I'm sorry, sir, but your kid is too short to ride...
-
- Permanent Fixture
- Posts: 5734
- Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:19 pm
- Location: Vancouver, Washington
Re: I'm sorry, sir, but your kid is too short to ride...
You may notice kenkid hasn't posted here since. Might have to do with some of the smileys I applied to him after we shut out the lights for the night...
My opinions are mine and mine only. If my opinions are the opinion of others who happen to share whatever my crazy views may be, then fine, but it's not because I represent them in having my opinions. Got it?
Re: I'm sorry, sir, but your kid is too short to ride...
Time for me to be a huge pain in the...Goofyernmost wrote:Always remember and don't ever forget...muscle weighs more then fat. It's an important distinction when you are attempting to prevent someone from riding strictly because of weight. It could hurt!
:kingkong:
Muscle does not technically weigh more than fat. Example, which weighs more, a pound of muscle or a pound of fat? The correct statement should be that muscle is denser than fat.
Sorry, just one of those things I like to do to stir shit. See my sig for further details. :twisted:
The opinions expressed here may not be those of kcberlin. Sometimes I just like to stir shit.:twisted:
Re: I'm sorry, sir, but your kid is too short to ride...
Which weighs more a pound of feathers or a pound of rocks? :D:kcberlin wrote:Time for me to be a huge pain in the...
Muscle does not technically weigh more than fat. Example, which weighs more, a pound of muscle or a pound of fat? The correct statement should be that muscle is denser than fat.
Sorry, just one of those things I like to do to stir shit. See my sig for further details. :twisted:
-
- Practically Lives Here
- Posts: 1126
- Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:31 pm
- Location: North Carolina
Re: I'm sorry, sir, but your kid is too short to ride...
I wasn't referring pound per pound, I was referring pounds per mass. There would be more mass to equal a pound of fat then a pound of muscle and way more mass if it were a pound of feathers. So an equal sized block of fat would weight on scale, less then the equal sized block of muscle. So both your statement and mine are correct and exactly the same.kcberlin wrote:Time for me to be a huge pain in the...
Muscle does not technically weigh more than fat. Example, which weighs more, a pound of muscle or a pound of fat? The correct statement should be that muscle is denser than fat.
Sorry, just one of those things I like to do to stir shit. See my sig for further details. :twisted:
If you strictly went by using a scale to determine whatever the hell it was that that guy was trying to determine, he might be surprised that someone might be right up there on the weight side but not be fat at all. It was kind of a joke point anyway...but there it is.
:goofy: :goofy:
- Zazu
- Permanent Fixture
- Posts: 4133
- Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 3:00 pm
- Park: WDW
- Position: retired
- Location: 8 miles east of Spaceship Earth
- Contact:
Re: I'm sorry, sir, but your kid is too short to ride...
I think somebody needs to learn the difference between "mass" and "volume". They aren't the same -- especially when talking to all the engineers we have on this board.Goofyernmost wrote:I wasn't referring pound per pound, I was referring pounds per mass. There would be more mass to equal a pound of fat then a pound of muscle and way more mass if it were a pound of feathers. So an equal sized block of fat would weight on scale, less then the equal sized block of muscle. So both your statement and mine are correct and exactly the same.
Zazu
-
- Practically Lives Here
- Posts: 1126
- Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:31 pm
- Location: North Carolina
Re: I'm sorry, sir, but your kid is too short to ride...
Definition of Mass...a body of coherent matter, usually of indefinite shape and often of considerable size.Zazu wrote:I think somebody needs to learn the difference between "mass" and "volume". They aren't the same -- especially when talking to all the engineers we have on this board.
Definition of Volume...how much three-dimensional space a substance (solid, liquid, gas, or plasma) or shape occupies or contains.
Although slightly different, for the purposes of this particular discussion they are pretty much interchangeable, in my opinion. With or without an engineering background.
:goofy: :goofy:
- Zazu
- Permanent Fixture
- Posts: 4133
- Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 3:00 pm
- Park: WDW
- Position: retired
- Location: 8 miles east of Spaceship Earth
- Contact:
Re: I'm sorry, sir, but your kid is too short to ride...
Zazu wrote:I think somebody needs to learn the difference between "mass" and "volume". They aren't the same -- especially when talking to all the engineers we have on this board.
Well, this physicist and engineer takes mass as something quite different from volume. "Mass" is functionally equivalent to weight when on the surface of this planet. Your comments confused me, and perhaps others considering the number of jokes about how much a pound of feathers weighs.Goofyernmost wrote:Definition of Mass...a body of coherent matter, usually of indefinite shape and often of considerable size.
Definition of Volume...how much three-dimensional space a substance (solid, liquid, gas, or plasma) or shape occupies or contains.
Although slightly different, for the purposes of this particular discussion they are pretty much interchangeable, in my opinion. With or without an engineering background.
Not knocking the point you were trying to make; just suggesting a clearer way you might want to make it.
Zazu
-
- Practically Lives Here
- Posts: 1126
- Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:31 pm
- Location: North Carolina
Re: I'm sorry, sir, but your kid is too short to ride...
What is this...dump on my lack of engineering degree thread. I know you know what I was talking about otherwise you would have said...what do you mean, not...there is a difference between Mass and Volume.Zazu wrote:Well, this physicist and engineer takes mass as something quite different from volume. "Mass" is functionally equivalent to weight when on the surface of this planet. Your comments confused me, and perhaps others considering the number of jokes about how much a pound of feathers weighs.
Not knocking the point you were trying to make; just suggesting a clearer way you might want to make it.
I don't exactly understand why it is necessary to take a semi-lighthearted discussion about a stupid weight related post and make it into a grammatical war. You are right...I am wrong...I'll do my time out now. In the future I will try to remember that I have to defend my dissertation.
:goofy: :goofy:
Re: I'm sorry, sir, but your kid is too short to ride...
Sorry to all. As I said, I was trying to stir shit. Obviously it worked, but I didn't mean for it to start an argument. Maybe I'm the one who should be doing the time out.Goofyernmost wrote:What is this...dump on my lack of engineering degree thread. I know you know what I was talking about otherwise you would have said...what do you mean, not...there is a difference between Mass and Volume.
I don't exactly understand why it is necessary to take a semi-lighthearted discussion about a stupid weight related post and make it into a grammatical war. You are right...I am wrong...I'll do my time out now. In the future I will try to remember that I have to defend my dissertation.
The opinions expressed here may not be those of kcberlin. Sometimes I just like to stir shit.:twisted: