Page 1 of 2

Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 9:55 pm
by Dan Schultz
enthusiastic flatulation :shock: :shock:

Heck, I practice that all the time and still need to lose 30 pounds :!:

Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 10:00 pm
by KevinMadden
I don't know much, but I'd imagine that since a person just can't force the expulsion of gases (as in a case where the gases aren't resent to begin with) a person would have to intake things to produce said gasses. thus causing weight gain.

Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:00 am
by Philip Jensen
I think your friend is merely using flatulance as a form of isometric excercise. That's it! Trim you waistline while you sit on your *** watching TV! By contracting you stomach muscles and forcing the gas through your intestines you too can have 6-pack abs*.


* disclaimer - make sure your couch has been properly stainguarded before atempting these exercises. Do not conduct these exercises near open flames. Caution, may cause loss of friends

Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:32 am
by iiipopes
The idea speaks for itself.

Re: for the scientists: weight loss question

Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 1:40 pm
by Rick Denney
bloke wrote:My friend argues that (if properly applied) this would reduce the overall quantity of body matter (cells, molecules, etc.) to a minimally measurable degree, and thus weight loss would occur.

My argument is that the occurance would inevitably cause body buoyancy to be reduced, and thus an actual weight INCREASE would be realized.
I refute the notion that one can enthusiastically flatulate on a consistent basis without some of the expelled matter being...heavier than air.

Therefore, I'm going with your "friend".

Besides, methane under enough pressure still weighs more than air. It doesn't assume the lighter-than-air condition until it has normalized to standard atmospheric pressure after expulsion.

This also explains the Permeability Factor, but that's another story.

Rick "dedicated to science" Denney

Re: for the scientists: weight loss question

Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:53 pm
by lgb&dtuba
bloke wrote:OK. Tons :roll: of us are interested in weight loss - something that has possibly become a nearly trillon dollar industry. A friend of mine thinks he discovered a way to lose some weight FAST. This involves the conscientious expulsion of excess gases (enthusiastic flatulation).

My friend argues that (if properly applied) this would reduce the overall quantity of body matter (cells, molecules, etc.) to a minimally measurable degree, and thus weight loss would occur.

My argument is that the occurance would inevitably cause body buoyancy to be reduced, and thus an actual weight INCREASE would be realized.

What say ye men of great physical wisdom?
I'd say that with rigorous flatulation your bouyancy would decrease because you're deflating yourself (like a really smelly balloon), but the mass lost in gas would be quite small compared to difference in displacement. In other words you'd have pretty much the same mass as before displacing less water due to the reduction in body volume, therefore decreasing your bouyancy and still weigh the same.

The real question is, with the change is displacement would your flatulance propell you faster or slower through the water?

Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 7:11 pm
by Chuck(G)
Let's think about this one for a second or two.

Methane (CH4) has a density of 0.717 kg/m³, while air is nominally about 1.2 kg/m³ at sea level and 20°C.

Thus a blue one is almost half the density of air, which means that venting will actually reduce your atmospheric bouyancy and make you appear to be heavier.

So, you're better off keeping it all in, if the number on your bathroom scale is your criterion.

I trust that clears the air.

Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 7:45 pm
by lgb&dtuba
How about vertical thrust to counterract weight? Subject to interference from clothing, of course. How much increase in thrust would you get from lighting an S.B.D. vs a Rafter Raiser?

I guess you'd have to read the scales fast, though.

And, of course, flatulance is a renewable resource.

Jim 'Where did I bury that Kimchi?' Wagner

Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 3:32 pm
by ken k
harold wrote:Wade,

Having unfortunately had to do this a few times, I can assure you that heads way more than 12 pounds. Much closer to 18.
So Harold are you saying that you have had to cut off heads a few times??

This could be a case of TMI, of course this entire thread could fall in to that category.

ken "who thinks this thread really stinks...." k

Re: for the scientists: weight loss question

Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:15 am
by SRanney
bloke wrote:OK. Tons :roll: of us are interested in weight loss - something that has possibly become a nearly trillon dollar industry. A friend of mine thinks he discovered a way to lose some weight FAST. This involves the conscientious expulsion of excess gases (enthusiastic flatulation).

My friend argues that (if properly applied) this would reduce the overall quantity of body matter (cells, molecules, etc.) to a minimally measurable degree, and thus weight loss would occur.

My argument is that the occurance would inevitably cause body buoyancy to be reduced, and thus an actual weight INCREASE would be realized.

What say ye men of great physical wisdom?
Weight is a function of (Mass * Gravity). If you lose mass, whatever way you choose to do it (e.g. chopping off your own head, farting excessively), your resulting weight will be lower.

That said, you'd have to have a scale accurate to a high degree of resolution to even begin to see changes.

Re: for the scientists: weight loss question

Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:32 am
by Chuck(G)
SRanney wrote:Weight is a function of (Mass * Gravity). If you lose mass, whatever way you choose to do it (e.g. chopping off your own head, farting excessively), your resulting weight will be lower.
That's what the 6th grade science textbooks would like to tell you, but unless you're weighing things in vacuo, a scale measures the gravitational attraction between the earth and a body, less any secondary effects from the medium in which the object is immersed as well accounting for any inertial effects.

One is nearly weightless about the International Space Station, not because there's no gravity, but because one is essentially in continuous free-fall (inertial effect). ANd you "weigh" more in an ascending elevator.

You "weigh" less in water than you do in air. A helium-filled balloon "weighs" less than an empty one, even though a filled balloon has more mass.

So, if you see my comment above, the effect of expelling methane is more akin to letting helium out of a balloon.

Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 2:39 pm
by windshieldbug
But what if you light it? :shock: :?:
(Or burn a viola?)

Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 3:37 pm
by Chuck(G)
windshieldbug wrote:But what if you light it? :shock: :?:
(Or burn a viola?)
Well, then it's less like a weather baloon and more like the Hindenburg. :P

Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:43 pm
by windshieldbug
So THAT'S what hit Roswell! :P

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:32 am
by LoyalTubist
How I lost 30 pounds:

I am an almost 50 year old man, 5'10' tall. When I moved to Vietnam, I weighed 225 pounds, making my Vietnamese bride seem smaller than the 4'11", 95 pound woman she is. Moving to Vietnam was my first step in losing weight. For my first month here, I lived as a tourist. I ate nothing but fast food. I gained ten pounds. My employer paid me well but began reducing my hours (I earn wages, not a salary.) I worked with that employer until Christmas Day (yes, I worked on December 25, it's not a holiday here). I now teach at a Vietnamese public high school, which pays much better than the private sector here. Because I had to make a month's pay last for two months, I had to learn how to eat like a local. I thought I liked Vietnamese food but, to be honest, I don't like most of it. So I eat a fraction of the food that's set before me. When I eat Western food now I eat only healthy Western food. My weight is now around 190 pounds. I should also mention that my mobility was impaired when I moved here because I broke my right big toe the week before I left Los Angeles.