Maximum size a mammal could grow to?

[parshyaa]

I have a presentation on square cube law. But i don't have any numerical data to show.
How could i find the maximum size a animal could go. I know that by using square cube law we could say that greater the size of animal goes lesser its strength becomes. But how could i find the numerical datas for maximum size of humans,elephants,dinosaurs etc.could you help me.

 

[NFuller]

I know that by using square cube law we could say that greater the size of animal goes lesser its strength becomes.

I'm not really sure how you come about this.

But how could i find the numerical datas for maximum size of humans,elephants,dinosaurs etc.could you help me.

Have you seen this paper? It shows that the maximum speed of organisms is roughly proportional to body length across more than 20 orders of magnitude.
http://aapt.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1119/1.4917310

 

[parshyaa]

I'm not really sure how you come about this.

Take two cubes, take 2nd cube exactly doubled in size then cube1(i.e length of cube1= l and that of cube2= 2l)
Now strength for a human/living body is defined as [strength = surface area/volume]
Then strength of cube1 =6/l and
strength of cube2 = 3/l
Therefore
Although the size of cube2 is double of cube1 but its strength is half of cube1
{Ie st.cube1 = 2(str.cube2)}
Therefore greater the size lesser would be the strength.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square

 

[sophiecentaur]

But i don't have any numerical data to show.

Have you tried Google?
Blue whales can grow to the size they do because the water supports them.

 

[NFuller]

Therefore greater the size lesser would be the strength.

I think you mean the greater the size the lesser the strength to mass ratio. The strength of an elephant is obviously greater than that of a human.

The issue is that the ability of an animal to move its own weight seems roughly constant across a broad scale, as shown in the article in post #2. This causes me to question the validity of your initial assumption.

If your just looking for an upper bound on mammal size, then there are more factors to consider than just muscle mass as sophiecentaur has pointed out.

 

[diogenesNY]

One approach to this question might be to take a look at several of history's largest mammals. Ask why they were that large and none or few got any larger. How did they do in their eco-system? Why were they large? Why weren't they larger? How did they fare against smaller mammals or against non-mammals?

Seems you could proceed in any of a number of directions from there.

diogenesNY

 

[sophiecentaur]

This is another game of PF Top Trumps, I think.
All successful species occupy their own Ecological Niche. Elephants are doing favours for Dung Beetles all the time and vice versa.