Muscle, fat, density, weight, mass...oh my!
Replies
-
EVERYBODY KNOWS BRICKS WEIGH MORE THAN FEATHERS DUHSo after reading through this thread - I just have one question...
If I'm standing on the top of a mountain with an elevation of 13,000 feet above sea level on the planet Vespa...
Which weighs more? A metric ton of bricks or a metric ton of feathers?
Don't ask me how I got a metric ton of feathers up the mountain - assume it's irrelevant to the analysis.0 -
I don't think you do or else you wouldn't have written that last paragraph in your other post.
So let me restate it shorter and simpler.
Person A says Muscle weighs more than fat.
Person B says Nuh-uh, a pound is a pound. or Nuh-uh muscle is more DENSE than fat.
OP is trying to say that Person B's sentence is equally "wrong" as Person A's, which is to say it's not, it just leaves out details that the listener gets out of the implication, see my first post in this thread if you want to, or don't, I'm not your boss.
That is pretty much all there is to it.
Wow. A reasonable person who gets my OP.
Just....
Just let them have the Internets.
I'll have to remember next time that I am an engineer. So, anything I say can be written off as antisocial, arrogant and abrasive.
You all win.0 -
EVERYBODY KNOWS BRICKS WEIGH MORE THAN FEATHERS DUHSo after reading through this thread - I just have one question...
If I'm standing on the top of a mountain with an elevation of 13,000 feet above sea level on the planet Vespa...
Which weighs more? A metric ton of bricks or a metric ton of feathers?
Don't ask me how I got a metric ton of feathers up the mountain - assume it's irrelevant to the analysis.
Gotcha - it's because Bricks have more carbs, right?0 -
so it was all basically an "i know more than you do" post. got itI don't think you do or else you wouldn't have written that last paragraph in your other post.
So let me restate it shorter and simpler.
Person A says Muscle weighs more than fat.
Person B says Nuh-uh, a pound is a pound. or Nuh-uh muscle is more DENSE than fat.
OP is trying to say that Person B's sentence is equally "wrong" as Person A's, which is to say it's not, it just leaves out details that the listener gets out of the implication, see my first post in this thread if you want to, or don't, I'm not your boss.
That is pretty much all there is to it.
like i said, arbitrary distinctions. you could literally go on and on like this for hours if your going to nitpick every variable that hasnt been explicitly stated
It has nothing to do with egos. Why are you so insecure about it anyway?
Again, you are essentially agreeing with us and don't even realize it because you want to prove that you are above it or something. (I really don't get what you are trying prove now to be honest.)0 -
so it was all basically an "i know more than you do" post. got itI don't think you do or else you wouldn't have written that last paragraph in your other post.
So let me restate it shorter and simpler.
Person A says Muscle weighs more than fat.
Person B says Nuh-uh, a pound is a pound. or Nuh-uh muscle is more DENSE than fat.
OP is trying to say that Person B's sentence is equally "wrong" as Person A's, which is to say it's not, it just leaves out details that the listener gets out of the implication, see my first post in this thread if you want to, or don't, I'm not your boss.
That is pretty much all there is to it.
like i said, arbitrary distinctions. you could literally go on and on like this for hours if your going to nitpick every variable that hasnt been explicitly stated
It has nothing to do with egos. Why are you so insecure about it anyway?
Again, you are essentially agreeing with us and don't even realize it because you want to prove that you are above it or something. (I really don't get what you are trying prove now to be honest.)
The point is there is no point for this entire thread because like how engineers can use certain language and still get the context. 90% of us know what muscle weighs more than fat means.
Book smart there buddy.
edit for correction0 -
not insecure at all, i just think alot of what you brought up was just an issue of people taking the literal definition of everything, and you chalk this up to lack of understanding physics. all im saying is that doing this is a little useless, you could do it with almost any aspect of the human language. i suppose we are agreeing to an extent with one main difference; i dont see the point of making these little distinctions due to one or two variables that arent explicitly stated. i dont know, maybe you dont either, but then what was the point of the post in the first place. the difference between mass and weight has very little to do with losing weight, or health and fitness of any sort.
so it was all basically an "i know more than you do" post. got itI don't think you do or else you wouldn't have written that last paragraph in your other post.
So let me restate it shorter and simpler.
Person A says Muscle weighs more than fat.
Person B says Nuh-uh, a pound is a pound. or Nuh-uh muscle is more DENSE than fat.
OP is trying to say that Person B's sentence is equally "wrong" as Person A's, which is to say it's not, it just leaves out details that the listener gets out of the implication, see my first post in this thread if you want to, or don't, I'm not your boss.
That is pretty much all there is to it.
like i said, arbitrary distinctions. you could literally go on and on like this for hours if your going to nitpick every variable that hasnt been explicitly stated
It has nothing to do with egos. Why are you so insecure about it anyway?
Again, you are essentially agreeing with us and don't even realize it because you want to prove that you are above it or something. (I really don't get what you are trying prove now to be honest.)
im not even sure what im trying to prove either at this point. all i know is this day is going by super fast because of this thread, which i will thank you for0 -
For someone who argues in favor of precisely precise language, you certainly glossed over the difference between anthropogenic global warming in particular and global warming in general.No. We are f'ed as a species because people still believe global warming is a hoax. We are f'ed as a species because people still reject evolution. We are f'ed as a species because people still think vaccines are not necessary and cause more harm than good.
That said, it's pretty clear that the "muscle doesn't weigh more than fat" faction doesn't apply the same "a pound is a pound" reasoning to many situations -- lead and hydrogen, bricks and styrofoam, helium and air -- that they want applied so excruciatingly to muscle and fat. I'm not sure why that is, but very, very few people want to argue that lead and hydrogen weigh the same because a pound of each is a pound of each.0 -
90% of us know what muscle weighs more than fat means.
Book smart there buddy.
I agree with you except for the 90%. If it were 90%, people wouldn't be "correcting" that statement ALL THE FRIGIN TIME.
So are you implying by your last statement that education is uncool or something? Eh forget it.
It's funny and entertaining because I feel like I am arguing against myself here.0 -
Oh no caps. Someone is upset now.90% of us know what muscle weighs more than fat means.
Book smart there buddy.
I agree with you except for the 90%. If it were 90%, people wouldn't be "correcting" that statement ALL THE FRIGIN TIME.
So are you implying by your last statement that education is uncool or something? Eh forget it.
It's funny and entertaining because I feel like I am arguing against myself here.
You are new to the boards. Only 488 post so yes you do not know how everyone thinks they need to correct every single statement. Yes you are arguing to no one now at this point.0 -
So after reading through this thread - I just have one question...
If I'm standing on the top of a mountain with an elevation of 13,000 feet above sea level on the planet Vespa...
Which weighs more? A metric ton of bricks or a metric ton of feathers?
Don't ask me how I got a metric ton of feathers up the mountain - assume it's irrelevant to the analysis.
I would tell you, but it's horribly complicated and involves the air speed velocity of an unladen swallow. You would never understand.0 -
"Muscle is more dense (sic) than fat" - Another incomplete statement. Again, there is no frame of reference. A better statement would be: "At the same pressure and temperature, muscle is denser than fat."
My favorite part was including the "(sic)" [sic] in a made up quote ...0 -
As a fellow engineer, let me give the OP some advice: STFU. You make the rest of us look bad.
And while you may not have tried to come off as pretentious, that was precisely the result.0 -
So after reading through this thread - I just have one question...
If I'm standing on the top of a mountain with an elevation of 13,000 feet above sea level on the planet Vespa...
Which weighs more? A metric ton of bricks or a metric ton of feathers?
Don't ask me how I got a metric ton of feathers up the mountain - assume it's irrelevant to the analysis.
I would tell you, but it's horribly complicated and involves the air speed velocity of an unladen swallow. You would never understand.
African or European?0 -
As a fellow engineer, let me give the OP some advice: STFU. You make the rest of us look bad.
And while you may not have tried to come off as pretentious, that was precisely the result.
He was the entertainment thread of the day. He reminds me of Sheldon from big bang theory
0 -
As a mechanical engineer, I find it upsetting the lack of understanding in basic scientific principles on the forums.
From one engineer to another - get over yourself.
Language is an inherently idiomatic medium, and always will be.0 -
I don't think you do or else you wouldn't have written that last paragraph in your other post.
So let me restate it shorter and simpler.
Person A says Muscle weighs more than fat.
Person B says Nuh-uh, a pound is a pound. or Nuh-uh muscle is more DENSE than fat.
OP is trying to say that Person B's sentence is equally "wrong" as Person A's, which is to say it's not, it just leaves out details that the listener gets out of the implication, see my first post in this thread if you want to, or don't, I'm not your boss.
That is pretty much all there is to it.
Wow. A reasonable person who gets my OP.
Just....
Just let them have the Internets.
I'll have to remember next time that I am an engineer. So, anything I say can be written off as antisocial, arrogant and abrasive.
You all win.
You're pinning a lot on that engineer business.
I'm an engineer.
You're coming off as arrogant and abrasive. You're arguing something that does not need arguing, as it's already been done before.0 -
I came here thinking this was something about the human body, but it's just a big word problem from math class.
0 -
I don't think you do or else you wouldn't have written that last paragraph in your other post.
So let me restate it shorter and simpler.
Person A says Muscle weighs more than fat.
Person B says Nuh-uh, a pound is a pound. or Nuh-uh muscle is more DENSE than fat.
OP is trying to say that Person B's sentence is equally "wrong" as Person A's, which is to say it's not, it just leaves out details that the listener gets out of the implication, see my first post in this thread if you want to, or don't, I'm not your boss.
That is pretty much all there is to it.
Wow. A reasonable person who gets my OP.
Just....
Just let them have the Internets.
I'll have to remember next time that I am an engineer. So, anything I say can be written off as antisocial, arrogant and abrasive.
You all win.
You're pinning a lot on that engineer business.
I'm an engineer.
You're coming off as arrogant and abrasive. You're arguing something that does not need arguing, as it's already been done before.
So if I understand correctly.. on earth.. @ sea level.. OP's a Troll? Who would've thunk it...:yawn:0 -
.0
-
How so? He's right.I have no idea how a replying to "muscles weighs more than fat" with "a pound is a pound" is a tell tale sign that they don't understand the concept.
Again, if I am talking to a fellow engineer, I will say things like "titanium is lighter than steel." We both understand what that means because we both have a pretty high level of confidence in each other's understanding.
Look up in the sky. It's a bird? It's a plane? Nope, it's your credibility flying away.
He's right about what? That titanium is lighter than steel? No issue there.
The credibility goes out the window when it is okay to say things like "titanium is lighter than steel", but that's okay cause he is an engineer. Yet, somehow none of the rest of us grasp the fact that "muscle weighs more than fat".0 -
not insecure at all, i just think alot of what you brought up was just an issue of people taking the literal definition of everything, and you chalk this up to lack of understanding physics. all im saying is that doing this is a little useless, you could do it with almost any aspect of the human language. i suppose we are agreeing to an extent with one main difference; i dont see the point of making these little distinctions due to one or two variables that arent explicitly stated. i dont know, maybe you dont either, but then what was the point of the post in the first place. the difference between mass and weight has very little to do with losing weight, or health and fitness of any sort.
im not even sure what im trying to prove either at this point. all i know is this day is going by super fast because of this thread, which i will thank you for
Let's try again.
1) I am not arguing about the precise language to use. You are actually verifying my point about that.
2) The reason I started this thread is because there seems to be a trend these days (I'm not just talking about these forums) that when someone says "muscle weighs more than fat" they need to be corrected and even insulted. There are A LOT of people who do this in my experience (maybe I'm just in the wrong circles). I never really thought much about the statement. Like you, I understand all the nuances. So, I decided to challenge people who try to "correct" me by asking them to explain why it's "wrong." 75% of the people could not explain it accurately. And the funny thing is they would use the same old rhetoric such as the bricks and feathers example (the one all of our grade school physics teachers used) or the pound is a pound statement.
I just thought it was a stupid thing at first and never really cared too much about it. But I realize this dynamic leads to a lot of people giving in to social pressures to just "get in line" with what the "in crowd" believes in. So real aholes like Dr. Oz can take advantage of it and sell crap which not only doesn't work, but can hurt people in some cases.
I am just advocating that people take a little time to understand some basic scientific principles. Most of us took physics in high school and probably had the attitude that they were "too cool" to care about it. My hope is that if people care a little more about it, they will be less susceptible to believing misinformation and lies. Maybe it's hopeless, but if I can influence just a few people it would be a win for me.
3) It is not my intention to act as if I am all knowing and you are all stupid or whatever. I said I was an engineer just to give a point of reference to people. This was a mistake I suppose because engineers are stereotyped and arrogant and antisocial. I'm trying to be an engineer who is less of these things but maybe it's just in my blood as people suggest here.0 -
How so? He's right.I have no idea how a replying to "muscles weighs more than fat" with "a pound is a pound" is a tell tale sign that they don't understand the concept.
Again, if I am talking to a fellow engineer, I will say things like "titanium is lighter than steel." We both understand what that means because we both have a pretty high level of confidence in each other's understanding.
Look up in the sky. It's a bird? It's a plane? Nope, it's your credibility flying away.
He's right about what? That titanium is lighter than steel? No issue there.
The credibility goes out the window when it is okay to say things like "titanium is lighter than steel", but that's okay cause he is an engineer. Yet, somehow none of the rest of us grasp the fact that "muscle weighs more than fat".
That's not what I was saying. I realized the post you are referring to was very badly worded. I apologize. Read my last post. I tried my best to explain better.0 -
To the OP, I get your trying to show that what is thrown at us isn't entirely accurate.
I also understand that the reason that information is broken into a somewhat inaccurate, but simple way for people to understand. Honestly, I am sure your 100% right about everything you said, but the average person isn't going to know how to use that information.
The muscle weighs more than fat (with your extended blurb): people need to know there is a reason why we work out because a lot of humans are lazy (a lot aren't) but it gives them insentive to keep working out, even if they gain a pound or two. Also people should realize that losing a ton of weight fast, they're probably losing a lot of that weight/ mass whatever it is that you wanna call it, through water or muscle wasting.0 -
OP just write this off as a L. Move on.0
-
rjmudlax13 -- I totally hear what you're saying. But, you're banging your head against a wall.
There are more than a handful of posters here that will present a large variety of bs arguments, red herrings, strawmen, needless semantics, etc. Oftentimes, I think they think that they're being super clever, when they just look like they can't differentiate between pertinent facts and unimportant, peripheral details. Other times, I think they're purposefully muddying the waters because they get a kick out of that sort of thing. I think they're a type of troll essentially (or perhaps simply not that bright).
My guess is that it's a psychological issue more than anything. All you can really do is ignore them and engage with folks that appear to be genuine in their discourse. Trolls will be trolls.0 -
Well said lindsey!0
-
As a fellow engineer, let me give the OP some advice: STFU. You make the rest of us look bad.
And while you may not have tried to come off as pretentious, that was precisely the result.
How so?0 -
As a fellow engineer, let me give the OP some advice: STFU. You make the rest of us look bad.
And while you may not have tried to come off as pretentious, that was precisely the result.
How so?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
To add to this as a linguist:
The reason why the incomplete statement "muscle weighs more than fat." Is understood by pretty much anyone even though no frame of reference is given is because of implication. Implication is an important part of human communication.
It's the reason why "I'm studying tonight." is a valid answer to the question "Do you want to go to the movies with me?" even though it's not answering the question at all. The "No, I can't, because..." part is left out because it is unnecessary for understanding the sentence because your brain can decipher the unspoken part by itself within a split second. The same applies to "Muscle weighs more than fat." Any interpretation except "...if they're both the same volume." wouldn't make any sense so that's the interpretation your brain chooses and that's how you understand it even though that part didn't get said.
The Japanese people are taking it even further, regularly just leaving out the complete subject of a sentence if they think it's obvious what the subject is.
Completely agree. I actually think this is the only response that has any value. Thank you for that.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions