Can Humans Really Have Superhuman Strength?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Strength
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on anecdotal accounts of extraordinary human strength, particularly in life-threatening situations, such as a mother lifting a car to save her child. Participants express skepticism about these claims, suggesting they are often urban legends rather than scientifically supported phenomena. Some mention personal experiences of increased strength during adrenaline rushes, while others question the plausibility of such feats. The conversation also touches on the role of training and genetics in strength, with references to competitive strongman events and individual lifting capabilities. Overall, the consensus leans towards viewing these extraordinary strength stories as largely exaggerated or mythological.
  • #201
SkepticJ said:
What about the skeleton? There's no way someone could pick up a weight great enough to snap their arm or leg bones.

People that actually train in tough martial arts, or hard body make their bones tougher through abuse that they put them though, and the body heals them back denser and stronger than they were before, but this only gets you so much. Bone is pretty pathetic compared to other natural materials (such as bamboo), to say nothing of the man-made materials that put Nature's materials to shame.

"Bones are pathetic" i don't see why anyone would say that..., or even compare it to any other material like that.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #202
FizixFreak said:
"Bones are pathetic" i don't see why anyone would say that..., or even compare it to any other material like that.


I was going to say... bones are astounding! Their ability to heal and callous, their sheer strength, and role as part of a major organ system is amazing.
 
  • #203
I know this thread is about superHUMAN strength but doesn't anyone find it shocking how strong some animals are for their size check this out

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #204
FizixFreak said:
I think it would have been better if you had seen one of my older posts here it is read it you still may disagree with some things though

I think mentionig NOAH(peace be upon him) was a stupid thing any ways you cannot deny that in older times life span could have been a lot more (but 950? like i said that was stupid on my behalf to mention it here) the reasons why i say this is becaust at that time diet of people was very pure no food colors, preservatives,chocolates,burgers and cold drinks no air pollution no carbon monoxide in the air and at that time ozone must have been really healthy Earth less hotter i mean there are a lot of factors you can hardly count them.

I read your later replies, but it doesn't change what I wrote.

I can certainly deny all of that.

1. We have evidence life span was shorter (significantly).
2. Those claims about the diet are complete non-sense.*
3. It is only with the introduction of modern medicine that we have increased life expectancy.
4. If you take random tribes that have had little to no contact with the outside world, their diet is fairly consistent and is free of all the things you mention - but they don't miraculously live longer than westerners.

* Where the claim is the diet is the sole responsibility - ignoring medicine, exercise, nutrition and other key factors that play a far bigger role.

Now, once again I have no interest in your personal beliefs, they are what you choose them to be. But please be very aware that if you are going to bring them up and make statements like this I will take the ridiculous claims and tear them to shreds. I'm sorry if people don't like me saying this but at the end of the day if the claims are permitted then it is only reasonable that we have adequate responses. There's only so far tolerance can go.
 
Last edited:
  • #205
jarednjames said:
I read your later replies, but it doesn't change what I wrote.

I can certainly deny all of that.

1. We have evidence life span was shorter (significantly).
2. Those claims about the diet are complete non-sense.*
3. It is only with the introduction of modern medicine that we have increased life expectancy.
4. If you take random tribes that have had little to no contact with the outside world, their diet is fairly consistent and is free of all the things you mention - but they don't miraculously live longer than westerners.

* Where the claim is the diet is the sole responsibility - ignoring medicine, exercise, nutrition and other key factors that play a far bigger role.

Now, once again I have no interest in your personal beliefs, they are what you choose them to be. But please be very aware that if you are going to bring them up and make statements like this I will take the ridiculous claims and tear them to shreds. I'm sorry if people don't like me saying this but at the end of the day if the claims are permitted then it is only reasonable that we have adequate responses. There's only so far tolerance can go.

This is S&D, you have no need to apologize, but I think Fizix has been clear (and if I'm wrong, I'm sorry) that those were his beliefs, as opposed to what he's learned from science.

In principle however, I agree completely, but I think the language barrier here, while not immense, is still considerable.

@FizixFreak: He's right about the religious angle; right, wrong, or belief, in S&D if you bring it up, it's fair game. That doesn't mean a lack of respect, it's just... the nature of S&D.
 
  • #206
nismaratwork said:
This is S&D, you have no need to apologize, but I think Fizix has been clear (and if I'm wrong, I'm sorry) that those were his beliefs, as opposed to what he's learned from science.

Oh he was perfectly clear they are his beliefs and as I said, that's a personal choice and I respect his right to those beliefs.

My problem stems from the use of exceptionally flawed scientific arguments to justify said beliefs and tell us we are wrong.
 
  • #207
jarednjames said:
I read your later replies, but it doesn't change what I wrote.

I can certainly deny all of that.

1. We have evidence life span was shorter (significantly).
2. Those claims about the diet are complete non-sense.*
3. It is only with the introduction of modern medicine that we have increased life expectancy.
4. If you take random tribes that have had little to no contact with the outside world, their diet is fairly consistent and is free of all the things you mention - but they don't miraculously live longer than westerners.

* Where the claim is the diet is the sole responsibility - ignoring medicine, exercise, nutrition and other key factors that play a far bigger role.

I admit that i only considered the factors that could have had a positive impact on life expectancy and neglected the others you are right about that i made some bad assumptions i can see your point there.

But please be very aware that if you are going to bring them up and make statements like this I will take the ridiculous claims and tear them to shreds.

Now i admit that it was my fault to bring religion into this and i even admitted that in my post so this ends right here so this argument can now be called purely scientific so why did you have to refer to my mistake again? i don't see why your response has been so aggressive if it is not appropriate to discuss religion here then it would also not be right to label someones believes as "ridiculous claims" i really didn't liked your tone there we can have an argument about those "ridiculous claims" but you and i both know that this is not the right place to do it.

By the way nismar thanks for the explanation on my behalf Chuck Norris is now happy with you:wink:
 
Last edited:
  • #208
FizixFreak said:
Now i admit that it was my fault to bring religion into this and i even admitted that in my post so this ends right here so this argument can now be called purely scientific so why did you have to refer to my mistake again?

Your response contained said argument again, hence me replying to it. My response is purely scientific, outlining the problems in your claims.
i don't see why your response has been so aggressive if it is not appropriate to discuss religion here then it would also not be right to label someones believes as "ridiculous claims" i really didn't liked your tone there we can have an argument about those "ridiculous claims" but you and i both know that this is not the right place to do it.

I have, at no point, labelled your beliefs ridiculous. I have labelled your claims regarding longer living, stronger, bigger humans as ridiculous. The simple reason being because they are based on false logic and fallacious ideas.

My initial response was not aggressive, but you simply reposted and earlier item of yours as if I had ignored it and restated your initial claims. Which is why my next reply wasn't as kind.

I will not discuss specific religious content of posts, but I will respond to anything of a scientific nature. In particular any claims known / provable to be incorrect.
 
  • #209
I have, at no point, labelled your beliefs ridiculous. I have labelled your claims regarding longer living, stronger, bigger humans as ridiculous. The simple reason being because they are based on false logic and fallacious ideas.

Maybe i misunderstood you there for that i am sorry as for "longer living" i admit i made some premature assumptions as far as "stronger and bigger" you can refer to my older post.

My initial response was not aggressive, but you simply reposted and earlier item of yours as if I had ignored it and restated your initial claims. Which is why my next reply wasn't as kind.

I can't clearly understand what you are trying to say here i took back the claim of bigger humans in ancient times earlier when did i restarted my initial claims?


I will not discuss specific religious content of posts, but I will respond to anything of a scientific nature. In particular any claims known / provable to be incorrect.

I was not talking about pure religious topic i was talking about discussing religion in the light of science sorry for not making my self so clear.
 
  • #210
FizixFreak said:
I can't clearly understand what you are trying to say here i took back the claim of bigger humans in ancient times earlier when did i restarted my initial claims?


It was simply that your response to my post was you saying "you can't deny humans lived longer". That is what I was referring to.
I was not talking about pure religious topic i was talking about discussing religion in the light of science sorry for not making my self so clear.


OK I understand. Unfortunately the two don't mix nicely.

Now all is clarified, let's get back to the OP.
 
  • #211
It was simply that your response to my post was you saying "you can't deny humans lived longer". That is what I was referring to.

when did i say that? but you know what just forget about it things are cleared up now.

OK I understand. Unfortunately the two don't mix nicely.

Now all is clarified, let's get back to the OP.

I admit in some cases they really don't but in some cases they DO
 
  • #212
I saw this video a long time ago i felt like posting it here



personally i am skeptical about it!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #213
FizixFreak said:
I saw this video a long time ago i felt like posting it here



personally i am skeptical about it!


