How much force to break an Elbow?
Ralf
does anyone know how much power (in Newtonmeter) is nessesary to break
an average elbow?
I know that this quesion is kinda weird, but i´m looking for a way to
measure how forceful a armlock is. So, to convince people that their
armlock has been powerful enough to break the opponents arm.
This is a serious question and no sick shit!
Thanks for feedback and/or sources
Ralf
Bass Guitar God
a coller bone... "Not much...not much"
nemo
>I don't know but Jerry Petersen says it takes only 12 lbs of pressure to break
>a coller bone... "Not much...not much"
I know there are many statements of this kind out there - and
they always make me cringe. They are utterly devoid of real
meaning. For instance, pressure is not measured in pounds but in
pounds-force per unit area (that is, if you wish to stick with
the obsolete English system of units, whose last bastion is the
US. The rest of the world uses SI and measures pressure in
Pascals (Pa) and multiples thereof.)
If someone is uncl;ear on the distimnction between force and
pressure you needn't give much credence to their analysis (and
that's assuming that either force or pressure is relevant -
they might not be. It might be better to speak of other
parameters, such as momentum or energy, instead.).
Regards,
+-
> I don't know but Jerry Petersen says it takes only 12 lbs of pressure to
> break a coller bone... "Not much...not much"
13 lb
--
+-; the point where things begin and end, where the end is start and start
comes to it's final end.....
GreenDistantStar
"Ralf" <bl...@gmx.li> wrote in message
news:364aeec8.04012...@posting.google.com...
I've heard anecdotes that it takes about 17lbs of downward pressure to snap
an elbow in a straight armbar.
Clearly differences in arm strength due to stronger muscles and the degree
of flex in tendons and ligaments would yield different results.
I would have thought a physical demo would be enough for most doubting
Thomases.
GDS
zxcv
"GreenDistantStar" <GreenDis...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:C9DQb.26390$Wa.1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
17 pounds where? At the hand? I just did an experiment. A grabbed a few
weights from my home gym and layed my fully extended arm across a table with
my elbow exposed. I put a 10 pound weight in my palm-no problem. 20
pounds-a bit of pain. 25 pounds-more pain, not quite a tap but close (I
should note that I have two bad wlbows from tendonitis). Since I am home
alone I could not lay any more weight in my palm. I am guessing, however,
that it would probably take about 50 pounds to cause an injury and somewhat
more (say 100 pounds) to cause a break.
I would like some of you out there with healthy elbows to try similar
experiments and report back.
Fraser Johnston
"Bass Guitar God" <drsmi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040124175115...@mb-m24.aol.com...
> I don't know but Jerry Petersen says it takes only 12 lbs of pressure to
break
> a coller bone... "Not much...not much"
So if I put a 12 pound weight on your collarbone it would snap like a twig?
What a load of bollocks.
Fraser
eric neale
"zxcv" <zx...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:40132129$0$7346$61fe...@news.rcn.com...
<snip>
> > I've heard anecdotes that it takes about 17lbs of downward pressure to
> snap
> > an elbow in a straight armbar.
<snip>
>I put a 10 pound weight in my palm-no problem. 20
> pounds-a bit of pain. 25 pounds-more pain, not quite a tap but close (I
> should note that I have two bad wlbows from tendonitis). Since I am home
> alone I could not lay any more weight in my palm. I am guessing, however,
> that it would probably take about 50 pounds to cause an injury and
somewhat
> more (say 100 pounds) to cause a break.
>
> I would like some of you out there with healthy elbows to try similar
> experiments and report back.
What can you learn from a non-destructive test? Lets break 30 elbows and
then see if we get a bell curve.
;-)
George
>
>> I've heard anecdotes that it takes about 17lbs of downward pressure to
> snap
>> an elbow in a straight armbar.
>>
>> Clearly differences in arm strength due to stronger muscles and the
>> degree of flex in tendons and ligaments would yield different results.
>>
>> I would have thought a physical demo would be enough for most doubting
>> Thomases.
>>
>> GDS
>>
>
> 17 pounds where? At the hand? I just did an experiment. A grabbed a few
> weights from my home gym and layed my fully extended arm across a table
> with
> my elbow exposed. I put a 10 pound weight in my palm-no problem. 20
> pounds-a bit of pain. 25 pounds-more pain, not quite a tap but close (I
> should note that I have two bad wlbows from tendonitis).
So, you put pressure on the hands in a straight arm bar? Note it was
written 17lbs force not 17lbs. Hard concept to grasp I'm sure.
El Queso
What he should say is that a collarbone may possibly break with as
little as 12 lbs of pressure when struck at the correct angle in the
right circumstance. It is quite anatomically possible. My buddy broke
his sister's collarbone when they were kids by running up behind her and
slapping down on her shoulders as he said Boo! Had another friend break
a collarbone by simply falling in the living room. That being said, what
is possible and what you can actually do on purpose are often very
different.
Cheers,
Queso
kirks...@operamail.com
armbar. Rather, it dislocates as the colaterals are torn.
You might be able to induce a rotational fracture (torsion) with some
kind of twisting armbar, perhaps.
Ralf
thanks for feedback.
Let me collect all the facts:
My arm is 32cm from shoulder to elbow and 32cm from shoulder to wrist.
Now i need 17lbs(7,7kg) to break an average elbow.
Where are the people that study physics?
If i´m right that would be 25Nm for the elbow to break.
Is that right??
Thats not to much, isn´t it??
Need more feedback,
Ralf
Fraser Johnston
"El Queso" <the_chees...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4013ABA...@yahoo.com...
> What he should say is that a collarbone may possibly break with as
> little as 12 lbs of pressure when struck at the correct angle in the
> right circumstance. It is quite anatomically possible. My buddy broke
> his sister's collarbone when they were kids by running up behind her and
> slapping down on her shoulders as he said Boo! Had another friend break
> a collarbone by simply falling in the living room. That being said, what
> is possible and what you can actually do on purpose are often very
> different.
> Cheers,
> Queso
My point was that pounds of pressure is a bullshit term. Pounds per square
micron or per square mile. Or loading a 17 pound round into a cannon and
shooting that at someone. Just saying 17 pounds of pressure is bullshit.
Fraser
story
>
> "zxcv" <zx...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:40132129$0$7346$61fe...@news.rcn.com...
>
> <snip>
> > > I've heard anecdotes that it takes about 17lbs of downward pressure to
> > snap
> > > an elbow in a straight armbar.
> <snip>
> >I put a 10 pound weight in my palm-no problem. 20
> > pounds-a bit of pain. 25 pounds-more pain, not quite a tap but close (I
> > should note that I have two bad wlbows from tendonitis). Since I am
home
> > alone I could not lay any more weight in my palm. I am guessing,
however,
> > that it would probably take about 50 pounds to cause an injury and
> somewhat
> > more (say 100 pounds) to cause a break.
> >
you are experimenting wrongly to begin with.
........................Tom........................
nemo
The most relevant physical property for a slow break would be the
**moment** about the elbow joint.
Imagine, for instance, that you support your upper arm just above
the elbow on a (padded) table, with your forearm extending
horizontally, and progressively add weight to your hand (say 35
cm from the elbow). Let us say (for the sake of discussion) that
your elbow breaks when the weight reaches 150 lb (667.2 N). Then
we can say that your elbow joint broke at a moment (torque) of
233.5 N.m
That's the physics, that's the correct units, and that's a
methodology, but finding the volunteers for the study is your
problem :-)
Regards,
zxcv
news:06IQb.14444$lh3....@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
purposes of the experiment I think.
An object that weighs 17 pounds will exert 17 pounds of force (will in a 1G
field, in which is my basement I assure you) by definition. During my
experiment was arm was held level. Also, according to mechanics the force
at the hand would be of the same maginitude and opposite direction of the
force at the elbow which was just clearing the table.
see:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pound
"A British unit of force equal to the weight of a standard one-pound mass
where the local acceleration of gravity is 9.817 meters (32.174 feet) per
second per second. "
zxcv
news:1017l6m...@corp.supernews.com...
zxcv
not the slap but you have to adjust for the fact that they were kids with
small bones.
Wayne Dobson
> > "Bass Guitar God" <drsmi...@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:20040124175115...@mb-m24.aol.com...
> >
> >>I don't know but Jerry Petersen says it takes only 12 lbs of pressure to
> >
> > break
> >
> >>a coller bone... "Not much...not much"
> >
> >
> > So if I put a 12 pound weight on your collarbone it would snap like a
twig?
> > What a load of bollocks.
> >
> > Fraser
> >
> >
>
> What he should say is that a collarbone may possibly break with as
> little as 12 lbs of pressure when struck at the correct angle in the
> right circumstance.
Again, bollocks!
> It is quite anatomically possible. My buddy broke
> his sister's collarbone when they were kids by running up behind her and
> slapping down on her shoulders as he said Boo! Had another friend break
> a collarbone by simply falling in the living room. That being said, what
> is possible and what you can actually do on purpose are often very
> different.
> Cheers,
> Queso
I guess you haven't heard the one about a car travelling at 30 mph, coming
to rest, suddenly, and the unrestrained passenger in the back, hitting the
driver with the force of an elephant, or something like that. Sudden
deceleration can produce some surprisingly large forces.
A little bit of physics:
F = MA
M = Mass
A = Acceleration
ie. Force = Mass Times (Acceleration or Deseleration)
Acceleration is the rate of change of speed, with respect to time. A small
mass, travelling at a fair speed, decelerating in a short space of time, can
produce a large force. So, don't judge the amount of force, by the mass of
the object, alone. Your buddy most certainly produced more than 12lbs of
force, with that slap.
--
Wayne
Wayne Dobson
> thanks for feedback.
> Let me collect all the facts:
> My arm is 32cm from shoulder to elbow and 32cm from shoulder to wrist.
> Now i need 17lbs(7,7kg) to break an average elbow.
> Where are the people that study physics?
> Is that right??
> Thats not to much, isnæ„’ it??
> Need more feedback,
> Ralf
I have no idea how this figure could have been arrived at. A ball-park
estimate tells me that this is way out. Why don't you start from 100lbs,
upwards. Alot also depends on if the oponent is resisting, or if it was
snapped on, without warning. The point at which it begins to hurt and the
point at which it pops, are two different things, so how would you know
where one stops and the other starts, unless you actually popped an elbow
with a force gauge?
Besides which, what is the point of the question? I bet you could not give
an accurate estimate of how much force you delivered in an armlock. The
equation is simple:
If you want to control:
Force = Enough to control.
If you want to break:
Force = All you've got.
--
Wayne
George
> An object that weighs 17 pounds will exert 17 pounds of force (will in a
> 1G
> field, in which is my basement I assure you) by definition.
If you want to get technical about it all, F=ma. A 17lb object exerts no
force at rest (the experiment) by definition.
Robert Low
George <fat...@locallinux.net> wrote:
>If you want to get technical about it all, F=ma. A 17lb object exerts no
>force at rest (the experiment) by definition.
You'll want to remember that to console yourself the
next time an elephant sits on you.
--
Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
Wayne Dobson
news:bv15oq$ucf$1...@sunbeam.coventry.ac.uk...
>
> George <fat...@locallinux.net> wrote:
> >If you want to get technical about it all, F=ma. A 17lb object exerts no
> >force at rest (the experiment) by definition.
>
> You'll want to remember that to console yourself the
> next time an elephant sits on you.
ROFL! Well said. ROFL! *Pisses self*
--
Wayne
George
>
> George <fat...@locallinux.net> wrote:
>>If you want to get technical about it all, F=ma. A 17lb object exerts no
>>force at rest (the experiment) by definition.
>
> You'll want to remember that to console yourself the
> next time an elephant sits on you.
You so of course realize the act of sitting is motion and the sudden stop at
the end is a rapid negative acceleration?
Ralf
> **moment** about the elbow joint.
>
> Imagine, for instance, that you support your upper arm just above
> the elbow on a (padded) table, with your forearm extending
> horizontally, and progressively add weight to your hand (say 35
> cm from the elbow). Let us say (for the sake of discussion) that
> your elbow breaks when the weight reaches 150 lb (667.2 N). Then
> we can say that your elbow joint broke at a moment (torque) of
> 233.5 N.m
Hi,
thats mathematicly correct, but way to much!!
Have you ever tried to fasten a tire with 233 Nm.
Thats realy hard work. I dont think , many people are able to do an
armlock with 150lb.
From my personal view, i get a tapout at roundabout 30Nm.
When the opponent doesen´t expect an armlock (kanuki gatame or other)
i get tapouts even eralier.
Whith 233 Nm you rip his Arm of ;o)
That´s to much blood for me...
Ralf
Wayne Dobson
You honestly think it matters how slowly an *elephant* - do I need to say
that again? - an *elephant* sits on you? LOL. I've heard it all now.
*Insane laughter*
--
Wayne
zxcv
Whoah! Do I need to explain basic mechanics to you?
GRAVITY is the acceleration.
Of course an object at rest can exert a force. The object it is acting upon
just exerts the same force back. And a moving object can exert zero force
as well (an object in a zero-G field that is not accelerating), but that is
another story.
You seem to be confusing force with energy (for example mass times velocity
squared divided by 2).
Robert Low
I guess that must be why I have to keep jumping up and
down on my bathroom scale to find out what I weigh.
El Queso
It was the slap, not the fall. The curve of the part of the bone close
to the shoulder is sometimes vulnerable to weird impacts.
Queso
El Queso
Since I never said the slap was 12 lbs, and only said that the
collarbone COULD be broken with AS LITTLE AS 12 lbs UNDER THE RIGHT
CIRCUMSTANCES - I'd say you read much more certainty into my words than
was there. People who say it is either impossible or likely are both
equally mis-stating the probabilities.
Queso
>
> --
> Wayne
>
>
How hard do you have to chuck a rock to go thru a windshield of a car?
Now how hard do you have to throw a bit of ceramic from a sparkplug to
do the same thing? There are more partsd of this equation than the
impact alone.
GreenDistantStar
"Fraser Johnston" <fra...@jcis.com.au> wrote in message
news:bv0i6b$lpqas$1...@ID-201168.news.uni-berlin.de...
> My point was that pounds of pressure is a bullshit term. Pounds per
square
> micron or per square mile. Or loading a 17 pound round into a cannon and
> shooting that at someone. Just saying 17 pounds of pressure is bullshit.
I'm no engineer, but isn't this just a fulcrum/lever thing?
It would be feasible I suppose to measure the amount of pull that is exerted
in a straight arm-bar until the point of tapping (different pain
thresholds?). Sample many combinations of exponents of various weights &
strengths etc and plot the results.
GDS
Wayne Dobson
> Since I never said the slap was 12 lbs, and only said that the
> collarbone COULD be broken with AS LITTLE AS 12 lbs UNDER THE RIGHT
> CIRCUMSTANCES - I'd say you read much more certainty into my words than
> was there.
Why stick at 12lbs? A collar-bone could be broken with 5lbs of pressure,
under the right circumstances. By the same token, a femur could be broken
with 4lbs of pressure, under the right circumstances. I have a video of a
fighter blocking a casual kick and having his femur completely snap. I also
have a friend who has suffered broken bones from coughing. All of that is
true. How ridiculous should we make this?
Are we to assume that you meant, "the right circumstances" to mean any
spurious and unlikely examples you can think of?
If you don't think a slap generates a brief force exceeding 12lbs, then try
getting a pair of bathrooms scales and press down on it until you see the
12lb mark, and get the feel of it on your hand. Then, press your shoulder
with what you judge to be the same pressure. Then casually slap yourself
with that same hand on the same shoulder and then come back and tell me
which one hurt.
> People who say it is either impossible or likely are both
> equally mis-stating the probabilities.
Ok then, shall we stick to probabilities, rather than improbabilities?
> How hard do you have to chuck a rock to go thru a windshield of a car?
> Now how hard do you have to throw a bit of ceramic from a sparkplug to
> do the same thing? There are more partsd of this equation than the
> impact alone.
The equation dosen't mention impact. It is complete.
--
Wayne
Wayne Dobson
*More insane laughter, narrowly missing spewing out tea*
--
Wayne
Wayne Dobson
news:5gYQb.27913$Wa.1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Let me try and help you both out and suggest that even if 17lbs or 12, or
thereabouts was applied as far out as the finger-tips, the elbow still would
not dislocate.
--
Wayne
nemo
The number of 150 lbf was illustrative. However, I tried it
myself and was at 40 lbf (using a barbell grasped in my hand
with my arm supported as I described) with no joint pain (moment
of somewhere around 180 N.m). I'm careful of my old bones and
tendons, so I didn't go any further :-)
Regards,
.
nemo
But there *is* acceleration - the so-called (local) acceleration
due to gravity.
An object of 10 lb mass exerts a force of roughly 10 lbf on earth
(it does vary). By *convention,* the *standard* acceleration of
gravity is 9.80665 m/s^2 (the actual local gravitational constant
does vary over the surface of the earth).
Strictly speaking, the equivalence of gravitational mass and
inertial mass is not automatic and given (despite sharing the
same name, mass, they are really different concepts). It requires
an experiment to show they are the same (strictly speaking,
directly proportional)
Regards,
El Queso
> El Queso <the_chees...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4014499C...@yahoo.com...
>
>
>>Since I never said the slap was 12 lbs, and only said that the
>>collarbone COULD be broken with AS LITTLE AS 12 lbs UNDER THE RIGHT
>>CIRCUMSTANCES - I'd say you read much more certainty into my words than
>>was there.
>
>
> Why stick at 12lbs? A collar-bone could be broken with 5lbs of pressure,
> under the right circumstances.
Yes, I agree.
By the same token, a femur could be broken
> with 4lbs of pressure, under the right circumstances. I have a video of a
> fighter blocking a casual kick and having his femur completely snap. I also
> have a friend who has suffered broken bones from coughing. All of that is
> true. How ridiculous should we make this?
That was kind of my point. It can't be directed, but it exists within
the realm of possibility.
>
> Are we to assume that you meant, "the right circumstances" to mean any
> spurious and unlikely examples you can think of?
I mean any circumstances which result in a broken collar bone. Whan I
say ANY , I mean any.
>
> If you don't think a slap generates a brief force exceeding 12lbs, then try
> getting a pair of bathrooms scales and press down on it until you see the
> 12lb mark, and get the feel of it on your hand. Then, press your shoulder
> with what you judge to be the same pressure. Then casually slap yourself
> with that same hand on the same shoulder and then come back and tell me
> which one hurt.
I never said anything at all about the slap in relation to the number of
12. I said a pal of mine broke his sister's collarbone with what seemed
like a light slap. If you need to read more into that and extrapolate
more from it - not my problem.
>
>
>>People who say it is either impossible or likely are both
>>equally mis-stating the probabilities.
>
>
> Ok then, shall we stick to probabilities, rather than improbabilities?
Probabilities include improbabilities.
>
>
>>How hard do you have to chuck a rock to go thru a windshield of a car?
>>Now how hard do you have to throw a bit of ceramic from a sparkplug to
>>do the same thing? There are more partsd of this equation than the
>>impact alone.
>
>
> The equation dosen't mention impact. It is complete.
Then why keep going back to 12 lbs and putting it where I wasn't talking
about it as if it were part of the equation?
Queso
>
> --
> Wayne
>
>
Jacob Andersen
But when it's just sitting there you're safe? Great!
/Jacob
--
"You think he didn't know the 8 points and how to end a life with a super
quickness?"
- RestInParadise
Jacob Andersen
news:bv1fcr$87o$1...@sunbeam.coventry.ac.uk...
>
ROFL!!!
Jacob Andersen
> "George" <gri...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:nLUQb.15831$lh3....@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> > zxcv wrote:
> >
> > > An object that weighs 17 pounds will exert 17 pounds of force (will in
a
> > > 1G
> > > field, in which is my basement I assure you) by definition.
> >
> > If you want to get technical about it all, F=ma. A 17lb object exerts
no
> > force at rest (the experiment) by definition.
>
> Whoah! Do I need to explain basic mechanics to you?
>
> GRAVITY is the acceleration.
>
> Of course an object at rest can exert a force. The object it is acting
upon
> just exerts the same force back. And a moving object can exert zero force
> as well (an object in a zero-G field that is not accelerating), but that
is
> another story.
It's terrible that someone would not know this. It's taught in the 6th or
7th grade for fucks sake?
It's even more terrible that someone would say it when it so blatantly goes
against common sense.
/Jacob
Richard Lancashire
> > does anyone know how much power (in Newtonmeter) is nessesary to break
> > an average elbow?
> > I know that this quesion is kinda weird, but i´m looking for a way to
> > measure how forceful a armlock is. So, to convince people that their
> > armlock has been powerful enough to break the opponents arm.
> > This is a serious question and no sick shit!
> > Thanks for feedback and/or sources
Aaaahhhh! The martial arts physics! The martial arts physics! The
martial arts physics! The martial arts physics!
Ahem.
> I've heard anecdotes that it takes about 17lbs of downward pressure to snap
> an elbow in a straight armbar.
>
> Clearly differences in arm strength due to stronger muscles and the degree
> of flex in tendons and ligaments would yield different results.
That seems
a) to be a force (or a mass, I'm not much up to speed on Imperial)
rather than a pressure (sorry, force of habit on RMA :)), and
b) very low, however you measure it.
I'm reasonably flexible, not at all muscular and I'd hazard a ballpark
guess at *at least* three or four times that figure. Bear in mind it's
the whole body applying the force; at such a low value, I'd expect to
hear a lot more elbows snapping from hurriedly-applied locks. Even
during standing grappling...
On a matter of semantics, isn't an armbar an upward force? You trap
the hand and body and push up into the elbow.
> I would have thought a physical demo would be enough for most doubting
> Thomases.
You bring the Newton meter, RMA will provide the Darwini- I mean,
volunteers.
:P
Rich
Robert Low
nemo outis <nemo ou...@erewhon.com> wrote:
>Strictly speaking, the equivalence of gravitational mass and
>inertial mass is not automatic and given (despite sharing the
You have not been properly brainwashed into the
Einsteinian point of view, nemo. Come on, repeat
after me: "gravitation is a manifestation of space-time
curvature". Once you've said it three times, it's true.
Robert Low
Wayne Dobson <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>Let me try and help you both out and suggest that even if 17lbs or 12, or
>thereabouts was applied as far out as the finger-tips, the elbow still would
>not dislocate.
Maybe if you applied it by dropping it from the top of
a ladder...
Wayne Dobson
> > Are we to assume that you meant, "the right circumstances" to mean any
> > spurious and unlikely examples you can think of?
>
> I mean any circumstances which result in a broken collar bone. Whan I
> say ANY , I mean any.
I'm sorry. My mistake. Have you heard of the new newsgroup:
rec.martial-arts.osteoporosis? They might be interested in your findings.
> > If you don't think a slap generates a brief force exceeding 12lbs, then
try
> > getting a pair of bathrooms scales and press down on it until you see
the
> > 12lb mark, and get the feel of it on your hand. Then, press your
shoulder
> > with what you judge to be the same pressure. Then casually slap
yourself
> > with that same hand on the same shoulder and then come back and tell me
> > which one hurt.
>
> I never said anything at all about the slap in relation to the number of
> 12. I said a pal of mine broke his sister's collarbone with what seemed
> like a light slap. If you need to read more into that and extrapolate
> more from it - not my problem.
Simple error in perception, I would say.
> >>People who say it is either impossible or likely are both
> >>equally mis-stating the probabilities.
> >
> >
> > Ok then, shall we stick to probabilities, rather than improbabilities?
>
> Probabilities include improbabilities.
Fraid not.
> >>How hard do you have to chuck a rock to go thru a windshield of a car?
> >>Now how hard do you have to throw a bit of ceramic from a sparkplug to
> >>do the same thing? There are more partsd of this equation than the
> >>impact alone.
> >
> >
> > The equation dosen't mention impact. It is complete.
>
> Then why keep going back to 12 lbs and putting it where I wasn't talking
> about it as if it were part of the equation?
