Impulse/force in pounds for the time frame

waynexk8

When I say which uses the most overall/total force, I mean, if you lift 80 pounds for 10 seconds, and then lift 40 pounds for 10 seconds, you will have used more overall/total force lifting the 80 pounds for 10 seconds.

And you will in the above use more energy lifting the 80 pounds, right ??? Thus EVERY time you use MORE energy, you have to use MORE force, right ??? As you are using more acceleration and velocity = more force/energy.

You can not show me a faster lift, where you dont use more energy, when you are not using more acceleration/velocity and these = force,

Wayne

sophiecentaur

You are asking about Work Done and forces. We have told you all we can about those strictly defined quantities. You have your own special set of meanings for those and other words you use.
Your machine tells you about your muscle activity. You ask why your musclus fade / tear under some extreme use. Clearly some forces and energy is involved but your muscles don't study Physics. You can't rely on them to behave as you want or even to do the best thing possible. They give up because you try to make them do more than they're prepared to do. They break because you abuse them into doing more than they're designed to do. What has that to do with Physics? They aren't like a dumb electric motor that will work or fail according to simple rules (that can be modelled fairly accurately). You will probably never know all the details of the biochemistry and biomechanics involved so stop trying to explain it all in terms of simple Physics.
Until you state your questions in the right words, used the right way, you can't get an answer.
Check up on and learn the accepted meanings of the terms you use. This 'Question and Answer' method that you insist on is just not working. You have to give just a little if you want a result.

douglis

No....it's possible to use the same and even more energy by lifting explosively the 40 pounds even though the average force is the half.The huge fluctuations of force are very energy demanding.
In fact,there was a study that compared the energy expenditue of light weighted jump squats vs heavy squats.The jump squats used more energy but obviously their "total/overall force" was less.

For the last time.Greater energy expenditure doesn't equate greater force.

waynexk8

Back in full tomorrow, been very busy.

First, we all agree that there is far far far more Power in the faster, right ??? But is not Muscular power, the combination between force and velocity ??? So more Power = more force and velocity !!!

Wayne

sophiecentaur

Power = Force TIMES Velocity
Forget whether it's "muscle power" or power from anything else. Also, forget words like"far, far" - these things are just proportional. And Power is an instantaneous value, varying as force or velocity varies.
If you can accept this, then we have started talking the same language.

waynexk8

This was from an EMG expert. It shows my EMG results are quite right, and D. does not know the difference between the two EMGs, as basically there is no diffrence. What is basically proves, is that the on the faster reps, the higher peak forces from the accelerations, cannot be made up balanced out with the constant medium forces of the slower reps, when the faster reps are producing less force on the decelerations. This seems quite obvious to me, as if I struck something very hard like a heavy barbell, it’s going to put a huge jolt/tension on my muscles, do this 6 times in the same time frame as someone moving the barbell slow, and the muscles will, as they do feel very high tension on them and fatigue far far far faster than when moving the barbell slow.
Hi Wayne,

Thanks for considering our products - while our EMG systems are research orientated and will give you the best quality data, realistically in this situation the quality of your results will be far more dependent on the way that the system is used and the way that the data is interpreted. My advice would be to record the data as raw data - obtain the best raw EMG data that you can and then process the data to determine the results. By recording raw data you have the opportunity to reprocess the data in different ways to discover the best processing methods.

The difference between integrated mean EMG data and RMS EMG data is simply mathematical - the end results are simply derived from slightly different processing methods. I'd suggest a couple of books that you might want to obtain and read that discuss the different methods:

Cram JR, Kasman GS, Holtz J: Introduction to Surface Electromyography. Aspen Publishers ISBN 0-8342-0751-6
Craik RL, Otis CA : Gait Analysis:Theory and application. Mosby ISBN 0-8016-6964-2

Wayne

waynexk8

Right.

So "if" we were using the exact same power over 10 seconds, and could mesure/read this power to be the exact same every .1 of a seconds, could we say I 100J in 10 seconds, and for 20 seconds would be 100J

This equation for power states that a powerful machine/muscle is both strong and fast ???

Do you mean if force and velociry goes up so does power ??? Or when power goes up so must force and velocity.

Wayne

waynexk8

Sorry you got that wrong, I said if I lift 80 pounds for 10 seconds and 40 pounds for ten seconds, what I meant as I did not state speed or distance, was both amounts lifted the same speed and thus distance. This then would mean I have used more total or overall force and energy lifting the heaver weight.

You are one about different weights used, I am not.

I am on about the same weight, the above was just to explain to you how you will use more total or overall force, it had nothing to do with the actual debate.

I move 80 pounds up and down 20 times in 10 seconds, you lift 80 pounds up and down 1 time in 10 seconds, I use more energy.

Greater energy expenditure does equate greater force, if you move the same weight faster in the same time frame.

Wayne

douglis

More energy yes...more peak force yes....but the average force is 80 pounds in both cases hence the forces "make up".

Well...since you discovered a new law...all you have to do is to prove it somehow or else it will remain a figment of your imagination.

sophiecentaur

Wayne
You still seem to be insisting that your muscles and the way your body controls them are much simpler than they are. No one has argued that doing things faster can knacker you more and can damage muscles. It's just that you seem to insist on having a simple Physics formula - but not real Physics - your brand of Physics, in which all the names are jumbled up and re defined. No wonder we can't help you.

waynexk8

What your trying to say, or think, is that if you hold 80 pounds half way up for 10 seconds, and I move the weight up and down 20 times in 10 seconds, that we have both put out the exact same total/overall force thus tension on the muscles, right ???

“If” that were so, then why does anyone that uses 80% of their 1RM {repetition maximum} fail in lifting the weight, or/and hit momentary muscular failure say 50% faster ??? I will tell you why. Its because the higher force needed for the accelerations, and for the decelerations, as on the decelerations you are still pressing with as much force as you can, its only on the very last portion of the lift that you immediately lower force very fast for the transition from positive to negative, then immediately on the negative there is force from the muscles thus tension on the muscles.

So there we have it, you fail faster, and this is basically because the faster reps “are” putting more tension on the muscles, so they fatigue/tire 50% faster. But your saying they don’t they fatigue/tire faster or put more tension on the muscles, your saying that they fatigue/tire 50% faster, because they use up more energy, and they use up more energy not because they are moving with greater acceleration = more force, or travelling with more velocity = more force, your saying they just they fatigue/tire faster because of no reason than they use more energy for some unknown reason, is that right ???

You also think that your medium forces can make up or balance out my higher forces, but you cannot say why ??? However I can say why I say it’s not, as I move the weight 6 times more distance, use more power, that’s more energy and more work done.

Question to all please
If I was to lift and try to throw the same weight with open hands, are you saying then I would use more force ???

Yes.

So what about tension, can physics find out how much tension was put on so and so ???

No, that’s where the EMG and force plate come into action, these work out the total or overall force, or and average force.

If you think total or overall force does not exist in physics, why are you saying both lifts have the same total or overall force ???

We could call this total of overall force, total force with respect to time, so if I put 100 force on 80 pounds for 4 seconds, and you put 80 force on 100 pounds for 4 seconds, who put out the total or overall force ??? As I would have moved the weight further, that would categorically say I did, right ??? If not why ??? If I put 100 force on 80 pounds for 4 seconds, and you put 80 force on 100 pounds for 6 seconds, who put out the total or overall force ??? As I would have moved the weight further, that would categorically say I did, right ??? if not why ??? If I put 100 force on 80 pounds for 4 seconds, 79 pounds of force for 2 seconds, and you put 80 force on 100 pounds for 6 seconds, who put out the total or overall force ??? As I would have moved the weight further, that would categorically say I did, right ??? If not why ??? And ??? Means I am please asking you a question.

You seem to think, that as I move the weight further, I don’t use more total or overall force to do this ???

Wayne

sophiecentaur

I do not subscribe to the term "total force". There is no such quantity in Physics. So the rest of your post means nothing, I'm afraid.

waynexk8

That are far more complicated, and am trying to simplify things, as instead of muscles, we can just say this is a machine pushing the muscles with force, [b]and if you put too much strain on that machine, it will fail faster than the machine you don’t put as much strain, and strain in this case is higher force output, and thus more tension on the machines moving parts. Put to more strain on the machine, as in making it move as fast as it can with very high accelerations, and there will be too much tension on the machine, and it will fail. Same are the car that have been driven further, its parts fail faster, and that’s because more acceleration force thus tensions on the moving parts.

Ok thx for that.

But I see it as the higher acceleration forces, anytime you move faster, it could be 3/3 against 10/10 in the same time frame, but every time you try and move faster, there has to be more acceleration, thus higher forces on the muscles.

Sorry I am trying, but if D. is right, then physics does not have an equation for total or overall force, in the same time frame “could not we be the first to try and find one ???” As physics is physics, we should be able to work this out somehow, or is it the power equation, power = force acceleration ??? Thus we all know there is more power in the faster, if more power and more power = more force acceleration, then am I not right ???

Will read the other posts later and get back to them, thank you for your time and help again.

What if a bought a force plate ???

Wayne

douglis

No...the reason is very well known.Biology studies tell us that the fluctuations of force are more energy demanding.

Everyone has told you why.Because the average force is the weight in any case.This by definition means that "your" higher peaks are exactly balanced by "your" lower peaks and the result is "my" medium force(the weight).

First learn to use the basic physics terms and leave your big plans for the much later future.

waynexk8

But in full tomorrow night and I must apologise for not answering some posts yet, I will get back to them, and thank you all again.

The below is again for D. it’s from “another” EMG expert. And would be interested to see how/or why he was wrong, and thought my EMG was wrong, mind you it’s not the first time you have been wrong, you had metabolism wrong, energy wrong, your rocket theory, now EMG, however we all get things wrong and you’re a very clever person. I got my training wrong for 15 years, doing the slow, so I cannot pass judgment.

Hi Wayne,

I got the email you sent to Motion Labs - we have a cooperation with them. The company I work for - prophysics AG in Zurich, Switzerland - market and sell the myon EMG system as well as the proEMG data capture and analysis software.

You can check out details of our prophysics on www.myon-prophysics.ch

I read through your email. EMG measures the electrical activity of muscles using electrodes attached to the skin surface above the muscle's belly. To answer your direct question, whether to use Integrated or RMS calculation, the answer is probably RMS. The reason for this is that the RMS calculation is the "standard" way of representing the average voltage amplitude of the signal, and this is correlated with the muscle power.

Wayne

sophiecentaur

Wayne
For someone who claims to know nothing of Physics, you have become very assertive and a bit too stroppy for my liking.
Nothing I have ever written about the Physics of this topic is wrong. It's just too basic and glaringly obvious. The same goes for Douglis's statements about Physics.

The stuff about EMG results is not the Physics of moving masses up and down. I's about what your Muscles are doing. The fact is that, even when lowering something, your muscles are using energy (unless you just drop it on the floor). Hence, there is no direct relationship between Energy Expended in your muscles and Work Done on the Weights you lift. That is the beginning and end of the whole topic and neither you nor your fellow EMG users can change it.

The readings on your EMG machine can give you a lot of useful information about your Body and that's all.

I can't actually understand what you are trying to achieve here and slagging people off for making statements that you clearly don't actually understand is not getting us anywhere.

douglis

Show me where I was wrong.
From physics point of view...you can not possibly know if you spend more energy by lifting and lowering a weight than just holding it for the same duration.Only biology has the answer...so I was never wrong.It was supposed to be a physics discussion.


Check the graph.Anyone who has the intelligence to breathe can understand that the RMS amplitude is NOT the average.