Moving on a treadmill is LITERALLY the same as moving on ground, ignoring negligible wind resistance.

Moving on a treadmill is LITERALLY the same as moving on ground, ignoring negligible wind resistance.

Yet people keep saying shit like
>on a treadmill you're just jumping up and down
>running a treadmill is easier because the conveyor belt pushes your feet backwards
>the running biomechanics on a treadmill are different because your body remains stationary

Do these people not understand what a frame of reference is?
Even the physicists seem to be convinced by an idea that breaks the laws of physics, see here for example:
https://evidencebasedfitness.net/get-off-the-never-ending-path-to-nowhere/

The frick is wrong with people?

Die For Epstein's Client List Shirt $21.68

CRIME Shirt $21.68

Die For Epstein's Client List Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Air resistance is significant when running

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Only if you are significantly large

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not that c**t but no, in the limit it's most of what holds you back.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's not literally the same thing. I used to run track in high school and one winter I trained exclusively on the treadmill to stay in shape. When the weather warmed up and I started running outside, my pace was much slower and my hamstrings were burning and made me sore for weeks. Turns out that treadmill running doesn't work your hamstrings at all, but running on the actual ground your hamstrings need to contract to actually pull your body forward.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The only reason I like treadmills is for pacing.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What if you angled it uphill?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Another guy who thinks he's breaking Newton's laws of motion because "it feels different bro".

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >anon is supplied with personal experince that indicates there to be a significant difference between and activity and a mechanical simulation of that activity
        >rejects the claim
        >indicates no desire to objectively test whether there actually is a difference using his own body as a test bed
        armchair physiologist confirmed

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Based runner. Treadmill is a scam, your local gym centers don't want you in shape, they want your money.
      >running is free
      >physical activity is free
      They don't want you to understand that.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why are you so adamant about this when you can literally just go outside and run and see that it is, in fact, more difficult than running the same speed/distance on a treadmill?

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I mean, you're not wrong about reference frames- but think about it: Do you typically run at a perfectly constant horizontal speed?

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    by your logic the plane should take off

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What makes you think the plane stays on the treadmill?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Air resistance actually matters here though, because that's what's lifting the plane. It doesn't for small objects travelling at slow speeds.

      Also even if the wheels on a plane spin freely the propeller would push the plane forward, regardless.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Air resistance matters here
        >That's what's lifting the plane
        Wrong. Lift force is the pressure differential on the top and bottom of the wings, creating a net upwards force. Air resistance is a net backwards force, which only serves to slow the plane down. Some air resistance is a result of lift, but in theory the two are separate.

        You're correct about the wheels not mattering, since they're not what's propelling the plane forward. The propulsion system, be it a propeller or jet engine, acts on the air directly and don't rely on friction with the ground like a car.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Air resistance, aka drag, is NOT what produces lift.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Drag and lift are just different components of the same reactive force to air hitting the wing.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >Drag and lift are different components of the same force
            It's more complicated than that, there are multiple sources of drag, and your schematic lumps a few of them together and oversimplifies it a bit.

            An airfoil at an angle of attack has a net circulation associated with it, which results in a downward deflection of the air, and a reaction force that points upwards and backwards as drawn in your cartoon. The resulting force points normal to the chord of the airfoil. The vertical component of that is deemed lift, and the horizontal component is "induced drag". As you add camber, you can produce lift even with zero angle of attack, greatly reducing the induced drag.

            Practically speaking, there are other phenomena which are much bigger contributers to drag, namely profile drag, and skin friction. The former being the result of blockage/deflection of air around a body without a net lift force being produced, and the latter being the result of viscous effects in the boundary layer, which is where turbulence also comes into play. Theoretically analyzing an airfoil using an idealized inviscid fluid correctly predicts the lift, but does not account for profile drag or skin friction, because the mechanisms are different.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            No one cares about the details, moron. There is a net force and a net moment on the wing, which can be described without the specific distinction between lift and drag. The real problem is linguistics. Anon said air resistance and meant fluid interaction, so what.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >Mythbusterts tries to bust the 'plane on a treadmill' myth
      >fails to recreate the conditions of the original myth then acts like the audience doesn't understand physics

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    its common knowledge in fitness community that treadmill miles dont equate to running real life miles. 1 mle on treadmill .80 real mile

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >common knowledge in the fitness community
      >broscience
      The perceived difference might make a real difference in times but mechanically you're doing the same work.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >but mechanically you're doing the same work.
        Source to back up your claim?

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    AMERICANS will LITERALLY buy any stupid Shit. You spend 1k on a fricking treadmill when you can litterally go out the door and walk and run outside..

    I don’t feel bad when rich people Scam you dumb sheep

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why don't they just make a fitness cycle that is angled at 45deg for easy as hell uphill cycle session. And by easy I mean it would feel easy. Obviously it would train you hardcore. You know with the "frame of reference" and everything.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Moving on a treadmill is LITERALLY the same as moving on ground, ignoring negligible wind resistance.
    is the ground as smooth as the surface of the treadmill?does your treadmill have gravels?

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    A treadmill is boring as frick, and when I did placement experience with an occupational therapist, it had terrible compliance numbers vs. walking outdoors or indoor/outdoor cycling -- though, tbf, that was without headphones, a TV screen, etc.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's not the same. I ran on a treadmill for months to prepare myself for the Army. Then I ran on a track and it was totally different. Muscles were being used that the treadmill did not work out.

  12. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    1. You're fat
    2. Treadmills are perfectly flat and straight (ground never is)
    3. Your speed is fixed by the treadmill (not true on the ground)
    4. The treadmill has more friction than asphalt or concrete on your shoes, yielding more efficient strides
    t. IQfyizen. PUT THE FORK DOWN YOU FAT SACK OF SHIT

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      This. The planet has upscaling, you actually have to get over an obstacle to move from one location of the planet to another.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *