Muscle DOES weigh more than fat
Replies
-
0 -
However, 1 lb of muscle does not weight more than 1 lb of fat.
Oh...and....
0 -
Yes, 1 cubic inch of muscle does weigh more than 1 cubic inc of fat. I am happy for you.0
-
Who cares. I want to see more muscle and less fat on me.
Period.0 -
However, 1 lb of muscle does not weight more than 1 lb of fat.
Well yeah but that statement is a tautology. One pound of anything will always weigh the same as one pound of anything else.0 -
:laugh: :laugh:0 -
0 -
0 -
I don't really see this conversation getting all emotional and hostile. It is about as controversial as saying carrots are orange. Not to mention people are posting cool gifs and pictures.
0 -
Actually muscle does weigh more than fat.
look at the following
From that evidence we can CLEARLY see that a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat. They aren't even the same size for cripes sake.
0 -
0 -
Congrats! Just print it out and fill in the blanks. Get a pretty frame for it, display it proudly. You deserve it.0 -
Who cares. I want to see more muscle and less fat on me.
Period.
^^^ THIS. But the gifs are funny
0 -
Muscle takes up less room then fat.....0
-
0 -
From that evidence we can CLEARLY see that a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat. They aren't even the same size for cripes sake.
Really?, We'll since you have that all figured out maybe you can let us know whether a pound of feathers weighs more than a pound of metal....
Metal:
vs.
Feathers:
0 -
However, 1 lb of muscle does not weight more than 1 lb of fat.
Well yeah but that statement is a tautology. One pound of anything will always weigh the same as one pound of anything else.
False. If the fat is weighed on the moon or in outer space it will weigh nothing. However, one could say 1 kg of muscle will always have the same mass as 1 kg of fat.0 -
0
-
Anthing that is bigger or more OBVIOUSLY weighs more than small things or less of things.
Durrr.0 -
0
-
However, 1 lb of muscle does not weight more than 1 lb of fat.
Well yeah but that statement is a tautology. One pound of anything will always weigh the same as one pound of anything else.
False. If the fat is weighed on the moon or in outer space it will weigh nothing. However, one could say 1 kg of muscle will always have the same mass as 1 kg of fat.
I am talking about an equivalency so if you change the conditions for one of the objects you would have to make the same change to the other object or all you are doing is imposing an unequal state.
Think of it like this if I were to say that the following statement is always true: 1=1. It would not be correct to fire back with "False, 1 does not equal 1 if you add 1 to just one side of the equation." Pounds is a unit of measure that is dependent upon weight. Weight is a function of gravity. If you change the gravity for one object you would have to make that same change to the other object. In completely open space both objects would weight nothing in which case we would have 0=0 which is still true.
For that matter in completely open space a 10 pound object would weigh nothing as well. So by saying that we are in open space it really doesn't make sense to try an even apply a concept of weight at all. The only way a conversation about the weight of anything even has a chance of making sense is if we are all in agreement that we are talking about the same planet.
The topic title "Muscle DOES weigh more than fat" states unambiguously that this conversation is about a comparison of weight which means gravity will be a factor. I did infer that we were all talking about the weight of objects on earth. If that was incorrect then I would say that this forum is not appropriately titled or the OP did not explain clearly enough that he meant to say "Muscle DOES weigh more than fat even when we are talking about open space" in which case I would disagree. Since you are the OP the ball is in your court to determine which is the case.0 -
However, 1 lb of muscle does not weight more than 1 lb of fat.
Well yeah but that statement is a tautology. One pound of anything will always weigh the same as one pound of anything else.
False. If the fat is weighed on the moon or in outer space it will weigh nothing. However, one could say 1 kg of muscle will always have the same mass as 1 kg of fat.
I am talking about an equivalency so if you change the conditions for one of the objects you would have to make the same change to the other object or all you are doing is imposing an unequal state.
Think of it like this if I were to say that the following statement is always true: 1=1. It would not be correct to fire back with "False, 1 does not equal 1 if you add 1 to just one side of the equation." Pounds is a unit of measure that is dependent upon weight. Weight is a function of gravity. If you change the gravity for one object you would have to make that same change to the other object. In completely open space both objects would weight nothing in which case we would have 0=0 which is still true.
For that matter in completely open space a 10 pound object would weigh nothing as well. So by saying that we are in open space it really doesn't make sense to try an even apply a concept of weight at all. The only way a conversation about the weight of anything even has a chance of making sense is if we are all in agreement that we are talking about the same planet.
The topic title "Muscle DOES weigh more than fat" states unambiguously that this conversation is about a comparison of weight which means gravity will be a factor. I did infer that we were all talking about the weight of objects on earth. If that was incorrect then I would say that this forum is not appropriately titled or the OP did not explain clearly enough that he meant to say "Muscle DOES weigh more than fat even when we are talking about open space" in which case I would disagree. Since you are the OP the ball is in your court to determine which is the case.
That was a very long winded response to justify why you are wrong. Don't say always if I can easily provide a scenario that proves it incorrect. Should have said, "all else being equal", your response should have been, "I forgot to say all else being equal, so you are correct on a technicality".
Btw, I could still say 2 items on earth with the same mass have two different weights depending on their location...0 -
I've been told my muscle weighs alot....0
-
Dude, you're wrong. It's common knowlege that when comparing the weight of two different objects, you always assume the same amount of weight of each object. So when I say that apples and oranges weigh the same, its because everyone knows that I'm comparing 5 lbs of apples to 5 lbs of oranges. Duh.This is the most idiotic horse beating argument on MyFitnessPal. Everyone who went to elementary school heard of the thought experiment: "What weighs more, 100 lbs of bowling balls, or 100 lbs of feathers?" Notice that there is a specific quanity mentioned. So, for one, it isn't even a valid analogy to use when arguing against the muscle weighs more than fat horse beating. Also, if I could go back to that science class, I would ask my a**hat teacher, "well are they being acted on by the same amound of gravity?" This would throw a wrench into the clever little thought experiment, because then it becomes a little less clear. Sure 100 lbs on earth is mathmatically equal to 100 lbs on the moon. However, if you took the 100 lbs of whatever on the moon to the same spot that the 100lbs of whatever on the earth is, the moon stuff would weigh more. Of course, if we are talking about mass, 100 lbm of something will always equal 100 lbm of something else.
Regardless, when someone says muscle weighs more than fat, it is implied that they mean per unit of volume. If you don't understand that, you are a DUMBA**!!!!!!!!!! If you feel the need to be an insecure know-it-all and say dumba** *kitten* like "1lb of muscle weighs the same as 1lb of fat you dumba** ga ga ga!" you are a f**king loser with a huge superiority complex and you need to die a slow death by RASBERRY KETONES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also, when I say that lead and oxygen weight the same, duh, I'm talking about 1 lb of each. That is how we know that nothing weighs more or less than anything else. Comparing the weight of two objects always implies comparing the same sample size of each that weighs the same.0 -
However, 1 lb of muscle does not weight more than 1 lb of fat.
Well yeah but that statement is a tautology. One pound of anything will always weigh the same as one pound of anything else.
False. If the fat is weighed on the moon or in outer space it will weigh nothing. However, one could say 1 kg of muscle will always have the same mass as 1 kg of fat.
I am talking about an equivalency so if you change the conditions for one of the objects you would have to make the same change to the other object or all you are doing is imposing an unequal state.
Think of it like this if I were to say that the following statement is always true: 1=1. It would not be correct to fire back with "False, 1 does not equal 1 if you add 1 to just one side of the equation." Pounds is a unit of measure that is dependent upon weight. Weight is a function of gravity. If you change the gravity for one object you would have to make that same change to the other object. In completely open space both objects would weight nothing in which case we would have 0=0 which is still true.
For that matter in completely open space a 10 pound object would weigh nothing as well. So by saying that we are in open space it really doesn't make sense to try an even apply a concept of weight at all. The only way a conversation about the weight of anything even has a chance of making sense is if we are all in agreement that we are talking about the same planet.
The topic title "Muscle DOES weigh more than fat" states unambiguously that this conversation is about a comparison of weight which means gravity will be a factor. I did infer that we were all talking about the weight of objects on earth. If that was incorrect then I would say that this forum is not appropriately titled or the OP did not explain clearly enough that he meant to say "Muscle DOES weigh more than fat even when we are talking about open space" in which case I would disagree. Since you are the OP the ball is in your court to determine which is the case.
That was a very long winded response to justify why you are wrong. Don't say always if I can easily provide a scenario that proves it incorrect. Should have said, "all else being equal", your response should have been, "I forgot to say all else being equal, so you are correct on a technicality".
Btw, I could still say 2 items on earth with the same mass have two different weights depending on their location...
When others were posting that you were a troll I actually posted in your defense because I felt that your topic wasn't exactly controversial enough to warrant branding you with the troll label. You simply posted a factually true statement on an open internet forum and I saw nothing wrong with that. Then came all the entertaining gifs but no real controversy.
What I did not realize is that I gave you too much credit. They were right. You are simply a troll. Perhaps you are so desperate for something to fight with people about you regretted not posting something that would have riled up people more. So you decide to come after me for using the word "always" in an effort to get me to fight with you.
Well I am actually quite happy in my life and if it will bring some sort of joy in to your life I will help you out here.
I did type this "One pound of anything will always weigh the same as one pound of anything else."
Do you see how the word always is in bold print? Thankfully someone was here to point out that if you change the conditions for one thing and not the other then the weight would change. I am clearly deficient in intelligence and I would like to ask forgiveness from everyone on the internet for posting this completely inaccurate statement.
I hope that made your day.0 -
Dude, you're wrong. It's common knowlege that when comparing the weight of two different objects, you always assume the same amount of weight of each object. So when I say that apples and oranges weigh the same, its because everyone knows that I'm comparing 5 lbs of apples to 5 lbs of oranges. Duh.This is the most idiotic horse beating argument on MyFitnessPal. Everyone who went to elementary school heard of the thought experiment: "What weighs more, 100 lbs of bowling balls, or 100 lbs of feathers?" Notice that there is a specific quanity mentioned. So, for one, it isn't even a valid analogy to use when arguing against the muscle weighs more than fat horse beating. Also, if I could go back to that science class, I would ask my a**hat teacher, "well are they being acted on by the same amound of gravity?" This would throw a wrench into the clever little thought experiment, because then it becomes a little less clear. Sure 100 lbs on earth is mathmatically equal to 100 lbs on the moon. However, if you took the 100 lbs of whatever on the moon to the same spot that the 100lbs of whatever on the earth is, the moon stuff would weigh more. Of course, if we are talking about mass, 100 lbm of something will always equal 100 lbm of something else.
Regardless, when someone says muscle weighs more than fat, it is implied that they mean per unit of volume. If you don't understand that, you are a DUMBA**!!!!!!!!!! If you feel the need to be an insecure know-it-all and say dumba** *kitten* like "1lb of muscle weighs the same as 1lb of fat you dumba** ga ga ga!" you are a f**king loser with a huge superiority complex and you need to die a slow death by RASBERRY KETONES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also, when I say that lead and oxygen weight the same, duh, I'm talking about 1 lb of each. That is how we know that nothing weighs more or less than anything else. Comparing the weight of two objects always implies comparing the same sample size of each that weighs the same.
I can't speak for talking about the weight of apples vs. oranges (seriously, who the f*** talks about apples and oranges like that?), but when the topic is fitness and weight loss, and someone says the specific phrase, "muscle weighs more than fat," I am intelligent and socially competent enough to know they mean per unit of volume. I am sorry that you are too stupid to understand that.
It has nothing to do with being "right" or "wrong." This isn't a f**cking physics exam. However, I and the intellegent people I spend time with know the physics behind it all. So, I am not worried that there will be a misunderstanding. I could care less if they say, "muscle is more dense than fat" or "1 cubic inch of muscle weighs more than 1 cubic inch of fat weighed at the same time and altitude on earth" or the more common phase. I still get it. It's magical!0 -
When others were posting that you were a troll I actually posted in your defense because I felt that your topic wasn't exactly controversial enough to warrant branding you with the troll label. You simply posted a factually true statement on an open internet forum and I saw nothing wrong with that. Then came all the entertaining gifs but no real controversy.
What I did not realize is that I gave you too much credit. They were right. You are simply a troll. Perhaps you are so desperate for something to fight with people about you regretted not posting something that would have riled up people more. So you decide to come after me for using the word "always" in an effort to get me to fight with you.
Well I am actually quite happy in my life and if it will bring some sort of joy in to your life I will help you out here.
I did type this "One pound of anything will always weigh the same as one pound of anything else."
Do you see how the word always is in bold print? Thankfully someone was here to point out that if you change the conditions for one thing and not the other then the weight would change. I am clearly deficient in intelligence and I would like to ask forgiveness from everyone on the internet for posting this completely inaccurate statement.
I hope that made your day.
Yeah, as I was writing my response, it hit me that he is probably a troll. However, I see angry and insecure people in the real world use this topic as a way to verbally abuse people. And to be honest, it angers me when I see this behavior. Although, I recently realized that it has nothing to do with the physics or anything that's going to help people understand the topic better. it's just one more thing for people to do to make themselves feel superior because they have deep rooted issues. It's what's behind the trolling phenomenon as well.
I need to learn from my own mistakes and distance myself from these people on the internet and in real life.
I will excuse myself as it's time for my anal injection of rasberry ketones and coffee bean extract. ahhhhhhhhh0 -
Sorry, I thought the condesending language I used would have made it clear (I guess you can't make that assumption with some of the posters around here), but my response to you was 100% sarcasm. I completely agree with your post.
