Re: MArc runs and trips
From: Rich Travsky (_at_hotmMOVEail.com)
Date: 11/29/04
- Previous message: Rich Travsky: "Re: Only idiots believe that humans have external noses to run after springbok in the heat of the day (Re: snorkel noses (Re: Ape theories & Aquaticism"
- In reply to: Marc Verhaegen: "Travsky runs down small antelopes in less than 26 miles (Re: Born to run"
- Next in thread: Al Zeller: "Re: Born to run"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:08:42 -0700
Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> :-D
Don't understand the difference my boy?
> "Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> news:41A41712.9DCD2985@hotmMOVEail.com...
> > Nick Maclaren wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <10ppd9o3rtuaubd@news.supernews.com>,
> > > "John Roth" <newsgroups@jhrothjr.com> writes:
> > > |>
> > > |> Horses, for example, cannot run long
> > > |> distances without suffering heat exhaustion.
> > >
> > > Having got home, I can check up on some figures to confirm my back of
> > > the envelope calculations. We are talking about 150-250 watts (10-17
> > > kcal/min), plus up to 250 watts (3.5 kcal/min) due to sunlight. The
> > > difference in conversion is because we are only about 20% efficient.
> > > At the speeds the current paper is talking about (3-4 m/sec), the
> > > convection loss is unlikely to exceed 5-10 kcal/min (from many, but
> > > unfortunately confused, references). We are therefore talking about
> > > 5-20 kcal/min to lose by sweating, with the latter figure for faster
> > > running under hotter conditions.
> > >
> > > That is 1.25-5 litres/hour of sweat, and we can lose only a few
> > > litres of body fluid before collapsing. At the lower rate, we might
> > > keep going for a couple of hours with no liquid; at the latter, no
> > > more than half an hour or so. That certainly fits with experience.
> > > We can keep going more-or-less indefinitely if we run slower (or
> > > walk) or run in cool/cold conditions. But so can horses.
> > >
> > > Now, all of that is at fairly fast speeds under tropical conditions.
> > > A typical small antelope would have collapsed long before we did.
> > > My point is that many of the papers that talk about our excellent
> > > extended running abilities ignore the problem that marathon runners
> > > are provided with drinks along the way, and hominids chasing food
> > > would have had no such help. Unless we assume that we had already
> > > developed technologies to carry water.
> >
> > It isn't necessarey to run 26 miles to bring down a small antelope...
- Previous message: Rich Travsky: "Re: Only idiots believe that humans have external noses to run after springbok in the heat of the day (Re: snorkel noses (Re: Ape theories & Aquaticism"
- In reply to: Marc Verhaegen: "Travsky runs down small antelopes in less than 26 miles (Re: Born to run"
- Next in thread: Al Zeller: "Re: Born to run"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]