They say that the average American gains seven pounds between Thanksgiving and New Years. It even has a name: The Seasonal Seven. Last year, I joined the ranks of average Americans and gained seven pounds. I would have like to blame the thesis, but shoveling sweets seems to be the real root of the problem. Even worse, one year later and I still haven't lost them. Because I am not a fan of learning from past mistakes, I can tell you exactly how one can gain so much weight in so little time, since it looks like I won't be escaping the clutches of the Seasonal Seven this year either. (Remember if you don't gain your seven pounds, some poor soul will gain 14 and no one should be that cruel.)
- Caramel covered apples. One with nuts and one with chocolate.
- Chicken enchiladas and green corn tamales. Two plates.
- Those chocolates with hazel nuts. Three.
- Marshmallows in the shape of snowmen. A handful. I stole the bag for later.
- Three frozen Margaritas.
- Mother's holiday frosted cookies. A handful.
- Gingerbread cookies. Lost count.
- A cheese course. (My sister-in-law was in France and sent a care package).
- Someone's homemade sugar cookies. I am not a fan of sugar cookies, but they slathered the icing on real thick, so I ate those too.
Maybe I should start thinking about whether or not I want to start training for a marathon.
Model the human race as a spherical closed system. At any given time, one could apply the principle of conservation of mass (clearly we are ignoring the difference between the positive flux of "new humans" and the negative flux of "new spirits") by using Gauss' Law.
After "rest-massing" myself (different than weighing myself), I've substantially increased in mass due to inactivity. I've excluded the possibility of relativistic speeds since my mountain bike is nowhere near as fast as a Marin road bike.
It is therefore *obvious* that my increase in mass is accompanied by a decrease of mass somewhere else in the system.
Hopefully this "mass gradient" has flowed from a "mass source" to a "mass sink" and you've noticed a corresponding loss in "weight".
Perhaps I should just stop drinking German beer instead. Those marathons are hard enough to train for.
Posted by: Geoffrey Alan Cope | December 18, 2005 at 10:58 PM
Gargantuan list!! Fortune cookies at the end? :)
Posted by: adrian | December 18, 2005 at 11:59 PM
Each pound is the result of 3500 Calories (the Calorie listed on a package of food is actually 1,000 calories) being consumed. So to gain 7 lbs would require the increase in food consumption of 7 times that amount, or 24,500 Calories -- and that's not including the extra calories needed for shopping, etc.
In other words, one would have to increase food consumption by ~ 800 Calories a day -- at least! That's about a Big Mac and a small french fry in addition to normal food intake.
Ouch!
BTW: There is a rate limiting step for the intestine. I think the number is 10,000 Calories a day. Beyond that, your body simply can't absorb more nourishment. That's why riders in the Tour de France lose weight despite having access to unlimited food.
Theoretically, that would put the maximum weight for a human at somewhere between 10,000/9 and 10,000/11, or about 1,000 lbs. But the "minimum daily Calorie" calculations make a lot of assumptions. For the extremely morbidly obese, cardiac-related water retention can drive the weight much higher. One man, reported to weigh over 1400 lbs, retained approximately 900 lbs. of excess water.
BTW: A lb. of cooking oil has more than 3500 Calories. How a lb. of food consumed can result in more than a pound of weight gained is an exercise for the reader.
Posted by: Rob | December 19, 2005 at 02:50 AM
Forget the marathon, start playing Ultimate. I lose about 4-6 kg every tournament I play....
I found that when I was doing long-distance running I didn't really lose weight because I had to eat so much just to keep my body going. My lunch hours turned into exactly that, I'd sit there and eat for an hour....
Posted by: mick | December 19, 2005 at 04:06 AM
but Ultimate requires hand-eye coordination, not exactly my forte.
Posted by: Caolionn | December 19, 2005 at 09:48 PM
True, but in Ultimate the uniforms are much funkier and the parties are more fun :-).
Posted by: mick | December 20, 2005 at 02:48 AM
I've only done three marathons, but the one trick is to start with a short distance and increase mileage gradually. Think of it as a "sum under the curve" problem.
Of course, remember that there are shorter races (5, 10K, and 21.1K (1/2 marathon)) and other sports (cycling and swimming, though there's some indication swimming might not help as much with weight.
Women are more prone to knee problems than men. You may not consider that important now, but when you're a distinguished elder in the physics community, you might feel differently.
Then again, at the halfway pointin the Cleveland marathon, a woman in her late 60s doing her 185th marathon left me in her dust. She's hoped to have completed 200 by the end of this year.
Posted by: Rob | December 20, 2005 at 05:03 AM
Only three? THREE?!! 200?!! What's wrong with you people?
Posted by: Caolionn | December 21, 2005 at 03:31 PM
Hola estoy muy extrañado al leer todo esto,
yo llegue a este blog porque estba leyendo un articulo sobre Einstein, del sitio de NOVA
y alli en ese articulo le preguntaron a segun los 10 mejores o mas prometedores fisicos
sobre la famosa ecuacion E=mc
pues bien alli salio el nombre de Caolionn O Connell, y me parecio una chica con un rostro que me atrajo y me sorprendio que fuera una cientifica y hice una busqueda en google que me llebo aqui!
pero ahora que e entrado a este blog me a sorprendido lo que leo, lo que e leido aqui no son cosas muy interesantes me sorprende que las escriba una cientifica me parece que son puras cosas tontas uno al leer estas cosas pensaria que las escribe una persona con un intelecto muy pequeño pero bueno no estoy seguro si esto lo escribia la supuesta fisica Caolionn,
yo soy una persona que sola se esta enseñando los conocimientos necesarios para ser un fisico, y me sorprenden las cosas escritas aquique demuestran tan poca inteligencia.
I ask you this question if a physicists cant resovle what Mr. Einstein left unresovle then you are really actually not a genius!
i ask why can any one solve what Einstein left unslove??????? hmmmmmm the world is filled with dumb creatures called people!
Posted by: Einstein grandson! | December 24, 2005 at 10:16 AM