So, /fit/, I bring you a quiz. Do you know enough about health and fitness to answer it?
In a room, there are two men. These two men are identical twins, born only minutes apart. They are both 25 years old, six feet tall, and both weigh 215 pounds. For the past week they have eaten identical meals with portion sizes, slept the same amount of time right down the the minute, and lived practically identical lives.
Twin A is a lifelong athlete. He played rugby throughout high school, and in university took up weight lifting. He bench presses 285 pounds, squats 370, and deadlifts 450. He can also run five kilometers in 18 minutes, and ten kilometers in 38 minutes. His bodyfat percentage is 8%.
Twin B is a lifelong couch potato. He spent his high school and university days playing video games, watching TV, and eating chips. He is obese with very little muscle mass at all, and probably could not run five kilometers in under 45 minutes. His bodyfat percentage is around 30%.
Both Twin A and Twin B get on exercise bikes. They ride the bikes for 30 minutes, at the lowest possible setting, and both retain a speed of exactly 90 RPM for the entire ride. Twin A completes the task easily, barely breaking a sweat. Twin B is barely able to finish his workout, and nearly collapses after doing it.
Excluding their different basic metabolic rates, which of the following is true?
(1) Twin A burned more calories than Twin B.
(2) Twin B burned more calories than Twin A.
(3) Twin A and Twin B burned identical numbers of calories.
So, /fit/, can you answer?
>>36694765
tl;dr go back to /b/
>>36694773
Mad fatty detected.
>>36694765
I'm not reading your post but I hope no one thinks that image has a solution
>>36694765
i pick 2
23
>>36694797
0x=24?
wat i guess not
how long did that take OP cause you wasted some srs time
>>36694823
oops 26
>>36694765
I don't fucking care, I lift but I'm just here for manlet and feels memes.
>>36694830
Nigga are u serious
No solutions exist
>>36694823
>0x
Twin B burned more calories, because his body is less efficient at partitioning energy.
Your image is dumb and I hate you
X can equal infinity and then 7 and 19 become insignificant
When you exhale co2 thats a good sign how much energy you expended. So if one guy barely breaks a sweat and the other is huffin n puffin n riding real slow then theres your answer.
>>36694765
Probably 1, 215lbs of muscle activation vs fat would suggest he is using far more glycogen.
But i'm no medfag. Fatty's heart would be absolutely hammering, and what muscle he does have would be working at itvs limit vs twin a.
Idk you tell me.
>>36694765
B weighs more and is therefore doing more work. Although Twin A has more muscle, motor units are activated as needed for a given activity. Considering the work output is the same, additional caloric usage is likely negligible for A; bodies don't like to waste energy.The answer is 2.
>>36694797
It has a solution mod 26
>>36695085
In fact it has 26 solutions mod 26
>>36694765
Let's see how /fit/ fares compared to /a/.
>>36695149
~0.14 units
>>36694765
2
Twin A can go through the motions more efficiently because they have a greater overall fitness level and their cells are adapted to physical activity, therefore it takes more for Twin B to do the same thing.
>>36694797
You do realize that "no solution" is considered a solution in mathematics, right?
>>36695149
>radius r
Redundant as fuck, senpai. Also, why is a maid asking me to do math?
>>36695387
>Needing wolphram alpha to calculate that
>>36695647
>Redundant as fuck
you apparently never had maths above high school level
>>36694765
In actual work done, they're identical. There are circumstances where either could have burned more, such as using body English to push the pedals around or maintaining poor and inefficient posture or technique. Only way to tell for certain is to hook them up to a machine that monitors breath composition.
>>36694765
"lived practically identical lives"
How the fuck can they live identical lives, yet one is a life long athlete and one is a couch potatoe? Fuckers don't live identical lives at all, so fuck off you retard.
X = -6
>>36695738
Because 7--6 = 13 and 19-6 =13
>>36695743
it is x - 7 => (-6)-7 = -13
19 - 6 = 13
13 != -13
x = {}
>x-7=19+x
>x=x+26
ok lel
for shits and giggles let's say that x=√169 which is ±13.
X = infinity
infinity +/- anything = infinity
alternatively you can get either 0=26, or -7=19
>>36696042
Oh shit, I never thought about that
The square root of 169 (if = 13+/-) does make sense.
>>36695682
I have, and I have seen plenty of people phrase problems like that, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still redundant as fuck to basically say "radius radius" considering the fact that there is no to other variable that could be misconstrued as r in this particular case. Fuck, the moment you say the words "unit square" you should just be able to assume that if you say "r" that people would understand you're referring to the radius of the circles.
The only legitimate reason I can think of that you might actually "need" to say "r" after that is if you have to provide a bunch of different answers on a list of some sort and there's another question that refers to radius that comes after this one. That's entirely possible as well, mind you.
It's ok, senpai, you can say radius without saying "r" afterwards. The world won't explode. I promise.
If it makes you feel better I can tell you that the highest I've gotten is finishing off Calculus III and some intro Linear Algebra course, though I don't see what my mathematics education has anything to do with an argument about semantics.
>people unironically saying infinity is the solution
>>36695733
It's a hypothetical, you mong
X = 7. FUCKING IDIOTS.
>>36696133
>0=26
>>36696049
>infinity +/- anything = infinity
Infinity is not a number, you cannot substitute it into an equation. It is the same as saying x=orange.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elvOZm0d4H0
>>36694765
Twin A burned more calories.
Twin A has way more muscle activation and activity than B.
His heart is beating harder, his muscles are riding the bike with more force and stuff.
Its the same reason why jacked guys are always hot, and skinny guys and even fat guys are always cold. Jacked guys produce more force and heat with every single movement.
>>36696555
>Excluding their different basic metabolic rates
can you into reading?
omg so it is true what they say about murican education system
do you like have physics classes at all?
if they did the same work, then they spent the same energy
it is literally one basic equation
inb4 body heat and blood flow etc - these fall under basic metabolic rate
>>36695149
0.14644660940672623779957781894758
>>36695473
~0.15
Sorry anon.
x=0 assuming you're talking about a field with 2 or 13 elements.
>>36696074
>autism
>>36696628
The fatass has to displace more mass on every stroke though, increasing Wout, right?
>>36694797
-6?
>>36694797
x - 9 = 19 + x
(x - 9)/(19 + x) = 1
x -> ∞
>>36696042
Not true, sqrt is always the positive root, which is why you always have to specify +-√
>>36695066
they weight the same you peasant.
>>36697312
now show your work so us retards can learn something
>>36697870
13^2 = 169
(-13)^2 = 169
√169 = +-13
It is true.
>>36694930
Wrong
>>36697312
I got 0.1465863453815261044176706
What method did you use?
>>36696049
Since when does 0=26? Are you special?
Riddle me this:
√-1
>>36696042
Wrong
So what's the solution to OP's problem guys?
I'd say 3 but I might be wrong
>>36694765
Work = Force * Distance
Force is equal in both subjects since both are 215 lbs, distance is also equal in both because distance = speed * time
So they burn an identical number of calories since they both are 215 lbs and ride for the same time at the same speed.
Twin B burns more calories because his metabolic processes are far less efficient.
x = x+1
where the x on the right side equals the x on the left side, so
x = (x+1) + 1
and
x = ((x+1)+1) + 1
and so on until both sides reach infinity.
>>36694765
Twin A.
Twin A has a higher proportion of fat-free mass, and thus mitochondria in his legs due to his lifelong athletic tendencies. He also has substantial deposits of glycogen and phosphocreatine for immediate energy needs, compared to his twin, who burns though his relatively smaller supply faster, and then needs to utilise the slow, fat-mobilising metabolic processes for his primary source of energy. Twin A burns more stored energy.
While twin B would be expending more energy than twin A in respects to his heart rate being close to maximal, it's not sufficient enough to overcome the difference in energy consumption between the two.
>>36698416
Forgot to tag on the end that twin A also is able to process more triglycerides at once, after they burn through energy reserves than twin B, because they have more mitochondria. Think of them as energy factories. More factories, better supply.
>>36698264
>>36698290
>>36698300
A more interesting question is "What is the square root of i?"
and what is the square root of the square root of i?
and so on and so on to infinity
>>36698416
Bait, twin B obviously burned more calories.
>>36698673
Nuh uh
>>36697312
>>36698028
>>36698221
Its actually super easy when you think about it
>>36698857
oh god how could i not see this
>>36698670
i = √-1
√i = √(√-1)
√i = (-1^(1/2))^(1/2)
√i = -1^(1/4)
√(√i) = (-1^(1/4))^1/2
√(√i) = -1^(1/8)
-1^(1/4n) where n is how many times i has been square rooted. As n approaches infinity 1/4n approaches 0.
As n approaches infinity -1^(1/4n) approaches 1 (-1^0)
So if you keep square rooting i forever and ever, you (sorta) get 1.
>>36698857
i think it has to be cosine though
>>36699174
>talking about that stuff obviously never having seen sin and cos curves in a single plot
>>36699174
>>36694797
>mfw /fit/ haven't watched Precure yet
