1
13788
Guest
cegro27: Is it heavy enough that you can easily feel the pull of gravity on it or not? When it's semi-erect/fully erect, does it bounce around quite a bit when you walk?
Actually, all matter does; it just happens it's generally a very small gravitational field compared to a planet.Originally posted by 3XL@Nov 4 2004, 03:23 PM
Actually, mine's massive enough to generate it's own gravational field.
Geesh, what kind of a question is that?
[post=262413]Quoted post[/post]
Actually, all matter does; it just happens it's generally a very small gravitational field compared to a planet.Originally posted by jonb+Nov 5 2004, 01:03 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jonb @ Nov 5 2004, 01:03 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-3XL@Nov 4 2004, 03:23 PM
Actually, mine's massive enough to generate it's own gravational field.
Geesh, what kind of a question is that?
[post=262413]Quoted post[/post]
Originally posted by 3XL+Nov 5 2004, 01:02 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(3XL @ Nov 5 2004, 01:02 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Originally posted by jonb@Nov 5 2004, 01:03 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-3XL@Nov 4 2004, 03:23 PM
Actually, mine's massive enough to generate it's own gravational field.
Geesh, what kind of a question is that?
[post=262413]Quoted post[/post]
Actually, all matter does; it just happens it's generally a very small gravitational field compared to a planet.
[post=262426]Quoted post[/post]
Originally posted by 3XL@Nov 4 2004, 10:02 PM
:angry: Well yes of course!
But correct me if I'm wrong, I think that a 290 lb man generates a field too small for our instruments to measure... certainly it's too small for us to naturally perceive without instruments. And I suspect my cock is something less than my full body weight too.
ooops sorry I used pounds, and that's not truely a unit of mass is it? Pounds are actually a unit of force. But given we are talking about earth's gravity well at sea level, 290 pounds of force is generated by 638 Kg of mass.
oh oh... I forgot to use the right significant figures in my calculation! Since I wrote "290" instead of "290." you'd have to conclude from reading my paper, that the last zero is not significant, and therefore I am reduced to 2 significant figures leaving me at 640 Kg. <_<
So if anything, I've proved that if you have to explain a joke, it wasn't funny :lol: !
[post=262443]Quoted post[/post]
Originally posted by jonb@Nov 6 2004, 01:29 AM
Err. . . . No. At 9.8 m/s^2, 130 kg produces approximately 290 pounds of force, or 1.3 kilonewtons
[post=262617]Quoted post[/post]
Originally posted by 3XL+Nov 5 2004, 09:32 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(3XL @ Nov 5 2004, 09:32 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-jonb@Nov 6 2004, 01:29 AM
Err. . . . No. At 9.8 m/s^2, 130 kg produces approximately 290 pounds of force, or 1.3 kilonewtons
[post=262617]Quoted post[/post]
Originally posted by EDDIEUK+Nov 5 2004, 11:16 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EDDIEUK @ Nov 5 2004, 11:16 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Originally posted by 3XL@Nov 5 2004, 09:32 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-jonb@Nov 6 2004, 01:29 AM
Err. . . . No. At 9.8 m/s^2, 130 kg produces approximately 290 pounds of force, or 1.3 kilonewtons
[post=262617]Quoted post[/post]
Wups! you are right, my constant was inverted!
Where is the egg on the face icon?
[post=262618]Quoted post[/post]
Originally posted by EDDIEUK@Nov 6 2004, 03:19 AM
Glad to see there are other scientists here. Both of you realize that String Theory will change all these calculations slightly.
[post=262626]Quoted post[/post]