The 'Performance Enhancing Drug' concept goes against the laws of physics

"Newton's second law of motion f=ma, force = mass times acceleration.

Apply this to any athletic event and efficiency of movement is the key to improved performance.

So when you race faster you are using less total energy to complete the race than your previous best time."

This only occurs in your head.

You could have quoted Einstein, and there is no connection in physical reality between your sentences.

DON'T FEED THE AUTISTIC!

Jon Orange wrote:

Newton's second law of motion f=ma, force = mass times acceleration.

Apply this to any athletic event and efficiency of movement is the key to improved performance.

So when you race faster you are using less total energy to complete the race than your previous best time.

The 'Peformance Enhancing Drug' concept makes people believe the opposite, that superior athletic performance comes from using more energy not less.

So according to the PED concept, Sir Isaac Newton was wrong.

your understanding of basic physics is wrong

velocity is speed with direction, or displacement over time

acceleration = change in velocity/change in time

f=ma.

work = forcex distance

We live in a world with a force called friction, I won't explain this, but it is a force which acts against forward motion. Eventually without a runner exerting energy, it brings a runner on earth to a stop. So acceleration isn't a constant positive as you understand it. In running, one is constantly accelerating against friction, and thus using energy exerted by the muscles to produce force, yielding forward motion.

so when you accelerate, ie run FASTER, you use more force. When you use more force, you do more WORK. Work is expressed in joules or calories, a unit of energy. So when use more force because you are running faster, you do more work, exerting more energy, not less.

So when you race faster, you use more energy, not less.

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that you can manipulate force through efficiency.

Mass is the effect of gravity on an object and manipulating it, ie to be as skinny as possible would have a small benefit in efficiency for an already elite athlete, but you don't get faster by becoming anorexic, because at that point you lose mass by losing muscles, which produce force by burning food, ie the exertion of energy. So no, an elite athlete does not get faster by using less and less energy to run, the opposite is true.

I imagine you are just a troll getting his jollies off over corrupting youngsters by confusing them on physics, hoping they flunk their first test this september, but I will explain to you anyways in the off chance that you haven't been trolling for years and are genuinely confused or ignorant.

You can look the above up in any physics textbook published in the last century or online.

With your understanding an athlete runs slower because of less efficiency. With your understanding a perfectly efficient athlete uses no energy and that a world record that approached C would use no energy. We can see from the above equations, that this is untrue.

Running efficiently requires more energy and the limit to an elite athlete's times isn't their mechanical efficiency or form, which is near perfect for an elite athlete, but the amount of work they are able to produce, particularly the force they can exert to increase their velocity. They are limited by human systems like the muscles and the lungs, which you don't understand, but we won't go into here.

Doping works by allowing athletes to recover faster than natural, which in turn allows them to run faster in training (exerting more force and using more energy), which in turn readies their body to run faster in competition. We won't go into the different common peds here, but its very easy to see why epo and other drugs are performance enhancers.

JR Orange wrote:

DON'T FEED THE AUTISTIC!

He's like one of those coaches who focuses only on running form, having his athletes run only 10-20 mpw. Wanting desperately for finding some perfection of form that allows an athlete to exist outside of newtonian mechanics, but unfortunately we live on earth, not a vaccum.

kvothe wrote:

Doping works by allowing athletes to recover faster than natural, which in turn allows them to run faster in training (exerting more force and using more energy), which in turn readies their body to run faster in competition.

Steroids do. But stimulants directly affect the performance itself.

The 100m world record progression shows how long it took steroids (24+ years) to catch up to the level things were at when amphetamine testing started in 1968.

If amphetamines were legalized in competition, the 100m world record would immediately drop to 9.4, not necessarily by a Bolt. Sustained adrenaline confers essentially superhuman powers, the CNS capable of things that would ordinarily make it shut itself down.

There is a reason for "mostly a lack of interest". I will leave it to a scientist, like yourself to figure it out.

spot on. You must be off shell:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_shell_and_off_shell

Jon Orange wrote:

Newton's second law of motion f=ma, force = mass times acceleration.

Apply this to any athletic event and efficiency of movement is the key to improved performance.

So when you race faster you are using less total energy to complete the race than your previous best time.

Jon Orange, you're wrong about this one. F=ma is not a measure of energy.

Also, you are wrong that total energy demand decreases when you run faster. As we discussed in a previous thread, I demonstrated that a runner will use virtually the same amount of energy to cover a given distance. If you could measure the calories burned by Ayana running 29:30 vs 29:17, you would expect it to be the same value.

What DOES change with training is your capacity of energy output per unit time. Suppose the energy demand for a 10k is 1000 calories. When I'm in shape, my body can do 1000 calories of work in 30 minutes. When I'm not in shape, it takes me 32 minutes to do the same work.

THIS is the advantage provided by PEDs (and training, btw). Increasing the body's capacity of calories/hr.

There is no point explaining to this man, who is clearly physics-illiterate.

For a start, the force in your F=ma can easily be increased through steroids? The force is the force produced by muscles, which can be artificially increased....

You are also assuming there is no air resistance to overcome, other frictional losses, and that runners are like cars and don't fatigue.

Muscles fatigue WAYYYY before "running out of energy". Otherwise people would fall down dead after every race.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Multiply the energy output by the total time to race, and the faster you race the less total energy you are using. Do the calculations.

How can you possibly belive that running more efficiently requires more energy? Why would you even say such a thing?

The first law of the Olympics is: M = DA

(Money = Doping Acceptance)

I know what measure of energy is. You were wrong on the other thread where you tried to tell me that a runner will use the same amount of energy to cover a given distance. I explained it to you but here you are doing it again.

I explained the efficiency conundrum as I called it, that running faster involves more wind resistance and more anaerobic contribution to overcome that, but racing faster is done using less energy, because your energy output multiplied by your time results in fewer joules of energy being expended.

Once you are in decent shape, your energy output per unit of time is not going to increase, that limit is easily reached in training. What takes much longer is the improvement in efficiency. Remember running is a skill, that is the are of greatest improvement. You are not going to take longer to do the same amount of work, when you are NOT in shape you got that completely backwards.

Completly backwards, when you are in better shape is takes you longer to do the same amount of work. That's what efficient running is.

Please, no more lectures until you understand how to apply basic physics.

Metric Miler wrote:

There is no point explaining to this man, who is clearly physics-illiterate.

For a start, the force in your F=ma can easily be increased through steroids? The force is the force produced by muscles, which can be artificially increased....

You are also assuming there is no air resistance to overcome, other frictional losses, and that runners are like cars and don't fatigue.

Muscles fatigue WAYYYY before "running out of energy". Otherwise people would fall down dead after every race.

Pay attention at the back.

Only equation on here is...

John Orange = idiot.

Still wearing Adidas Roms and improving your kick???

Angry Willy wrote:

There is a reason for "mostly a lack of interest". I will leave it to a scientist, like yourself to figure it out.

I'm not a scientist. That's the really sad thing about all of this. Why do I have toexplain basic physics to the people who are supposed to know this stuff???

The level of ignorance is something that I find mind boggling.

Zetland nutter wrote:

Only equation on here is...

John Orange = idiot.

Still wearing Adidas Roms and improving your kick???

I've never worn Adidas Roms idiot.

cleans wrote:

The first law of the Olympics is: M = DA

(Money = Doping Acceptance)

That is one problem. The other is the Mr Mkay approach which the anti drug crusaders preach. It just makes some people believe more in doping.

But the biggest problem is the lack of knowledge of how the body actually works. The lack of knowledge of physiology and physics.

Hello fred.

Do you remember JO's egregious drivel lower leg efficiency theory?

I have saved a study just for you:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27026848

Mr. Jon Orange=plasma shift=JR... is wrong again.

Go JO JO!!!

Jon Orange wrote:

cleans wrote:

The first law of the Olympics is: M = DA

(Money = Doping Acceptance)

That is one problem. The other is the Mr Mkay approach which the anti drug crusaders preach. It just makes some people believe more in doping.

But the biggest problem is the lack of knowledge of how the body actually works. The lack of knowledge of physiology and physics.

Let's go troll boy:

Oh yea.

(I feel more perky now.)