Dude, you're wrong. It's common knowlege that when comparing the weight of two different objects, you always assume the same amount of weight of each object. So when I say that apples and oranges weigh the same, its because everyone knows that I'm comparing 5 lbs of apples to 5 lbs of oranges. Duh.This is the most idiotic horse beating argument on MyFitnessPal. Everyone who went to elementary school heard of the thought experiment: "What weighs more, 100 lbs of bowling balls, or 100 lbs of feathers?" Notice that there is a specific quanity mentioned. So, for one, it isn't even a valid analogy to use when arguing against the muscle weighs more than fat horse beating. Also, if I could go back to that science class, I would ask my a**hat teacher, "well are they being acted on by the same amound of gravity?" This would throw a wrench into the clever little thought experiment, because then it becomes a little less clear. Sure 100 lbs on earth is mathmatically equal to 100 lbs on the moon. However, if you took the 100 lbs of whatever on the moon to the same spot that the 100lbs of whatever on the earth is, the moon stuff would weigh more. Of course, if we are talking about mass, 100 lbm of something will always equal 100 lbm of something else.
Regardless, when someone says muscle weighs more than fat, it is implied that they mean per unit of volume. If you don't understand that, you are a DUMBA**!!!!!!!!!! If you feel the need to be an insecure know-it-all and say dumba** *kitten* like "1lb of muscle weighs the same as 1lb of fat you dumba** ga ga ga!" you are a f**king loser with a huge superiority complex and you need to die a slow death by RASBERRY KETONES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also, when I say that lead and oxygen weight the same, duh, I'm talking about 1 lb of each. That is how we know that nothing weighs more or less than anything else. Comparing the weight of two objects always implies comparing the same sample size of each that weighs the same.
I can't speak for talking about the weight of apples vs. oranges (seriously, who the f*** talks about apples and oranges like that?), but when the topic is fitness and weight loss, and someone says the specific phrase, "muscle weighs more than fat," I am intelligent and socially competent enough to know they mean per unit of volume. I am sorry that you are too stupid to understand that.
It has nothing to do with being "right" or "wrong." This isn't a f**cking physics exam. However, I and the intellegent people I spend time with know the physics behind it all. So, I am not worried that there will be a misunderstanding. I could care less if they say, "muscle is more dense than fat" or "1 cubic inch of muscle weighs more than 1 cubic inch of fat weighed at the same time and altitude on earth" or the more common phase. I still get it. It's magical!0 -
Muscle takes up less room then fat.....
When?0 -
Sorry, I thought the condesending language I used would have made it clear (I guess you can't make that assumption with some of the posters around here), but my response to you was 100% sarcasm. I completely agree with your post.
Dude, you're wrong. It's common knowlege that when comparing the weight of two different objects, you always assume the same amount of weight of each object. So when I say that apples and oranges weigh the same, its because everyone knows that I'm comparing 5 lbs of apples to 5 lbs of oranges. Duh.This is the most idiotic horse beating argument on MyFitnessPal. Everyone who went to elementary school heard of the thought experiment: "What weighs more, 100 lbs of bowling balls, or 100 lbs of feathers?" Notice that there is a specific quanity mentioned. So, for one, it isn't even a valid analogy to use when arguing against the muscle weighs more than fat horse beating. Also, if I could go back to that science class, I would ask my a**hat teacher, "well are they being acted on by the same amound of gravity?" This would throw a wrench into the clever little thought experiment, because then it becomes a little less clear. Sure 100 lbs on earth is mathmatically equal to 100 lbs on the moon. However, if you took the 100 lbs of whatever on the moon to the same spot that the 100lbs of whatever on the earth is, the moon stuff would weigh more. Of course, if we are talking about mass, 100 lbm of something will always equal 100 lbm of something else.
Regardless, when someone says muscle weighs more than fat, it is implied that they mean per unit of volume. If you don't understand that, you are a DUMBA**!!!!!!!!!! If you feel the need to be an insecure know-it-all and say dumba** *kitten* like "1lb of muscle weighs the same as 1lb of fat you dumba** ga ga ga!" you are a f**king loser with a huge superiority complex and you need to die a slow death by RASBERRY KETONES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also, when I say that lead and oxygen weight the same, duh, I'm talking about 1 lb of each. That is how we know that nothing weighs more or less than anything else. Comparing the weight of two objects always implies comparing the same sample size of each that weighs the same.
I can't speak for talking about the weight of apples vs. oranges (seriously, who the f*** talks about apples and oranges like that?), but when the topic is fitness and weight loss, and someone says the specific phrase, "muscle weighs more than fat," I am intelligent and socially competent enough to know they mean per unit of volume. I am sorry that you are too stupid to understand that.
It has nothing to do with being "right" or "wrong." This isn't a f**cking physics exam. However, I and the intellegent people I spend time with know the physics behind it all. So, I am not worried that there will be a misunderstanding. I could care less if they say, "muscle is more dense than fat" or "1 cubic inch of muscle weighs more than 1 cubic inch of fat weighed at the same time and altitude on earth" or the more common phase. I still get it. It's magical!
Poe's Law
Without a blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of extremism or fundamentalism that someone won't mistake for the real thing.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions