Applied Physics: Weight-Lifting Work

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of physics to quantify the calories burned during weight-lifting exercises, specifically focusing on the work done when lifting and lowering weights. Participants explore the relationship between mechanical work and biological energy expenditure, considering various factors that influence the accuracy of calorie calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks to quantify the calories burned while bench pressing by calculating the work done against gravity, specifically lifting 100 lbs through a distance of 24 inches.
  • Another participant notes that while work can be calculated, this method is inaccurate due to the complexities of human physiology and energy expenditure.
  • It is mentioned that when lowering weights, gravity does positive work, while the lifter does negative work, complicating the understanding of energy expenditure.
  • Some participants argue that the work done against gravity does not account for the energy expended by the body in maintaining muscle tension and other biological functions.
  • A suggestion is made to use a cardio machine to measure heart rate and wattage to estimate calorie expenditure more accurately.
  • There is a discussion about the inefficiencies in human energy use during weight lifting, highlighting that muscle tension requires energy even when not performing mechanical work.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the nature of work done during lifting and lowering weights, emphasizing the transformation of energy and the biological context of the exercise.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the accuracy of calculating calories burned through mechanical work alone. There is no consensus on a definitive method for quantifying energy expenditure in weight lifting, as biological factors complicate the calculations.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the assumptions made about energy expenditure, including the neglect of factors such as efficiency, muscle tension, and the biological processes involved in lifting and lowering weights.

rustythevibeguy
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Applied Physics: Weight-Lifting "Work"

OK, sorry, this may be in the wrong place... but where would you post something like this?

This may be too simple, but I cannot get my mind wrapped around this. I need to lose weight and I want to be able to 'quantify' the calories I burn. If I am bench pressing, and I raise 100 lbs. through a distance of 24 inches, how much 'work' have I done, in terms of calories burned? We can neglect all the variables such as efficiency, speed of movement, work done in 'lowering' the weight, etc. I just want to know what the minimum work (change in potential energy) is, in terms of calories required.

My goal is to be able to say, "I want to burn X calories per day. How much weight do I have to move per day (through the 24" distance) to burn at least that many calories?"

Thanks in advance for your help.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
In the basic sense, you can calculate the work and then convert over to calories. Just remember that a food calorie is actually 1 kcal in engineering units (4317 J). You do realize though that this is an extremely inaccurate way to do this calculation...
 
Just to amplify - the reason this is in accurate is because in a physics sense, you should be absorbing work when you bring the weights back down, but you still actually expend energy.
 
russ, I think that would be true if you aren't fighting gravity.

For example, I push weights up, gravity does negative work and I do positive work. I let the weights fall, I do no work, gravity does positive work.

However, if I SLOWLY bring the weights down, while gravity wants to bring the weights down faster, I apply a force (not great enough to accelerate the weights up) bringing the weights down slowly. So gravity does positive work, and I do negative work. But all the same, I'm STILL doing work.
 
I lift, I have thought about this before. Unfortunately physics alone can't supply the answer without biology.

If we just consider the work done against gravity it would take (one rep of) a 200 pound bench press to burn one human food calorie.

From here the issue comes down to efficiency, how much effort is wasted? (A human can expend calories in muscle tension without doing any work, saying nothing of our core bio functions that run all the time).

Here is what you need to do: use a cardio machine that will measure your heart rate, and tell you the wattage of your effort.

Once you know that heart rate x leads to wattage y, just multiply the y of your average heartrate by the length of your workout (measured in seconds)
and by 1/4317 to get a vague idea of your expended calories.

If you want very detailed data of this kind specific to your own body, you would need to spend a few hour taking data and creating look-up tables. I wonder if I should start offering this as a proffesional service to people at my local gym and over the internet.
 
Da-Force said:
russ, I think that would be true if you aren't fighting gravity.

For example, I push weights up, gravity does negative work and I do positive work. I let the weights fall, I do no work, gravity does positive work.

However, if I SLOWLY bring the weights down, while gravity wants to bring the weights down faster, I apply a force (not great enough to accelerate the weights up) bringing the weights down slowly. So gravity does positive work, and I do negative work. But all the same, I'm STILL doing work.
I know - I think you may have misread my post.

Btw, when lifting weights, you do lower the weights slowly for precisely that reason.
 
Da-Force said:
For example, I push weights up, gravity does negative work and I do positive work. I let the weights fall, I do no work, gravity does positive work.

However, if I SLOWLY bring the weights down, while gravity wants to bring the weights down faster, I apply a force (not great enough to accelerate the weights up) bringing the weights down slowly. So gravity does positive work, and I do negative work. But all the same, I'm STILL doing work.
Careful here. When lifting the weight, you do positive work against gravity: you add mechanical energy to the system (barbell + earth). When lowering the weight slowly, gravity is doing positive work. The system (barbell + earth) loses mechanical energy, which you gain. You gain the energy that the barbell loses! Of course, that "lost" energy gets transformed into an increase in your internal energy--your muscles heat up.

(Just saying you "do work", albeit negative, is a bit misleading. It's like saying, after someone gives you $10, that you gave them negative $10. Either way you are the one getting the $10.)

The real problem, as Crosson points out, is that we are talking about a biological system here, not just a barbell. It requires chemical energy (fuel = calories) to just hold the barbell in position, never mind lift it up or down. If you examine the muscle fibers in action, they are continually contracting and relaxing, doing positive work just to maintain overall tension. You expend chemical energy (fuel) both when lifting and lowering the weight.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
9K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K