Effects of elevation.....

[kerssens]

All else being equal, is one single bench press rep of 225 lbs easier, harder, the same difficulty in Denver (mile high) as it is in Seattle (sea level)?

[blendedsuit]

Easier. The air is thinner and less gravity.

[daryn]

yeah sometimes it gets tough pushing a bar up through that thick air.

[InchoateHand]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah sometimes it gets tough pushing a bar up through that thick air.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brilliant!

[kerssens]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah sometimes it gets tough pushing a bar up through that thick air.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if it feels an ounce lighter, my point is that it would be easier in Denver...people at my job are trying to counter with the effects of breating in altitude.

[Beerfund]

[ QUOTE ]
people at my job are trying to counter with the effects of breating in altitude.



[/ QUOTE ]

That's ludacris! One rep won't be affected by heavier breathing.

[daryn]

i understand the science of it, i'm just not sure that lifting 250 lbs is ANY easier than lifting 250 lbs + 1 ounce

[kerssens]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
people at my job are trying to counter with the effects of breating in altitude.



[/ QUOTE ]

That's ludacris! One rep won't be affected by heavier breathing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I said the same thing, some people just don't listen...I've converted one with f=m1*m2*g/d^2

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
yeah sometimes it gets tough pushing a bar up through that thick air.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if it feels an ounce lighter, my point is that it would be easier in Denver...people at my job are trying to counter with the effects of breating in altitude.

[/ QUOTE ]

The effects of breathing at alltitute will have no difference here. 1 rep of bench press isnt using your arobic system, its anarobic. so it doesnt matter.

Also the effects of gravity dont come into play either, because 225LB on the moon is the same weight as 225LB on earth. Wieght is a function of mass and the force of gravity, so there being infitesimly less gravity at denver than at seattle wont matter, its still 225LB (the bar at denver will just have a pubic hairs worth more of mass attached to it)

So really the only diff is the volume of air you push the bar through, so if you want to get it down to like .000000000000000000000000000000000001 accuracy, then yeah maybe its easier at denver. But Your body is incapable of telling the difference, so it in fact still wouldnt be easier.

[GuyOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
people at my job are trying to counter with the effects of breating in altitude.



[/ QUOTE ]

That's ludacris! One rep won't be affected by heavier breathing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Entertainment media has really made people dumber.

GoT

[Jack of Arcades]

Beat me to it.

Jack

[blendedsuit]

[ QUOTE ]
Also the effects of gravity dont come into play either, because 225LB on the moon is the same weight as 225LB on earth. Wieght is a function of mass and the force of gravity, so there being infitesimly less gravity at denver than at seattle wont matter, its still 225LB (the bar at denver will just have a pubic hairs worth more of mass attached to it)


[/ QUOTE ]

This is just wrong. The mass stays constant. The weight will change. Yes, the change will be an extremely small amount, but a difference nonetheless.

[InchoateHand]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
people at my job are trying to counter with the effects of breating in altitude.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's ludacris! One rep won't be affected by heavier breathing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Entertainment media has really made people dumber. GoT

[/ QUOTE ]

For once I agree with GoT. This will have a much bigger impact than the weight of the bar. With that said, it's 225 lbs people. Big deal.

(I'm assuming this wasn't the old pound of feathers or pound of rocks joke, and that we're talking about the same bar & weights being moved to the mountains.)

[GuyOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also the effects of gravity dont come into play either, because 225LB on the moon is the same weight as 225LB on earth. Wieght is a function of mass and the force of gravity, so there being infitesimly less gravity at denver than at seattle wont matter, its still 225LB (the bar at denver will just have a pubic hairs worth more of mass attached to it)


[/ QUOTE ]

This is just wrong. The mass stays constant. The weight will change. Yes, the change will be an extremely small amount, but a difference nonetheless.

[/ QUOTE ]

An object that is 100 lb. on earth weighs the exact same as an object that is 100 lb. on the moon.

PS. This is OT, but if someone knows and could throw in a quick response, I'd appreciate it. For some reason I seem to have it in my head from a long time ago that the abbreviation for pound (lb.) is the same for pounds, i.e. pounds is not abbreviated lbs. I realize nobody does this, but for some reaosn I think everybody's wrong. Am I thinking of something else?

GoT

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]


This is just wrong. The mass stays constant. The weight will change. Yes, the change will be an extremely small amount, but a difference nonetheless.

[/ QUOTE ]


you missed the point of my post. You are right, the mass stays the same, and the weight does change. But the OP didnt say "life a 225LB bar at seattle, then take that EXACT same bar to Denver and lift it". That exact same bar wouldnt weigh 225LB at denver. It would weigh like 224.99999999999.

He stated, which is esier to lift 225LB at. So its 225LB at both places. Its like asking which is heavier, a pound of lead, or a pound of feathers.

[IsaacW]

[ QUOTE ]
there being infitesimly less gravity at denver than at seattle wont matter, its still 225LB (the bar at denver will just have a pubic hairs worth more of mass attached to it)

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow... just wow. So, I guess that's why it's so hard to get into space, because you have to keep adding mass to your spaceship as you get farther from earth?

There's a reason why there is a concept of "Conservation of Mass" but no concept of "Conservation of Weight."

P.S. And, no quantum-nerds better chime in with the idea that the spaceship's mass is increasing (in certain frames of reference) due to relativistic effects /images/graemlins/grin.gif

EDIT: My bad. He knew what he was talking about all along. Nice catch!

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]



PS. This is OT, but if someone knows and could throw in a quick response, I'd appreciate it. For some reason I seem to have it in my head from a long time ago that the abbreviation for pound (lb.) is the same for pounds, i.e. pounds is not abbreviated lbs. I realize nobody does this, but for some reaosn I think everybody's wrong. Am I thinking of something else?

GoT

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe you are correct, but I can't point to any source off the top of my head that would confirm this (and im to lazy to do the research /images/graemlins/smile.gif)

[kerssens]

I get annoyed when people say RBIs.

[kevyk]

Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation assumes a homogeneous Earth, which is fine if you are far away or aren't too concerned with precision. Be careful about claiming that the gravitational field strength in Denver (g=G*mass of Earth/radius from center^2) is smaller than any place at sea level. You are, of course, 1 mile further from the center of the earth, but this should only change the value of g by about 0.05%. Geological variation can more than compensate for this.

To answer this question, you'd have to find the value of g in Denver and at sea level, and compare.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />


This is just wrong. The mass stays constant. The weight will change. Yes, the change will be an extremely small amount, but a difference nonetheless.

[/ QUOTE ]


you missed the point of my post. You are right, the mass stays the same, and the weight does change. But the OP didnt say "life a 225LB bar at seattle, then take that EXACT same bar to Denver and lift it". That exact same bar wouldnt weigh 225LB at denver. It would weigh like 224.99999999999.

He stated, which is esier to lift 225LB at. So its 225LB at both places. Its like asking which is heavier, a pound of lead, or a pound of feathers.

[/ QUOTE ]

obviously a pound of lead idiot. lead is more dense.
<font color="white">obviously a joke but i wouldn't be surprised if alobar jumps on it </font>

[Alobar]

why does everyone assume I meant the EXACT same bar??

This isnt that hard people. 225LB is 225LB. A 225LB gold bar on the moon, is going to be bigger than a 225LB gold bar on earth. If you shot a bar of gold that weighed 225LB on the earth to the moon, it doesnt get larger,it just doesnt weigh 225LB anymore.

[blendedsuit]

Usually you see in a grocery store $2/lb. for your zucchini. But you might buy 12 lbs. worth.

[InchoateHand]

[ QUOTE ]
I get annoyed when people say RBIs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Clearly RsBI sounds better. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[daryn]

this thread is awesome.

[kevyk]

In English units, feathers are weighed according to the Advoirdupois scale. Gold (and presumably lead) are weighed on the Troy scale.

The Advoirdupois ounce is bigger than the Troy ounce; therefore, the pound of feathers weighs more.

In the metric system, they are equal.

[GuyOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also the effects of gravity dont come into play either, because 225LB on the moon is the same weight as 225LB on earth. Wieght is a function of mass and the force of gravity, so there being infitesimly less gravity at denver than at seattle wont matter, its still 225LB (the bar at denver will just have a pubic hairs worth more of mass attached to it)


[/ QUOTE ]

This is just wrong. The mass stays constant. The weight will change. Yes, the change will be an extremely small amount, but a difference nonetheless.

[/ QUOTE ]

An object that is 100 lb. on earth weighs the exact same as an object that is 100 lb. on the moon.

[/ QUOTE ]

WRONG. This object has the same MASS in both locations. The amount of matter the object has does not change. But its weight certainly changes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nothing has changed.

GoT

[IsaacW]

[ QUOTE ]
why does everyone assume I meant the EXACT same bar??

[/ QUOTE ]
Because you're smarter than we are. Also:

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: My bad. He knew what he was talking about all along. Nice catch!

Edited by IsaacW (04/12/05 03:39 PM)

[/ QUOTE ]

[daryn]

oh so you're saying using the metric system, a pound of feathers is equal to a pound of lead? using the metric system right?

[kevyk]

yes

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]



obviously a joke but i wouldn't be surprised if alobar jumps on it

[/ QUOTE ]

come on daryn, I know you don't like me, but you have to give me more credit than that.

What I do find funny tho is that you are the person who loves to correct everyone about EVERYTHING. And also a physics major. Yet you missed the opportunity to correct the poster about the effects of gravity. You're slipping dude

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />



obviously a joke but i wouldn't be surprised if alobar jumps on it

[/ QUOTE ]

come on daryn, I know you don't like me, but you have to give me more credit than that.

What I do find funny tho is that you are the person who loves to correct everyone about EVERYTHING. And also a physics major. Yet you missed the opportunity to correct the poster about the effects of gravity. You're slipping dude

[/ QUOTE ]

i didn't miss that at all. i assumed he was talking about the same bar. why wouldn't you? that's the whole point of his question. without that assumption, his question makes no sense. in physics, we learn to throw away the useless solution. on that note, i should ignore any further post from you.

but i won't, i'm not one of those guys /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
Also:

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: My bad. He knew what he was talking about all along. Nice catch!

Edited by IsaacW (04/12/05 03:39 PM)

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, I had made my reply before the edit tho, so I didnt see that

[kerssens]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I get annoyed when people say RBIs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Clearly RsBI sounds better. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

If people feel the need to put an s in there than I would prefer that they say RsBI, in fact, I may start saying this /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[daryn]

also some things are funnier if you let people go on making fools of themselves.
<font color="white"> like the guy who just said using the METRIC SYSTEM a POUND of feathers weighs the same as a POUND of lead </font>

[kevyk]

Obviously you knew what I meant

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]


i didn't miss that at all. i assumed he was talking about the same bar. why wouldn't you? that's the whole point of his question. without that assumption, his question makes no sense. in physics, we learn to throw away the useless solution. on that note, i should ignore any further post from you.

but i won't, i'm not one of those guys /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would we assume the same bar? That would be stupid. If it's supposed to be the same bar then the question is very poorly worded.

Its ok daryn, you can admit it, me being right once wont make the word end.

[daryn]

i have admitted you were right before. i do that only when you are right though. see mark prior bet thread.

you assume the same bar because why else would he ask the question?

[InchoateHand]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I get annoyed when people say RBIs.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. Clearly RsBI sounds better. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
If people feel the need to put an s in there than I would prefer that they say RsBI, in fact, I may start saying this /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually RBIs doesn't bother me nearly as much as "Ribees".

[GuyOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
You are, of course, 1 mile further from the center of the earth

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't care to argue about all this, so I'll just point out any errors I see in other people's logic. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif The Earth is not spherical due to it's rotation. I'm not sure how much tolerance there is, but I think there is some. My common sense says it must be "thicker" at the equator and "thin" down as you go toward the poles, but I don't know for sure. If that's the case and Seattle and Denver are not on the same parallel, there's not "obviously" a one mile difference. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

GoT

[mmbt0ne]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
pound of feathers

[/ QUOTE ]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
In the metric system

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
i have admitted you were right before. i do that only when you are right though.

you assume the same bar because why else would he ask the question?

[/ QUOTE ]

hes asking the qeustion because I suspect he wanted to argue about the effects of oxygen at elevation, not the incredibly negligent effects of gravity. If you want to argue about the effects of oxygen the bar has to weight the same at both locations, hence why it would be stupid to use the same bar. And if you want to argue the effects of gravity you have to do a much better job of wording the question.

Its the same principle as why you dont ask the question "which would you rather carry 10LB of lead, or 10LB of feathers" when you want to argue that the weight is the same, because then people can make all kins of assinine arguments about how 10LB of feathers would be much larger and more akward to carry.


But I mean, you beign so smart and all obviously realized this, cuz I'm sure in your physics classes they tought you the importance of setting up problems.

[kevyk]

The point I was making was that distance from the center is a smaller effect than local geological composition.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />


hes asking the qeustion because I suspect he wanted to argue about the effects of oxygen at elevation, not the incredibly negligent effects of gravity. If you want to argue about the effects of oxygen the bar has to weight the same at both locations, hence why it would be stupid to use the same bar. And if you want to argue the effects of gravity you have to do a much better job of wording the question.

[/ QUOTE ]

i would like to know one thing. if he wanted to argue about the effects of oxygen, why would using the same bar be stupid? after all the effects of gravity are incredibly negligent, your words of course.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]

i would like to know one thing. if he wanted to argue about the effects of oxygen, why would using the same bar be stupid? after all the effects of gravity are incredibly negligent, your words of course.

[/ QUOTE ]

so that the argument he wants addressed doesnt get derailed by a thread full of nits arguing about the effects of gravity

[daryn]

weak sauce.

he should make his question crystal clear.

also if you notice, i never even talked about difference in gravity in this thread regarding the initial problem.

[kerssens]

[ QUOTE ]
weak sauce.

he should make his question crystal clear.

also if you notice, i never even talked about difference in gravity in this thread regarding the initial problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

I figured that "all else being equal" meant that everything is equal except that the elevation was different.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
weak sauce.

he should make his question crystal clear.

also if you notice, i never even talked about difference in gravity in this thread regarding the initial problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

I figured that "all else being equal" meant that everything is equal except that the elevation was different.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok but it is the elevation that causes other things to be.

from that sentence you just typed, i could easily say, "oh ok.. the elevation is different, but you said all else is equal, i guess the air is the same density then."

also, does all else being equal mean you're using the same bar?

the conclusion here is that this question is horrible. why not just ask:

would the density of air have any effect on lifting weight?

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
.

he should make his question crystal clear.

[/ QUOTE ]

obviously

[ QUOTE ]


also if you notice, i never even talked about difference in gravity in this thread regarding the initial problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, a bit defensive are we? Why would you assume just because I used the word "nit" I was reffering to you? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[kerssens]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
weak sauce.

he should make his question crystal clear.

also if you notice, i never even talked about difference in gravity in this thread regarding the initial problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

I figured that "all else being equal" meant that everything is equal except that the elevation was different.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok but it is the elevation that causes other things to be.

from that sentence you just typed, i could easily say, "oh ok.. the elevation is different, but you said all else is equal, i guess the air is the same density then."

also, does all else being equal mean you're using the same bar?

the conclusion here is that this question is horrible. why not just ask:

would the density of air have any effect on lifting weight?

[/ QUOTE ]

In that case, it was weak sauce...eh, it killed some time and led to some interesting discussion.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
.

he should make his question crystal clear.

[/ QUOTE ]

obviously

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />


also if you notice, i never even talked about difference in gravity in this thread regarding the initial problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, a bit defensive are we? Why would you assume just because I used the word "nit" I was reffering to you? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

because you seem desparate to prove me wrong. what an arduous task though. it reveals your insecurity. also you mention many times in this thread how "smart i must be". more insecurity. see a shrink. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif