From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Kazmaier at 200,000 lbs vs the 200,000 lb sauropod
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 02:18:30 GMT

in <60@fedfil.UUCP>
    news@fedfil.UUCP (news) writes:
 
] As creatures get larger, efficiency goes down.  Weight goes up in proportion
] to volume, a cubed figure, strength goes up only in proportion to cross
] section of bone and muscle in the various body parts, basically a squared
] figure:  what is called the square-cube problem.
 
[...]
 
] This comes as a simple algebra equation:  1350/350^(2/3) = x/200000^(2/3).
] Just solve for x.
]
] I posted this the other night and I'm hearing a whole lot of silence
] on the subject.  It's unanswerable. Nor does figuring in total lifts
] for legs/back (squat) + arms (benchpress), i.e. substituting 2000 lbs for
] the 1350 (Kaz + bar) help.  That brings the 200,000 lb Kaz' lifting ability
] up to around 140,000 lbs.  He's still pinned to the ground.
 
Well, speaking as one of the people whose posts you refer to as
"silence," it's very much answerable and has been answered several
times--you just haven't responded with anything more substantive than
an insult.
 
[...]
 
] I honestly cannot think of any other possibility, other than for one.
 
Judging by the responses (or, more accurately, lack thereof) you've made
to the articles that I and others have posted on this subject, perhaps
you should have ended the above sentence after the fourth word.
 
] The felt effect of gravity in the age of dinosaurs was heavily attenuated
] by gravitational pull from some other, very close,  cosmic body.
 
But, Ted, I must admit that you do make me think--indeed, while reading
your message I realized that there is even more data out there fitting
your model and strengthening your case that you haven't even mentioned.
 
Ted has pointed out numerous times that strength (ability to apply
force) is proportional to the two-thirds power of mass.  So far, we've
considered this solely in the context of Kazmaier's ability to perform
squats, but let's look at a few other areas of physical endeavor to
which this rule applies equally well.
 
The force required to move through water is proportional to surface
area--which is also proportional to the two-thirds power of mass.  Why
is this important?  Because it means that, no matter how large or small
a creature is, there is a single fixed upper limit to the speed it can
attain moving through water under its own power--whether you make the
creature larger or smaller, the force required to maintain that maximum
speed increases and decreases at exactly the same rate as its ability to
expend the force necessary to maintain that speed.
 
Now, the obvious question to ask at this point is "what is the upper
limit for a creature moving through water under its own power?"  Well,
fortunately, I just happen to have a copy of that scholarly tome, _The
Guinness Book of World Records_ handy and, according to it, the fastest
swimmers (people who have dedicated their lives to training for maximum
swimming speed) have achieved maximum sustained swimming speeds of just
under five miles per hour.  Obviously, most organisms aren't dedicated
world-class athletes, so one would expect that most organisms would be
much slower than this in water and, further, it is safe to conclude that
no living organism can attain speeds greater than five miles per hour
under its own power no matter how hard it tries.
 
Yet, this same book (_Guinness_) also claims that some species of fish
have attained speeds of up to 68 miles per hour.  Now, since our
mathematics cannot possibly be wrong, and certainly a book like _The
Guinness Book of World Records_ couldn't possibly be in error, there is
left ONLY ONE POSSIBLE EXPLANATION FOR THIS FACT.
 
It is known that fish generate electric fields within their bodies
which, in most cases, serve primarilly as a sort of underwater 'radar'
to help them avoid obstacles while swimming; in the case of the electric
eel and some types of catfish, these fields are strong enough to be used
as offensive weapons.  Because of the speeds that fish attain while
moving through water, it is obvious that, through some physical process,
the knowlege of which is currently being suppressed by a conspiracy of
"scientists" (led by the dastardly Carl Sagan), these electromagnetic
fields being produced by the fish actually reduce the "felt effect of
water" to the point that the fish feels only a tiny percentage of the
drag that would normally be felt by a swimming creature.
 
Yet, this is not accomplished without a price:  a simple examination of
fast-moving fish will show that none of them have long necks--indeed, no
fast-moving fish has a neck at all!  Obviously, they would have evolved
long necks if they could have, so their increased speed comes at the
cost of bearing a similarly increased felt effect of gravity, which
makes long necks an impossibility.
 
Sure, some bogus "scientists" may scoff at such a simple and obviously
true idea as fish-produced electromagnetic fields reducing the felt
effect of water, but as long as this theory is repeated, unchanged and
without addressing any of its flaws, often enough, within a few decades
it will certainly be hailed as the one true scientific belief and we
will look back and wonder how we ever could have doubted this, the only
possible explanation for fish swimming speeds.
 
Trygve

Newsgroups: talk.origins