Muscle weighs more.....what?

If you throw a cannon ball out of a ship.. Does the sea level rise, lower or stay the same? This is a real physics question. Do you know the answer?

It depends. Does the cannon ball land in the water, or on land?

Not a single person has ever said a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat. That's not what they said, and that's not what they meant.

A pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat.

Well, I guess you can't say that anymore.

If people are saying that, then it's because they don't understand the basic difference between "weight" and "volume."

Yes, 1 pound of muscle = 1 pound of fat. By definition. 1 pound = 1 pound.

HOWEVER, 1 pound of fat = 5 times the VOLUME of 1 pound of fat. Muscle is more dense and therefore weighs 5 times as much per cubic inch.

So, yes. If you lose 1 pound of fat while putting on 1 pound of muscle, then you will weigh the exact same amount. HOWEVER, the tape measure will show that you've lost (some fraction of) inches because that muscle takes up less space than the fat did.

If you throw a cannon ball out of a ship.. Does the sea level rise, lower or stay the same? This is a real physics question. Do you know the answer?

stay the same
the amount of water that the bowling ball displaces will be equal to the difference in the amount displaced by the ship with vs. without the additional weight of the bowling ball

Right... Unless the cannon ball lands on land. Then the sea level lowers, as there is less displacement.

Because we haven't hashed this out a hundred times in these forums? If you put two "containers" at the same volume of fat and muscle next to each other, the muscle one would weigh more.

The search function is your friend.

If you throw a cannon ball out of a ship.. Does the sea level rise, lower or stay the same? This is a real physics question. Do you know the answer?

stay the same
the amount of water that the bowling ball displaces will be equal to the difference in the amount displaced by the ship with vs. without the additional weight of the bowling ball

Right... Unless the cannon ball lands on land. Then the sea level lowers, as there is less displacement.

It lowers. When "on" the water, water is displaced by mass. When "in" the water, water is displaced by volume.

A Cannonball has greater mass than volume. So it displaces more water when above/floating (on a boat) than it does when under the water. Once the cannonball leaves the boat and enter the water, less water is displaced and the water level lowers.

just realize i said bowling ball instead of cannon ball:blushing:

and yea that makes sense, im assuming if the ball had the same density of water the level would stay the same though

saying it has a greater mass than volume is a little off though, 2 different measurements.

I've met plenty of people who honestly believe muscle does weigh more than fat.
I believe some people have been doing this so long they forget many are just starting out and believe every old- retried- catchy phrase they hear. Some believe after a week of eating wrong, but going on walks down the street, the reason they gained weight is because they gained muscle so they continue their bad habits. Others believe eating only 500 calories a day and taking hcg shots are a good idea because some "nutritionist" or "doctor" told them so. Others take pills without even knowing exactly what's in it, but some friend swears by it so they ingest some unknown poisons and spend $100's just to try to get a quick fix. My point is not everyone knows muscle doesn't weigh more than fat, or have any concept of volumes and mass outside of their 12th grade education.

Keeping these types of clarifications around are a good idea because not everyone has been doing this forever. If posts like this are just buried no one will be able to differentiate the truth from the hype. They are helpful, even if overdone, and annoying with the bickering it breeds.

You shouldnt really be weight training whilst eating a low calorie diet. as mentioned above i was told to eat a min of 2000 calories a day by my personal trainer.
When i read muscle weighs more then fat ... that makes no sense to me. A pound is a pound ... 10 pounds is 10 pounds no matter the size of the object

???? No weight training while eating a "lower" calorie diet??? What about competitive bodybuilders who are cutting for competition and still hitting the weights just as hard in the gym?

When I was cutting a few months back on lower calories, I still kept my regular schedule of lifting like I always have? Not sure why you think you should not lift during a time like that??

Im talking about the average joe not body builders. In my opinion a body builders lifestyle isnt healthy anyways but thats not the point. Youre taking things im saying far too literal. This is about fitness goals for losing weight not becoming mister america. I know when i started going to the gym id get discouraged because i would go 5 sometimes 6 days a week and sometimes lose a pound if that id even sometimes gain weight but not because i wasnt getting results but it was because i had gained muscle. I didnt do hours of weight training i did a mix of cardio, HIIT and weight training. And plus body builders have binge days and they take alot of supplements

sorry but muscle gain is not why your seeing the scale go up, not in a calorie deficit at least

and the average joe would benefit from lifting, not just bodybuilders. i dont consider myself a bodybuilder, not within a mile, but ive been lifting in a deficit for 8 months now

Let me re-iterate,
No one listen to anything the OP has said.
That is all.

Even for entertainment purposes?