yet you need a net force equals the weight 196 N to accelerate it upwards.
No you wouldn't, if you could keep all the original forces as you were lifting. If only we could just give it a tiny little extra force pushing upwards then it most certainly would start to accelerate upwards.
Sadly we can't just add a little force simply by lifting the block with our hand. When you start to lift up the block, you start to take away the contact with ground which means you are taking away the normal reaction force it had from the ground. So that's the problem - you can't JUST add a little extra force, the process of lifting ends up removing the contact with the ground which means that you start by losing (or taking away) the upward force on the block. The block won't start to accelerate upward until you have completely replaced the reaction force with your own hand first, only then can you give it that little bit of extra force required to cause the acceleration.
Best Wishes.
-
@Origin , your calculation had some minor errors but it doesn't really matter too much. In some places you were mixing the average speed required to reach 15cm in ½ second with the acceleration that would be required.
Yes I know, I said it was a rough calculation. I thought it would be the clearest way to show him that he was looking at this problem wrong. Of course he dismissed the calculation out of hand, like he has done for any help he has been given for the last year or so. I think he is enamored with the thought that he has discovered something new, so he will accept nothing that jeopardizes his belief. I figured it was a waste of time but I tried.
-
this is futile, it will keep going round in circles. the human body, weighing 60kgs, has a nervous system adapted to carrying that weight and it is relatively easy to move about and do various manoeuvers. now add 20kgs and walk 1 mile- it will require considerable effort. now if this human overeats for a period and gains 20kgs, the same I mile walk will not require the same effort as when carrying the salient 20kgs, as the body has adjusted to the weight. what the op Is proposing is the perception of weight. science does not do perceptions, it does measurement.
-
this is futile, it will keep going round in circles.
Because I try as hard as I can but nobody understands or accepts
-
What is this extra x kg on the scale? what its value and why?
-
Because I try as hard as I can but nobody understands or accepts
We understand it just fine. What you are claiming is impossible.
-
Because I try as hard as I can
No you do not.
If you really were trying as hard as you can, you would start by learning actual physics from the Khan Academy of some such.
Then you would realise why you are wrong.
Instead, you just keep saying the same untrue things .
Why do you refuse to study?
-
Hi again.
Because I try as hard as I can but nobody understands or accepts
People have been equally certain their theory was right before. We've had models of the universe where everything went round the earth, for example.
The thing is, if you try hard enough, then you can make your model work, just like you can make the model work where everything goes around the earth. To make your theory work it would mean changing the way we consider most things, like all of Newtonian Mechanics. That is only going to happen if your theory does something more useful, better, or more simply than the existing theory. It does not seem to do this.
There is no absolute truth in a scientific theory just some utility (some usefullness for making predictions and/or for helping human understanding). It really doesn't matter if your theory is "true" in some profound philosophical sense. Science is mainly just about utility.
As a consequence your theory is not likely to be "accepted" into the mainstream of science as a result. Since it doesn't do more than the existing theory or explain something more simply, the old theory won't be changed for this new one.
Thank you for your time bringing this to people's attention.
Best Wishes.
-
The thing is, if you try hard enough, then you can make your model work,
His model says a person who weighs 50 kg will weigh something like 80 kg the instant they die. I realize you want to be kind to people but telling someone that there crazy idea is plausible is not really helping them IMO.
-
There is no absolute truth in a scientific theory
Actually; sometimes there is.
In some instances the scientific principle is based in a mathematical proof.
One instance is the conservation of mass.
And the OP is trying to say (as origin points out) that mass is not conserved.
Well.. yes it is- provably so.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem
-
His model says a person who weighs 50 kg will weigh something like 80 kg the instant they die.
They weigh the same. This not part of my theory.
-
His model says a person who weighs 50 kg will weigh something like 80 kg the instant they die.
They weigh the same.T
Make up your mind.
The force your ankles/ calves need to exert to lift you is your weight.
You say that, by magic, that force is less than your weight because living tissue is magically easier to lift.
But when it dies, the magic stops.
So it must weigh more.
-
You say that, by magic, that force is less than your weight because living tissue is magically easier to lift.
But when it dies, the magic stops.
So it must weigh more.
I did not say this. It was an intuitive conclusion. Both the dead and alive body should lift with force less than weight but a dead doesn't have force in its muscles so it is just an object..
-
His model says a person who weighs 50 kg will weigh something like 80 kg the instant they die.
They weigh the same. This not part of my theory.
Then why did you say this?
The physics of forces works the same for both living and non-living systems. What, do you think the human body suddenly becomes heavier when they die or something?
Yes.
It doesn't really matter since this whole thing is an completely absurd conjecture anyway.
-
Yahya A.Sharif, do you have access to:
1. Scales to stand on, analogue preferred over digital
2. A phone or other device to film the scales (preferably held steady on a stand or by another person)
3. A bottle of around 2 litres capacity (to be filled with water), or some similar weight
If so, I would like to propose a very simple test you can do.
(I hope I will not repeat what someone else has proposed)
-
It was an intuitive conclusion.
Your intuition is wrong.
Both the dead and alive body should lift with force less than weight
That brings us back to the question of a bottle of water.
Most of your body is water.
Does the water you drink change how much it ways while it is part of your body?
-
Most of your body is water.
Does the water you drink change how much it ways while it is part of your body?
I do not know what part of the body is considered as human. But the water drunk makes a difference
-
What is the extra x kg? What is its value and why? no
scientist knows that.I discovered it. I know it. I explained it.
-
What is the extra x kg?
It is a dream of yours.
It is not a real thing.
That's why science ignores it.
-
The idea is crazy try to think of this: my body is 60 kg and when I lift it I must exert the same force I exert to lift a heavy rock of 60 kg but I move or lift lighter body of say 20 kg even though it should be heavy like the rock.
I think like this can be thought of : people are familiar with lifting or moving heavy loads do you think you really jump, dance , walk, run, walk upside down,etc doing these with a load of your body 70 kg?
How many times can you do pull ups?
How much additional weight can you carry while pulling your own body up?
-
How many times can you do pull ups?
How much additional weight can you carry while pulling your own body up?
As the load on the feet when lifting is small the movements can remarkabley be many
The feet muscles must bear both the body and the object it bears the body with small force adding to it the weight of the object. The object weight doesn't change
-
How many times can you do pull ups?
How much additional weight can you carry while pulling your own body up?
As the load on the feet when lifting is small the movements can remarkabley be many
The feet muscles must bear both the body and the object it bears the body with small force adding to it the weight of the object. The object weight doesn't change
You did not answer the questions.
-
I think this video is related to the topic of discussion here.
You can have weight without gravity. You can be weightless in gravity! Weight is not the same as gravity. Then what is weight?
-
Weight is not the same as gravity.
Nobody said it was.
Then what is weight?
Weight isn't very well defined. That's why scientists talk about masses and forces.
-
Nobody said it was.
I'm pretty sure someone has said that weight equals mass times gravitational acceleration.
-
Then what is weight?
Weight is the gravity force mg on the scale by your body mass m where the only forces on the scale are gravity force by your body and the normal force by the scale, if forces change as in the video then it is not weight. Weight is a standard of how a human loses or gains body mass m, if g is constant weight mg can be equivalent to mass m the scale shows the mass m in kilograms
-
Nobody said it was.
I'm pretty sure someone has said that weight equals mass times gravitational acceleration.
Often, but not always.
It's more complicated than that.
-
if g is constant
It isn't.
-
if g is constant
It isn't.
You need to understand that g in elementary physics is a number 9.8 m/s² before you reply
-
You need to understand that g in elementary physics is a number 9.8 m/s² before you reply
LOL
It's not a number.
It's a value.
You can tell because it has units.
And it's not constant.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110605043202/http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/mat/fysik/vk/virtanen/studieso.pdf
-
You need to understand that g in elementary physics is a number 9.8 m/s² before you reply
LOL
It's not a number.
It's a value.
You can tell because it has units.
And it's not constant.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110605043202/http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/mat/fysik/vk/virtanen/studieso.pdf
g on earth's surface is constant 9.8 m/s² it is usual for measurements on earth's surface.
-
g on earth's surface is constant 9.8 m/s²
No
It really is not.
Try reading the paper I cited- and then try understanding it.
-
If it was a constant then nobody would set up a page for calculating it.
https://www.sensorsone.com/local-gravity-calculator/
-
LOL
Do you think your doctor will ask you what was your weight in the country you have been to?
Weight with constant g is used in medicine it is science.
So this is an important definition that I would like to repeat:
The definition of weight is the gravity force mg on the scale by your body mass m where the only forces on the scale are gravity force by your body and the normal force by the scale, if forces change as in the video then it is not weight. Weight is a standard of how a human loses or gains body mass m, if g is constant weight mg can be equivalent to mass m the scale shows the mass m in kilograms
-
Do you think your doctor will ask you what was your weight in the country you have been to?
My doctor knows that a glass of water before I talked to him makes more difference.
But, if you are trying to introduce a new idea into physics, you have to do things properly.
Why don't you learn science?
The definition of weight is the gravity force mg on the scale by your body mass m where the only forces on the scale are gravity force by your body and the normal force by the scale,
OK so we know that's not a constant- you might think about whether it depends on if the sun is overhead pulling up.