That's complete non-sense.

They don't even show him doing anything amazing (he's humble!).

It's all claims and stories, that's all. I watched the whole video and it sounds like a dude who just doesn't want to work, sleep with his wives at least 15 times a day and decides it's all about god.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #214
Heh... I don't think there's a religious angle, except in the natural translation of casual Arabic often crediting god, but yeah... with no demonstration it's just... nothing.

On the other hand, this guy DID find a way to sleep with a a bunch of women a LOT, so maybe his power is that he's incredibly smart? He reminds me of carnival strongmen... it's not that he can't be strong, just that he's not 30,000 men strong.
 
  • #215
nismaratwork said:
Heh... I don't think there's a religious angle, except in the natural translation of casual Arabic often crediting god, but yeah... with no demonstration it's just... nothing.

He credits his strength to god, a lot.
On the other hand, this guy DID find a way to sleep with a a bunch of women a LOT, so maybe his power is that he's incredibly smart? He reminds me of carnival strongmen... it's not that he can't be strong, just that he's not 30,000 men strong.

Is 30,000 men really only 260hp?
 
  • #216
jarednjames said:
He credits his strength to god, a lot.


Is 30,000 men really only 260hp?

True, but anyone in his position in Egypt would too... it's more culturally pronounced, but about the same as our sports stars pointing to the sky or thanking god. It's more prevalent, in fact, "god willing" and "'please' god" are practically articles of speech in some regions. Still, any kind of false humility is usually part of the carnie MO, and I doubt that changes due to region.

As for "manpower", that's not an actual unit, whereas HP = 745.7 watts
 
  • #217
Yeah, but I'd hope 30,000 men could do more than 260 horses.
 
  • #218
jarednjames said:
Yeah, but I'd hope 30,000 men could do more than 260 horses.

I'd have to assume so... it does seem like a very odd comparison... maybe Turbo-1 or Rhody would know?
 
  • #219
nismaratwork said:
True, but anyone in his position in Egypt would too... it's more culturally pronounced, but about the same as our sports stars pointing to the sky or thanking god. It's more prevalent, in fact, "god willing" and "'please' god" are practically articles of speech in some regions. Still, any kind of false humility is usually part of the carnie MO, and I doubt that changes due to region.

As for "manpower", that's not an actual unit, whereas HP = 745.7 watts

Nismar i am quite impressed with your understanding of the Muslim culture i guess your Kuwaiti friend helps you a lot say السلام علیکم to him from my behalf:smile: i hope i had a western friend in that comparison.

I also don't see a religious angle here this guy in the video doesn't really look very educated or intellectual so he would probably attribute any thing to GOD because he finds no other explanation people like this are so frustrating if the weather is cold they will say "MASHA-ALLAH its very cold outside" they don't see the cold as absence of heat but they see it as the will of the GOD and they would attribute natural calamities as "WRATH" of GOD.

But coming back to the topic i also think that 260HP=strength of 30,000...,is really a odd comparison he says that his strength has been measured by taking some samples from his knee and his spine it confusing can anybody tell me how that can these type of tests measure a man's strength?
 
  • #220
nismaratwork said:
True, but anyone in his position in Egypt would too... it's more culturally pronounced, but about the same as our sports stars pointing to the sky or thanking god. It's more prevalent, in fact, "god willing" and "'please' god" are practically articles of speech in some regions. Still, any kind of false humility is usually part of the carnie MO, and I doubt that changes due to region.

As for "manpower", that's not an actual unit, whereas HP = 745.7 watts

Measured power in lifts for WR holders is very pretty. For example credited numbers for Z. Shi (62.5 Kg ) in the technical snatch lift are" total pull ~1551 W , second pull ~3333 W.

But the peritinent question is: how much time you can maintain power output ? The reported power of Lance Armstrong over the 2004 Tour de France's climb in Alpe d'Huez is a staggering 495W. Probably an untrained men would be hard-pressed to maintain less than quarter of that.
 
  • #221
DanP said:
Measured power in lifts for WR holders is very pretty. For example credited numbers for Z. Shi (62.5 Kg ) in the technical snatch lift are" total pull ~1551 W , second pull ~3333 W.

But the peritinent question is: how much time you can maintain power output ? The reported power of Lance Armstrong over the 2004 Tour de France's climb in Alpe d'Huez is a staggering 495W. Probably an untrained men would be hard-pressed to maintain less than quarter of that.

OK, so let's say there are ~6 men per horsepower. That gives us ~5000hp for the figure.

Sounds better.

FizixFreak, I have no idea how those "tests" could tell you anything about the strength of a person. Perhaps someone else can enlighten us.
 
  • #222
FizixFreak said:
Nismar i am quite impressed with your understanding of the Muslim culture i guess your Kuwaiti friend helps you a lot say السلام علیکم to him from my behalf:smile: i hope i had a western friend in that comparison.


He did indeed, and I really enjoy learning about other cultures and ways of life. I'd be happy to pass your words along, and I can guess that he'll be quite pleased.

FizixFreak said:
I also don't see a religious angle here this guy in the video doesn't really look very educated or intellectual so he would probably attribute any thing to GOD because he finds no other explanation people like this are so frustrating if the weather is cold they will say "MASHA-ALLAH its very cold outside" they don't see the cold as absence of heat but they see it as the will of the GOD and they would attribute natural calamities as "WRATH" of GOD.

But coming back to the topic i also think that 260HP=strength of 30,000...,is really a odd comparison he says that his strength has been measured by taking some samples from his knee and his spine it confusing can anybody tell me how that can these type of tests measure a man's strength?

I can't imagine how that would be a valid test on its own, although I suppose if he's claiming ot be made of something other than bone and sinew that would be the direction. I think it's meant to do just what it has, lend an air of credibility and medicine to what amounts to an absurd claim. Remember, if he were that strong, actually USING that strength would tear his apart... his ligaments and tendons would rupture and tear, muscles would tear, and even bones would break.

Perhaps the idea was to show that he's like Wolverine, and covered in metal? :wink:

Nah, this guy is just using old carnival tricks of leverage to impress, and then follows up with these claims and immense humility. It's not a bad trick, but you're right to be skeptical of him. After all, if he were so strong, he could surely demonstrate it...


@DanP: Hmmmm... I think the measure for HP was 745.7 Watts/1 second (I could be wrong). Certainly your lift numbers alone disprove the notion, and while Armstrong may not be the norm, he's not a speed racer, but an edurance and speed racer.

@JarednJames: That sound much closer to reality. Other than adding the mystique of medicine to the mix, I guess the tests could be to show that his ligaments, tendons, and bone are somehow fundamentally different than the norm, and able to withstand the internal stresses of his "immense power". In short, think of John Edwards humbly saying, "Oh, it just comes to me..." :smile:
 
  • #223
nismaratwork said:
@DanP: Hmmmm... I think the measure for HP was 745.7 Watts/1 second (I could be wrong). Certainly your lift numbers alone disprove the notion, and while Armstrong may not be the norm, he's not a speed racer, but an edurance and speed racer.

horsepower is a unit of measure for power, not rate of change of power in time. Watt per second is a unit useful for ramp-up behavior of power sources.

watt-hour is a unit for energy.

I think historically Watt coined horsepower to explain how many horses would an engine replace to his potential customers from industry. Legend has it at least. Anyway you must be on crack to invent such a unit without any purpose :P
 
Last edited:
  • #224
DanP said:
horsepower is a unit of measure for power, not rate of change of power in time. Watt per second is a unit useful for ramp-up behavior of power sources.

watt-hour is a unit for energy.

I think historically Watt coined horsepower to explain how many horses would an engine replace to his potential customers from industry. Legend has it at least. Anyway you must be on crack to invent such a unit without any purpose :P

*sizzling sound of burning crack*

WHAT?! What do you mean? Damn why are the lights so bright?...

...There are ANTS under my skin!
 
  • #225
jarednjames said:
OK, so let's say there are ~6 men per horsepower. That gives us ~5000hp for the figure.

Sounds better.

FizixFreak, I have no idea how those "tests" could tell you anything about the strength of a person. Perhaps someone else can enlighten us.

How can you assume that? correct me if i am wrong but i don't think that the engineers have ever established that how many men would equal one horse power and i think that for this particular case we don't need to set such standard i think some one claiming to have 260HP is quite a claim it self but there is no doubt 260HP=strength of 30,000 men..., its an irresponsible exaggeration.

1HP=33,000lbs-foot/minute or 550lbs-foot/second so this guy claims to have the power of 143,000lbs-foot/second so if he is right he can move 550lbs of weight for 260 feet(you can think of other combinations as well) IN ONE SECOND just goes to show you how ridiculous that claim is i might have made some mistake there so any correction will be appreciated for reference check this out

http://www.howstuffworks.com/horsepower.htm
 
  • #226
FizixFreak said:
How can you assume that? correct me if i am wrong but i don't think that the engineers have ever established that how many men would equal one horse power and i think that for this particular case we don't need to set such standard i think some one claiming to have 260HP is quite a claim it self but there is no doubt 260HP=strength of 30,000 men..., its an irresponsible exaggeration.

1HP=33,000lbs-foot/minute or 550lbs-foot/second so this guy claims to have the power of 143,000lbs-foot/second so if he is right he can move 550lbs of weight for 260 feet(you can think of other combinations as well) IN ONE SECOND just goes to show you how ridiculous that claim is i might have made some mistake there so any correction will be appreciated for reference check this out

http://www.howstuffworks.com/horsepower.htm


It's not important that we define horsepower, what's important is that you're using your skeptical eye to realize how much is wrong with his claims. I'd say, well done.
 
  • #227
nismaratwork said:
He did indeed, and I really enjoy learning about other cultures and ways of life. I'd be happy to pass your words along, and I can guess that he'll be quite pleased.

I am sure he will be pleased but only if you could pronounce it right but i think i can trust you on that:wink:

I can't imagine how that would be a valid test on its own, although I suppose if he's claiming ot be made of something other than bone and sinew that would be the direction. I think it's meant to do just what it has, lend an air of credibility and medicine to what amounts to an absurd claim. Remember, if he were that strong, actually USING that strength would tear his apart... his ligaments and tendons would rupture and tear, muscles would tear, and even bones would break.

Well if the test showed how much stress his back bone and knee joints can take and IF that test was valid then i have to say that is really quite amazing and a topic worth discussing but still this does not prove that he has that much strength the only way to see is ask for demonstration which he declines but he does some small demonstration like breaking a coin in half and in a picture you can see him lifting a car by the side if he is going that far then why not show the world his REAL strength i mean a man with 260Hp can definitely do a lot better.

sizzling sound of burning crack*

WHAT?! What do you mean? Damn why are the lights so bright?...

...There are ANTS under my skin!

oh my GOD ants under your skin....,quick get a TWEEZER
 
  • #228
FizixFreak said:
How can you assume that?

Welcome to science. There may not be an official comparison, so we take known values and we create one.

I wanted to compare the 30,000 men to 260hp claim.

For this purpose, DanP provided figures for top athletes which I then used to gauge the ordinary joe's performance.

Based on the figures, it would take ~2 Lance Armstrongs to produce ~1hp. On this basis, I allowed for the average person and made it 6 people per 1hp. And so on...

The purpose of those approximations is not to give you an accurate answer, but to give you a rough idea of how close 30,000 men to 260hp is.

I overestimated the number of men per 1hp and still ended up with a figure well above what was claimed so it's clearly nonsense.

Now, your figure of 143,000lbs-foot/second gives each of the 30,000 men 4.8lbs-foot/second. That means you need 115 men per 1hp - which again you can see is complete non-sense.
 
  • #229
jarednjames said:
Welcome to science. There may not be an official comparison, so we take known values and we create one.

I wanted to compare the 30,000 men to 260hp claim.

For this purpose, DanP provided figures for top athletes which I then used to gauge the ordinary joe's performance.

Based on the figures, it would take ~2 Lance Armstrongs to produce ~1hp. On this basis, I allowed for the average person and made it 6 people per 1hp. And so on...

The purpose of those approximations is not to give you an accurate answer, but to give you a rough idea of how close 30,000 men to 260hp is.

I overestimated the number of men per 1hp and still ended up with a figure well above what was claimed so it's clearly nonsense.

Now, your figure of 143,000lbs-foot/second gives each of the 30,000 men 4.8lbs-foot/second. That means you need 115 men per 1hp - which again you can see is complete non-sense.

"welcome to science"

I admit i am not good at physics(i am actually a commerce student) but that really hurt my feelings:cry:you are a cruel man
 
  • #230
FizixFreak said:
"welcome to science"

I admit i am not good at physics(i am actually a commerce student) but that really hurt my feelings:cry:you are a cruel man

Nothing cruel, just realistic.
 
  • #231
jarednjames said:
Nothing cruel, just realistic.

you EVIL kitty!
 
  • #232
I have to admit... JnJ, he reached the same conclusion as you... you may have been a bit harsh.

We don't need to be physicists to be Skeptics, and we can't learn from FizixFreak or teach him if we're just harsh. I know, pot, kettle, black, I freely admit it... but consider it.
 
  • #233
nismaratwork said:
I have to admit... JnJ, he reached the same conclusion as you... you may have been a bit harsh.

We don't need to be physicists to be Skeptics, and we can't learn from FizixFreak or teach him if we're just harsh.

Well i have to say i did not find the comment "welcome to science" very pleasant but i am a big boy its not that i am going to take it so seriously so i just decided to laugh it of in my previous posts i do admit i am not the smartest guy here and like i said before i am a commerce student so you can expect me to make mistakes but any way let's not strech this may be its just his style and he probebly meant no disrespect.

I know, pot, kettle, black, I freely admit it... but consider it

what do you meant by that.

What about the ants under your skin if the tweezer doesn't work you can always use a RED HOT IRON:biggrin:
 
  • #234
FizixFreak said:
Well i have to say i did not find the comment "welcome to science" very pleasant but i am a big boy its not that i am going to take it so seriously so i just decided to laugh it of in my previous posts i do admit i am not the smartest guy here and like i said before i am a commerce student so you can expect me to make mistakes but any way let's not strech this may be its just his style and he probebly meant no disrespect.



what do you meant by that.

What about the ants under your skin if the tweezer doesn't work you can always use a RED HOT IRON:biggrin:


I think you're right about JnJ, who in my experience is a really good guy. As for "pot kettle black", it's from a phrase, "The pot can't call the kettle black", from a time when both were made of cast-iron (black). The idea is that I'm saying Jared can be harsh, when I'm extremely harsh much of the time... I'm calling him the same as he could call me.

Using the power of Wikipedia, I've even found the Urdu equivalent idiom!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_calling_the_kettle_black
Wikipedia said:
Urdu: لا چور کوتوال کو ان ("The thief scolding the magistrate in reverse")
 
  • #235
nismaratwork said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_calling_the_kettle_black
Wikipedia said:
Urdu: لا چور کوتوال کو ان ("The thief scolding the magistrate in reverse")

My goodness what would us modern day humans would do without the internet:smile:

Look like you may need to act as my translater at some times without any remuneration:biggrin:

But any ways let's get back to the topic i still think it would be quite interesting to discuss about this is from my previous post just wanted to know what others think about it

Well if the test showed how much stress his back bone and knee joints can take and IF that test was valid then i have to say that is really quite amazing and a topic worth discussing

But may be its just me.
 
  • #236
nismaratwork said:
he reached the same conclusion as you...

Exactly. He questioned my method and then used exactly the same one to draw exactly the same conclusion. Hence me being a bit miffed.
you may have been a bit harsh.

It's a language style. Spend enough time around me and you'll see it's my style.

I'm not a subtle person, I'll bite my tongue where I have to but for the most part I'm rather blunt and just call it like it is. It's something I tried to avoid on here initially, but battle fatigue or whatever you want to call it has set in something terrible and I'm tired of going in circles.
 
  • #237
jarednjames said:
Exactly. He questioned my method and then used exactly the same one to draw exactly the same conclusion. Hence me being a bit miffed.


It's a language style. Spend enough time around me and you'll see it's my style.

I'm not a subtle person, I'll bite my tongue where I have to but for the most part I'm rather blunt and just call it like it is. It's something I tried to avoid on here initially, but battle fatigue or whatever you want to call it has set in something terrible and I'm tired of going in circles.

I understand Jared, and I enjoy it to be honest... I know you can take at least as good as you give. In this case however, I don't think that tone or style translates well... I could be overprotective too though.

I think FizixFreak is making an honest attempt to participate in this, but take him at his word... he's in the process of learning, and we don't want to fail to teach, right? We also don't want to miss out on a chance to learn, and while you may not wish to be subtle (no reason you should have to be here), just remember that you two are literally worlds away in terms of cultures and languages.

I'll be honest, if this were me, I wouldn't say that you were being harsh to me, but I know you better and I'm familiar with this tyle in English. If I thought you were limited in your range I wouldn't have made the comment... I think you're selling your ability to communicate subtely short.
 
  • #238
jarednjames said:
Exactly. He questioned my method and then used exactly the same one to draw exactly the same conclusion. Hence me being a bit miffed.


When did i used your method..., may be i have missed some thing please enlighten me (i am NOT being sarcastic).


nismaratwork said:
I think FizixFreak is making an honest attempt to participate in this, but take him at his word... he's in the process of learning, and we don't want to fail to teach, right? We also don't want to miss out on a chance to learn, and while you may not wish to be subtle (no reason you should have to be here), just remember that you two are literally worlds away in terms of cultures and languages.

First of all Nismar we are all grown up men its not a big deal we don't need to stretch this stuff and thanks for the explanation on my behalf i really appreciate it and now let's just get back to the topic
 
  • #239
FizixFreak said:
When did i used your method..., may be i have missed some thing please enlighten me (i am NOT being sarcastic).




First of all Nismar we are all grown up men its not a big deal we don't need to stretch this stuff and thanks for the explanation on my behalf i really appreciate it and now let's just get back to the topic


Fair enough! :smile:
 
  • #240
FizixFreak said:
When did i used your method..., may be i have missed some thing please enlighten me (i am NOT being sarcastic).

I meant the assumption method you used.

Comparing up horsepower to the guy, and then as I showed the next step in your own assumption was to look at other humans.

The only difference was you assumed the guys power (using the 260hp figure not the 30,000 men one) and I did it the other way around.
 
  • #241
jarednjames said:
I meant the assumption method you used.

Comparing up horsepower to the guy, and then as I showed the next step in your own assumption was to look at other humans.

The only difference was you assumed the guys power (using the 260hp figure not the 30,000 men one) and I did it the other way around.

What assumption do you see here?are you talking about the foot-lbs combination?

1HP=33,000lbs-foot/minute or 550lbs-foot/second so this guy claims to have the power of 143,000lbs-foot/second so if he is right he can move 550lbs of weight for 260 feet(you can think of other combinations as well) IN ONE SECOND just goes to show you how ridiculous that claim is i might have made some mistake there so any correction will be appreciated for reference check this out

Again here is the reference to all that

http://www.howstuffworks.com/horsepower.htm
 
  • #242
Sooo...

putting aside HP for a second... let's use the approximations by both of you guys, and consider what the forces involved would do to bone, tendon, and muscle. I've looked through the JAMA, and a few others, and found no mention of this man. If any tests were done on tissue samples, they were done privately, or were not impressive. Frankly I don't know that human tissues can withstand the acceleration under that kind of power anyway, including bone (torsion at least).

I'd also have to wonder what good that strength is, and why it would evolve? Even if we run with the 'god gave it to him' notion... why? From my understanding, the god of Islam is not big on 'proving' things this way, the point being that was already done many times. No other god I can think of in other theologies would just plop some guy down with absurd strength and nothing better to do with it than talk about it and have loads of sex.

Maybe, even without the details, and in a scientific OR religious context, we may find this claim to be absurd on its face?
 
  • #243
FizixFreak said:
What assumption do you see here?

You made assumptions, I made assumptions, we came to the same conclusion. Job done.

I think we'll leave it there. Just wasting space now.
 
  • #244
nismaratwork said:
Sooo...

putting aside HP for a second... let's use the approximations by both of you guys, and consider what the forces involved would do to bone, tendon, and muscle. I've looked through the JAMA, and a few others, and found no mention of this man. If any tests were done on tissue samples, they were done privately, or were not impressive. Frankly I don't know that human tissues can withstand the acceleration under that kind of power anyway, including bone (torsion at least).

I'd also have to wonder what good that strength is, and why it would evolve? Even if we run with the 'god gave it to him' notion... why? From my understanding, the god of Islam is not big on 'proving' things this way, the point being that was already done many times. No other god I can think of in other theologies would just plop some guy down with absurd strength and nothing better to do with it than talk about it and have loads of sex.

Maybe, even without the details, and in a scientific OR religious context, we may find this claim to be absurd on its face?

I think even measuring strength in HP is a bad comparison NEWTON might have been a better unit am i right? any ways eating raw meat and molten butter and having sex 15 times a day bending a coin with his eye socket this guy is interesting(do you the photo at 35sec of the video? i think there is something fishy here) i don't think this is the way of the Egyptians to tell the world "hay don't mess with us we have this hulk on our sides" i mean they are probably not bluffing but no doubt the media of their country is being HIGHLY IRRESPONSIBLE buying into something like that without any demonstration only on the basis of an ambiguous test is quite immature and to top that all they are actully not being skeptical about it but i have to say the reporter in the beginning of the video is pretty cute:!).

Nismar i already explained that there is no religious angle here and being the only Muslim here i think its OK if you can take my word for it:wink:

I really don't want to talk about religion right now but it seems you have a HUGE misconception about the concept of GOD in ISLAM we believe that the GOD of the Jews,Christians,and the Muslims is the same there is no separate GOD for any religion that is why Muslims prefers the word ALLAH as it is universal and applies to all humans without discrimination of any religion.


jarednjames said:
You made assumptions, I made assumptions, we came to the same conclusion. Job done.

I think we'll leave it there. Just wasting space now.

I would still say that i made no assumptions but you are right we are just wasting time on this so let's just forget about that.
 
Last edited:
  • #245
FizixFreak said:
I think even measuring strength in HP is a bad comparison NEWTON might have been a better unit am i right? any ways eating raw meat and molten butter and having sex 15 times a day bending a coin with his eye socket this guy is interesting(do you the photo at 35sec of the video? i think there is something fishy here) i don't think this is the way of the Egyptians to tell the world "hay don't mess with us we have this hulk on our sides" i mean they are probably not bluffing but no doubt the media of their country is being HIGHLY IRRESPONSIBLE buying into something like that without any demonstration only on the basis of an ambiguous test is quite immature and to top that all they are actully not being skeptical about it but i have to say the reporter in the beginning of the video is pretty cute:!).

Nismar i already explained that there is no religious angle here and being the only Muslim here i think its OK if you can take my word for it:wink:

I really don't want to talk about religion right now but it seems you have a HUGE misconception about the concept of GOD in ISLAM we believe that the GOD of the Jews,Christians,and the Muslims is the same there is no separate GOD for any religion that is why Muslims prefers the word ALLAH as it is universal and applies to all humans without discrimination of any religion.




I would still say that i made no assumptions but you are right we are just wasting time on this so let's just forget about that.


Oh I understand, I'm just saying that however he came to be the way he CLAIMS, there is no logic to it in any framework, secular, religious, or in between.

His claims make no sense, and his demonstration with the coin is either impressive, or Yuri Geller's style... and we all know how reliable Yuri is eh? :rolleyes: Bending spoons... arrgh.

I understand your point however, but I'd add... you're right that the media there is being immature; they want this man to be amazing. It's that wanting that we all have, that needs to be guarded, and when we find truly amazing things to be true, it makes guarding our credulity all the better for the wait.
 
  • #246
nismaratwork said:
Oh I understand, I'm just saying that however he came to be the way he CLAIMS, there is no logic to it in any framework, secular, religious, or in between.

His claims make no sense, and his demonstration with the coin is either impressive, or Yuri Geller's style... and we all know how reliable Yuri is eh? :rolleyes: Bending spoons... arrgh.

I understand your point however, but I'd add... you're right that the media there is being immature; they want this man to be amazing. It's that wanting that we all have, that needs to be guarded, and when we find truly amazing things to be true, it makes guarding our credulity all the better for the wait.

So i guess those claims of his are officially busted:biggrin:

Any way i was just wondering that in the worlds strongest men competitions the participants do amazing things i wonder how much HP does these tasks requite for example pulling a truck which is a part of strong men competitions.
 
  • #247
FizixFreak said:
So i guess those claims of his are officially busted:biggrin:

Any way i was just wondering that in the worlds strongest men competitions the participants do amazing things i wonder how much HP does these tasks requite for example pulling a truck which is a part of strong men competitions.


DanP is the guy to ask about that, no doubt.

edit: and may Proton_Soup
 
  • #248
FizixFreak said:


Any way i was just wondering that in the worlds strongest men competitions the participants do amazing things i wonder how much HP does these tasks requite for example pulling a truck which is a part of strong men competitions.


I say you should start by understanding the concepts of work, power and energy.
 
  • #249
MY goodness!




26000 pounds for 120 feet in just 28 seconds:bugeye:

which=111429lbs-foot/second which =202Hp

BUT he does uses the rope for assistance so the calculation might not be accurate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #250
FizixFreak said:
MY goodness!

26000 pounds for 120 feet in just 28 seconds:bugeye:

which=111429lbs-foot/second which =202Hp

BUT he does uses the rope for assistance so the calculation might not be accurate.


Again, please understand the concepts. Think about what force is actually necessary to pull the truck :P Do you really think that man developed 148000+ Watts ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top