Because you presented an anecdote of your friend breaking his sister's
collar-bone, as proof that 12lbs force could dislocate a shoulder, as if the
slap was around 12lbs.
--
Wayne
Wayne Dobson
>
> Wayne Dobson <nos...@noaddress.com> wrote:
> >Let me try and help you both out and suggest that even if 17lbs or 12, or
> >thereabouts was applied as far out as the finger-tips, the elbow still
would
> >not dislocate.
>
> Maybe if you applied it by dropping it from the top of
> a ladder...
I see nothing wrong with that statement. That's obviously what was meant
all along. LOL.
--
Wayne
Dan Winsor
> Bass Guitar God wrote:
>
>
>>I don't know but Jerry Petersen says it takes only 12 lbs of pressure to
>>break a coller bone... "Not much...not much"
>
>
We have a bid for 13, do I hear 15? Can I get 15? 15? Going once..
going twice...
--
Dan Winsor
"Microsoft's relationship to its users is that of the blue whale
to krill. Our only purpose is to breed, feed and get squeezed
against its giant tongue until every last drop of money is
released." - Rupert Goodwins, ZDNet(UK)
nemo
>
>nemo outis <nemo ou...@erewhon.com> wrote:
>>Strictly speaking, the equivalence of gravitational mass and
>>inertial mass is not automatic and given (despite sharing the
>
>You have not been properly brainwashed into the
>Einsteinian point of view, nemo. Come on, repeat
>after me: "gravitation is a manifestation of space-time
>curvature". Once you've said it three times, it's true.
>
It was hard enough for this old Aristotelian to accept Newton,
never mind those brash newcomers :-)
Regards,
Robert Low
nemo outis <nemo ou...@erewhon.com> wrote:
>It was hard enough for this old Aristotelian to accept Newton,
>never mind those brash newcomers :-)
I have to concede that the older I get the more sympathy
I have for the idea that natural state of matter is rest.
--
Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
Badger North
wrote:
>I don't know but Jerry Petersen says it takes only 12 lbs of pressure to break
>a coller bone... "Not much...not much"
Oh geez, Jerry Petersen is an authority on making money off the rubes.
He probably gives some similar stat for breaking a knee.
TravIsGod
>**moment** about the elbow joint.
And, being such a pedant, I'm disappointed in you that you missed out on the
misuse of Nm as a measure of force in the initial post.
Trav
TravIsGod
>George <fat...@locallinux.net> wrote:
>>If you want to get technical about it all, F=ma. A 17lb object exerts no
>>force at rest (the experiment) by definition.
>
>next time an elephant sits on you.
>Rob.
He meant "at rest" relativistically.
Trav
Paul Tanenbaum
> > > does anyone know how much power (in Newtonmeter) is nessesary
> > > to break an average elbow?
>
> martial arts physics! The martial arts physics!
You lobbying to edit a new academic journal, Richard?
> > I've heard anecdotes that it takes about 17lbs of downward
> > pressure to snap an elbow in a straight armbar.
> >
> > Clearly differences in arm strength due to stronger muscles and the degree
> > of flex in tendons and ligaments would yield different results.
>
> That seems
> a) to be a force, rather than a pressure
>
> I'm reasonably flexible, not at all muscular and I'd hazard a ballpark
> guess at *at least* three or four times that figure. Bear in mind it's
> the whole body applying the force; at such a low value, I'd expect to
> hear a lot more elbows snapping from hurriedly-applied locks.
It's a torque, not a force. Depends on the length of his
forearm, and where you grip - lever arms and all that -
And, with a change of frame of reference, we could just as
easily ask how much force (torque) must be applied to uke's
shoulders, using his forearm as the reference frame.
Today's relativity exercise for the advanced student: what
torque is required if uke's upper and lower arms are moving
relative to each other with velocity v?
> On a matter of semantics, isn't an armbar an upward force?
It's a bending moment.
> You trap the hand and body and push up into the elbow.
Not if it's a reverse arm bar, face down...
---
Paul T.
Paul Tanenbaum
> > >If you want to get technical about it all, F=ma. A 17lb
> > >object exerts no force at rest (the experiment) by definition.
> >
> > Whoah! Do I need to explain basic mechanics to you?
> > GRAVITY is the acceleration.
> > Of course an object at rest can exert a force. The object it
> > is acting upon just exerts the same force back.
>
> in the 6th or 7th grade for fucks sake?
30% of the US population doesn't know that the earth
revolves around the sun (though technically they revolve
around each other, but I digress). This implies they
do not understand where the year comes from.
What is the percentage in Europe?
> It's even more terrible that someone would say it when it
> so blatantly goes against common sense.
Much of physics goes against common sense - that's one
reason it's such a difficult subject. This fact has
always mystified me - seeing as we live our whole lives
within those laws, it should come naturally -
---
Paul T.
Paul Tanenbaum
> George <fat...@locallinux.net> wrote:
> >If you want to get technical about it all, F=ma. A 17lb object exerts no
> >force at rest (the experiment) by definition.
>
> next time an elephant sits on you.
Keep in mind that you exert the same force on the elephant.
Which no doubt comes as a shock to the critter, that this
puny primate could be that strong -
---
Paul T.
Paul Tanenbaum
> ...
> >You so of course realize the act of sitting is motion and
> >the sudden stop at the end is a rapid negative acceleration?
>
> I guess that must be why I have to keep jumping up and
> down on my bathroom scale to find out what I weigh.
I get it - instead of depending on one error prone measurement,
you take several readings and compute the average, assuming
the positive and negative accelerations cancel.
Good silat - just don't try it in a time varying G field -
---
Paul T.
Badger North
Tanenbaum) wrote:
>30% of the US population doesn't know that the earth
>revolves around the sun (though technically they revolve
>around each other, but I digress). This implies they
>do not understand where the year comes from.
Like when you say "at least your birthday comes with an annual free
trip around the sun" and they look at you all confused.
@hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
Lancashire) wrote:
>"GreenDistantStar" <GreenDis...@bigpond.com> wrote in message news:<C9DQb.26390$Wa.1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...
>> "Ralf" <bl...@gmx.li> wrote in message
>> news:364aeec8.04012...@posting.google.com...
>> > Hi,
>> > does anyone know how much power (in Newtonmeter) is nessesary to break
>> > an average elbow?
>> > I know that this quesion is kinda weird, but i´m looking for a way to
>> > measure how forceful a armlock is. So, to convince people that their
>> > armlock has been powerful enough to break the opponents arm.
>> > This is a serious question and no sick shit!
>> > Thanks for feedback and/or sources
>
>Aaaahhhh! The martial arts physics! The martial arts physics! The
>martial arts physics! The martial arts physics!
Pickelhaube!
Ooops, sorry.
nemo
Ahh, you mistake my kindness for negligence. Verily, no virtue
goes unpunished.
Regards,
George
> You honestly think it matters how slowly an *elephant* - do I need to say
> that again? - an *elephant* sits on you? LOL. I've heard it all now.
> *Insane laughter*
If you are talking force (which we were) yes. For the stationary critter
the operational idea would be PSI.
George
> I guess that must be why I have to keep jumping up and
> down on my bathroom scale to find out what I weigh.
Sorry, you're measuring weight (mass) not force.
George
> Whoah! Do I need to explain basic mechanics to you?
>
> GRAVITY is the acceleration.
>
> Of course an object at rest can exert a force. The object it is acting
> upon
> as well (an object in a zero-G field that is not accelerating), but that
> is another story.
>
> velocity squared divided by 2).
Your discussion of a moving body isn't related to the inital discussion (a
body at rest). And FYI, it doesn't have to be in a zero-G field to not
have a force, the requirement is a constant velocity.
Hmm, acceleration = rate of change of velocity with respect to time. At
rest is has potential energy and this thing called mass (which happens to
be called pounds in the english system - yet another reason to switch to
mks)
You seem to be confusing velocity, acceleration, mass, and force.
zxcv
Weight is the force acted on a mass in a gravitational field.
zxcv
> zxcv wrote:
>
> > Whoah! Do I need to explain basic mechanics to you?
> >
> > GRAVITY is the acceleration.
> >
> > Of course an object at rest can exert a force. The object it is acting
> > upon
> > just exerts the same force back. And a moving object can exert zero
force
> > as well (an object in a zero-G field that is not accelerating), but that
> > is another story.
> >
> > You seem to be confusing force with energy (for example mass times
> > velocity squared divided by 2).
>
> Your discussion of a moving body isn't related to the inital discussion (a
> body at rest). And FYI, it doesn't have to be in a zero-G field to not
> have a force, the requirement is a constant velocity.
>
in a gravitational field") still has weight which is a force.
>
> Hmm, acceleration = rate of change of velocity with respect to time. At
> rest is has potential energy and this thing called mass (which happens to
> be called pounds in the english system - yet another reason to switch to
> mks)
>
No. Mass and weight are different. In the mks system mass is kilograms
weight is Neutons. Pounds are not mass. Pound is a unit of force. The
English unit of mass is slug.
> You seem to be confusing velocity, acceleration, mass, and force.
No I am not. I have tried to educate you but I have failed because you will
not listen. I suggest that you go to a sciene or physics newsgroup and
spout some of your "theories". That would be funny. I will no longer
respond to your physics ignorance.
Matthew Weigel
George <gri...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Would you mind comparing that statement with the description of mass
given at <http://www.morehead.unc.edu/Universe/Glossary.html> ?
Would you mind explaining the difference between pounds (measurement of
weight) and Newtons? Particularly in reference to this link
<http://www.google.com/search?q=100+pounds+in+Newtons> and this one
<http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=weight> (pay attention to
definitions 2 and 3a there).
(naturally, Google will also convert from lbs to kg, but if you take
that at face value it would indicate that kg is a measure of force...
except that <http://www.google.com/search?q=100+kilograms+in+Newtons>
fails)
I give it a 5, so far.
--
Matthew Weigel
hacker or something
no longer posting from work
zxcv
>
so misinformed about physics.
Alas, though I it probably is not a troll. I remember once a physician I
know insisting that momentum did not exist in space. Yeesh.
Matthew Weigel
"zxcv" <zx...@nospam.com> wrote:
> > I give it a 5, so far.
> >
> I only hope it was a troll. I would be a troll's victim than have someone
> so misinformed about physics.
There's the silver lining, then - he's stupid, but not malicious. Or
else he's malicious, but not (that) stupid.
> Alas, though I it probably is not a troll. I remember once a physician I
> know insisting that momentum did not exist in space. Yeesh.
There's a reason that people run in fear when physics comes up on RMA...
the physicists and mathematicians are vastly outnumbered by guys who
like to punch each other in the face :-)
Robert Low
Matthew Weigel <mcwe...@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
>There's a reason that people run in fear when physics comes up on RMA...
>the physicists and mathematicians are vastly outnumbered by guys who
>like to punch each other in the face :-)
With headgear on, by the looks of things.
--
Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
Richard Lancashire
I think you mean "you're measuring weight (force) not mass".
Every post you've made on the subject has shown a fundamental
misunderstanding the most basic mechanics. It is better to keep silent
and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
Cheers
Rich
Richard Lancashire
> rlanc...@hotmail.com (Richard Lancashire) wrote in message news:<8ad6f59.04012...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > does anyone know how much power (in Newtonmeter) is nessesary
> > > > to break an average elbow?
> >
> > Aaaahhhh! The martial arts physics! The martial arts physics! The
> > martial arts physics! The martial arts physics!
>
> You lobbying to edit a new academic journal, Richard?
Edition one of the JMAPh. available from all good outlets, published
by Black Belt Magazine.
> And, with a change of frame of reference, we could just as
> easily ask how much force (torque) must be applied to uke's
> shoulders, using his forearm as the reference frame.
Or to tori's pelvis. Good job I've been working on my pelvic floor
exercises. You should see me pick up pencils.
> Today's relativity exercise for the advanced student: what
> torque is required if uke's upper and lower arms are moving
> relative to each other with velocity v?
In my species, lower arms are called legs. :P
> > You trap the hand and body and push up into the elbow.
>
> Not if it's a reverse arm bar, face down...
Ah, my mistake.
:P
Rich
GreenDistantStar
<nemo ou...@erewhon.com (nemo outis)> wrote in message
news:9UQQb.258342$JQ1.188559@pd7tw1no...
> That's the physics, that's the correct units, and that's a
> methodology, but finding the volunteers for the study is your
> problem :-)
Could we use cadavers?
Break their elbows, and if they sit up screaming, they be zombies.
Clearly the test protocols should include having frickkin' head mounted
lasers available, just in case.
GDS
ps would a triangle choke work on a zombie?
Robert Low
>>>The most relevant physical property for a slow break would be the
>>>**moment** about the elbow joint.
>>And, being such a pedant, I'm disappointed in you that you missed out on the
>>misuse of Nm as a measure of force in the initial post.
>goes unpunished.
But Nm are correct units for moment of force.
Robert Low
Richard Lancashire <rlanc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>misunderstanding the most basic mechanics. It is better to keep silent
>and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
Sshh, Richard, if you keep telling people about that the
entertainment quotient of RMA will plummet.
Wayne Dobson
news:4015de88$0$27889$61fe...@news.rcn.com...
> No I am not. I have tried to educate you but I have failed because you
will
> not listen. I suggest that you go to a sciene or physics newsgroup and
> spout some of your "theories". That would be funny. I will no longer
> respond to your physics ignorance.
Off with his head, for his being ignorant of physics! Shall we boil him in
hot oil, first?
--
Wayne
Wayne Dobson
news:mcweigel-964734...@news.supernews.com...
> There's a reason that people run in fear when physics comes up on RMA...
> the physicists and mathematicians are vastly outnumbered by guys who
> like to punch each other in the face :-)
Whack each other in the head, would be more apt, bearing in mind some of the
responses.
--
Wayne
Wayne Dobson
Sorry, you're making this shit up.
--
Wayne
Wayne Dobson
Would it impact how dead you would end up? You are saying you would be
under the elephant, considering how fast it had sat on you, or would you be
thinking, "Oh shit! I've been sat on by an elephant!"
--
Wayne
Wayne Dobson
news:bv55ah$io5$2...@sunbeam.coventry.ac.uk...
>
> Matthew Weigel <mcwe...@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
> >There's a reason that people run in fear when physics comes up on RMA...
> >the physicists and mathematicians are vastly outnumbered by guys who
> >like to punch each other in the face :-)
>
> With headgear on, by the looks of things.
Nope!
--
Wayne
Robert Low
>> the physicists and mathematicians are vastly outnumbered by guys who
>> like to punch each other in the face :-)
>Whack each other in the head, would be more apt, bearing in mind some of the
>responses.
I think we should use seventeen pound gloves for sparring.
Just be careful not to hit anybody in the elbow.
zxcv
news:dzsRb.2470$MS3....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
It is not his ignorance that bothers me. When I know nothing about a
subject I might ask a question or two but mostly I shut up and listen and
learn.
Karim Rashad
> 30% of the US population doesn't know that the earth
> revolves around the sun (though technically they revolve
> around each other, but I digress). This implies they
> do not understand where the year comes from.
I'd say that roughly 30% of the population are also aged 0-14 or 75+
though, which might explain that...
--
Karim Rashad <remove SPAMFREE: krashad at SPAMorbisFREEuk dot com>
Karim Rashad
> ps would a triangle choke work on a zombie?
Don't know, but crucifix chokes work very well on vampires...
Chas
> It is not his ignorance that bothers me. When I know nothing about a
> subject I might ask a question or two but mostly I shut up and listen and
> learn.
I've not seen physics guys say much that's relevant, or agree with one
another at all.
I think it's cool- like listening to people talk about 'art'- none of the
words, ultimately, mean what you think they were going to mean.
Chas
Robert Low
Chas <chasclem...@comcast.net> wrote:
>I've not seen physics guys say much that's relevant, or agree with one
>another at all.
Now, that's not entirely fair Chas. We generally all agree
that the outsiders are wrong---it's just the reason for them
being wrong that we disagree about. (And that's at least
partly because arguing with each other is more fun than
arguing with people who don't talk the language.)
>I think it's cool- like listening to people talk about 'art'- none of the
>words, ultimately, mean what you think they were going to mean.
Come to think about it, it is a lot like listening
to people argue about art :-)
--
Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
Richard Lancashire
> Richard Lancashire <rlanc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >misunderstanding the most basic mechanics. It is better to keep silent
> >and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
>
> Sshh, Richard, if you keep telling people about that the
> entertainment quotient of RMA will plummet.
I plead self-referential postmodernism, your honour.
:P
Rich
Jacob Andersen
ROFLMAO!!
/Jacob
--
"You think he didn't know the 8 points and how to end a life with a super
quickness?"
- RestInParadise
TravIsGod
>
>--
>Rob.
Yeah, we call those "torques." Force is the vector acting on the moment arm.
Trav
TravIsGod
>weight) and Newtons?
Yes.
A Pound is an English unit of currency.
A Newton is a little cookie like thing that you eat.
Trav
BillMahoney68
Gi
Badger North
>>Would you mind explaining the difference between pounds (measurement of
>>weight) and Newtons?
>
>A Pound is an English unit of currency.
>
>A Newton is a little cookie like thing that you eat.
Fuck, no wonder I find physics so confusing.
Wayne Dobson
news:bv5nod$32e$1...@sunbeam.coventry.ac.uk...
>
I am shocked and appalled at your advocating such a dangerous practice.
--
Wayne
Wayne Dobson
You would think that most people know to do this, but in practice, this
often doesn't occur. I personally don't let such things bother me. It's
gonna happen again and again and again. I know it's coming, so I'm not
surprised by it. Anyway, it's not such a big deal, not even anything
malicious in it.
--
Wayne
Don Wagner
>Fuck, no wonder I find physics so confusing.
Yet, so so delicious.
--Don--
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
Grappler240
>
actually.....for YOU, trav....your dad's dick is the little thing you like to
eat.
and I can definately see you eating some newtons, fatty.
-g
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------
"You can carve it on a bowling pin and cram it,for all I care."
-Gichoke, Jan. 21, 2002
George
> Would it impact how dead you would end up? You are saying you would be
> under the elephant, considering how fast it had sat on you, or would you
> be
> thinking, "Oh shit! I've been sat on by an elephant!"
You're the one who brought up absurdities like elephants.
George
>
> It is not his ignorance that bothers me. When I know nothing about a
> subject I might ask a question or two but mostly I shut up and listen and
> learn.
The British Gravitational System - BG
The British Gravitational System of units is used by engineers in the
English-speaking world with the same relation to the foot - pound - second
system as the meter ? kilogram - force ? second system (SI) has to the
meter - kilogram - second system. For engineers who deals with forces,
instead of masses, it's convenient to use a system that has as its base
units length, time, and force, instead of length, time and mass.
The three base units are the foot, the second, and the pound-force.
In the BG system the mass unit is the slug and is defined from the Newton's
Second Law (1). The unit of mass, the slug, was then derived from the
pound-force by defining it as that mass that will accelerate at 1 foot per
second per second when a 1 pound-force acts upon it:
1 lb = (1 slug)(1 ft/s2)
* 1 lb force acting on 1 slug mass will give the mass an acceleration of
1 ft/s2.
The weight of the mass from equation (2) in BG units can be expressed as:
w (lb) = m (slugs) g (ft/s2)
With a standard gravity 32,174 ft/s2 - the mass of 1 slug weights 32,174 lb.
The English Engineering System - EE
In the English Engineering system of units, the primary dimensions are are
force, mass, length, time, and temperature.
In the EE systems the units for force and mass are defined independently.
* The basic unit of mass is pound mass (lbm)
* The unit of force is the pound (lb) alternatively pound force (lbf).
El Queso
> El Queso <the_chees...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:40146DFA...@yahoo.com...
>
>
>>>Are we to assume that you meant, "the right circumstances" to mean any
>>>spurious and unlikely examples you can think of?
>>
>>I mean any circumstances which result in a broken collar bone. Whan I
>>say ANY , I mean any.
>
>
> I'm sorry. My mistake. Have you heard of the new newsgroup:
> rec.martial-arts.osteoporosis? They might be interested in your findings.
All I stated was possibilities, not probabilities.
>
>
>>>If you don't think a slap generates a brief force exceeding 12lbs, then
>>
> try
>
>>>getting a pair of bathrooms scales and press down on it until you see
>>
> the
>
>>>12lb mark, and get the feel of it on your hand. Then, press your
>>
> shoulder
>
>>>with what you judge to be the same pressure. Then casually slap
>>
> yourself
>
>>>with that same hand on the same shoulder and then come back and tell me
>>>which one hurt.
>>
>>I never said anything at all about the slap in relation to the number of
>>12. I said a pal of mine broke his sister's collarbone with what seemed
>>like a light slap. If you need to read more into that and extrapolate
>>more from it - not my problem.
>
>
> Simple error in perception, I would say.
Yours, not mine.
>
>
>>>>People who say it is either impossible or likely are both
>>>>equally mis-stating the probabilities.
>>>
>>>
>>>Ok then, shall we stick to probabilities, rather than improbabilities?
>>
>>Probabilities include improbabilities.
>
>
> Fraid not.
Yes, whether you know it or not, odds include the possibility of
extremely unlikely events, just like reality does.
>
>
>>>>How hard do you have to chuck a rock to go thru a windshield of a car?
>>>>Now how hard do you have to throw a bit of ceramic from a sparkplug to
>>>>do the same thing? There are more partsd of this equation than the
>>>>impact alone.
>>>
>>>
>>>The equation dosen't mention impact. It is complete.
>>
>>Then why keep going back to 12 lbs and putting it where I wasn't talking
>>about it as if it were part of the equation?
>
>
> Because you presented an anecdote of your friend breaking his sister's
> collar-bone, as proof that 12lbs force could dislocate a shoulder, as if the
> slap was around 12lbs.
No, I mentioned that under the right circumstances AS LITTLE AS 12 lbs
could break a bone. I went on to show where someone got a collarbone
broken with very little force on accident to illustrate the suprising
occassional fact. YOU connected 12 lbs and the slap, not me. I am not
responsible for your want to connect unconnected points and argue
against something I didn't say.
It's like this - a piece of straw can blow through an oak tree. You
can win the lotto. Will you if you try and try? Probably not. Don't go
telling me that nobody wins the lotto, or that straw can't be pushed
through a tree just because these events are improbable. I knew a guy
who had been hit by lightning 4 times. He was a road worker. 3 times
directly and once on a hand-rail he was holding - that time he was blind
for close to 6 months and woke up with his sight one day. Very, no,
EXTREMELY improbable - but there he was. He might have been lying about
2 of the strikes, as the Dr. I worked for at the time could only vouch
for the last 2.
Queso
>
> --
> Wayne
>
>
Wayne Dobson
It is not the elephant which is absurd, but your arguement.
--
Wayne
Wayne Dobson
There you have it, zxcv. There you were getting all steamed up about a
stupid human, when all along, this stream of gibberish, was infact being
produced by a clever chimpanzee. That is the only explanation I can think
of. No human could have produced that.
--
Wayne
Robert Low
Hey, not fair! That was my absurdity, not his.
--
Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
Paul Maybury
> Wayne Dobson wrote:
>
> > You honestly think it matters how slowly an *elephant* - do I need
to say
> > that again? - an *elephant* sits on you? LOL. I've heard it all
now.
> > *Insane laughter*
>
> If you are talking force (which we were) yes. For the stationary
critter
> the operational idea would be PSI.
Pressure is measured in psi = pounds (force) per square inch. The total
*force* is derived by multiplying the applied pressure by the affected
surface area. Of course, since the sitting elephant has a larger surface
area than you, you will not be crushed by it's entire weight - but you
will be crushed, nonetheless. (In response to your comment in a later
post - people in India would not think this to be an absurd problem.)
Remember, the equation F=ma does apply, since all objects on the surface
of the earth are subjected to a gravitational acceleration (approx. 9.8
m/s, or 32.2 ft/s).
tpm