SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world · 1 day agoWould one run faster without arms?message-squaremessage-square19fedilinkarrow-up135arrow-down10file-text
arrow-up135arrow-down1message-squareWould one run faster without arms?SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world · 1 day agomessage-square19fedilinkfile-text
minus-squareAbouBenAdhem@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·edit-21 day agoAdditional weight makes it harder to accelerate, but once you’re up to a steady speed it doesn’t make much difference. On the other hand, using your arms as counterweights makes it possible to transfer more force from your foot to the ground with each step.
minus-squareNeatNit@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 day ago once you’re up to a steady speed it doesn’t make so much difference. [Citation needed]. You’re still fighting gravity so being lighter makes each step easier. There is also less air drag (but I don’t know how much difference this makes).
minus-squarekkj@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·24 hours agoYou do have more momentum to counteract the drag, though. I wonder if the decreased mass would be offset by the decreased surface area.
Additional weight makes it harder to accelerate, but once you’re up to a steady speed it doesn’t make much difference.
On the other hand, using your arms as counterweights makes it possible to transfer more force from your foot to the ground with each step.
[Citation needed]. You’re still fighting gravity so being lighter makes each step easier. There is also less air drag (but I don’t know how much difference this makes).
You do have more momentum to counteract the drag, though. I wonder if the decreased mass would be offset by the decreased surface area.