Physics puzzle: chin-ups.

[evolvedForm]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This cannot be determined conceptually.

[/ QUOTE ]

He isn't looking for some kind of rigorous proof of an exact number which doesn't even necessarily exist. I would assume he's looking for some kind of argument, based on some reasonable physical assumptions, to make an educated guess. This kind of thing is interesting in its own right.

pzhon, it's an interesting question. I'll think about it for a bit.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how the educated guess could be very accurate considering the subjective nature of physical training. Think about this: a person is well-trained in curling but poorly trained in chin-ups. This will make a huge difference in the results. I know from experience that the body adapts to specific motions. One person's body may adapt better to one than another.

This is why the impossibility of finding an answer. I agree it was interesting too, until I thought of this roadblock.

[traz]

There isn't much correlation between vicepts and chin-ups. There's obviously some..but your example is flawed. If your biceps were severely injured you wouldn't be able to do many things, not just chin-ups.

Its the same thing with push-ups...many people think pushups are some kind of indication of bicep strength.

[benkahuna]

[ QUOTE ]
There isn't much correlation between vicepts and chin-ups. There's obviously some..but your example is flawed. If your biceps were severely injured you wouldn't be able to do many things, not just chin-ups.

Its the same thing with push-ups...many people think pushups are some kind of indication of bicep strength.

[/ QUOTE ]

Many people seriously believe that?

Morons. Obviously, push-ups are more reliant on extensor muscles in the upper arm (triceps) and pectoral muscles. Biceps are necessary for a smooth downward motion toward the ground, but their use is clearly minimal in that calisthenic (sic).

What gets sore when you do push-ups? Exactly...