Posted on 01/28/2005 12:13:32 PM PST by BreitbartSentMe
Leno ping
LOL! see post 42 if you missed it.
Thanks, I'll remember this.
ST- just incase it snows down there again...
You know the rules here;)
I keep a bottle of water in my car for use with the coolant when my idiot light comes on. Funny thing is, with all the snow and cold we've had the last week, the bottle has been frozen.
Why wouldn't the beer freeze too?
Now, that's using your head.
59 bottles of beer in the car, 59 bottles of beer! Chug one down, piss on the ground, 58 bottles of beer in the car!
58 bottles of beer...
Brilliant. :)
Actually, I believe he did it exactly the correct way from a thermodynamics perspective. Allow me to explain.
Drinking the beer provides needed carbohydrates to maintain his body temperature and adding some of that heat to the beer through body heat as in passes through the digestive tract increases the temperature of the beer before it is applied to the snow thereby melting more snow per unit mass of beer.
The guy's a rocket scientist in my book.
I believe you neglected to account for the heat of fusion which must be accounted for in going from solid water to liquid water.
Even that wouldn't work.
This is related to the old science teaser about how you should be able to drink scotch-on-the-rocks all day long and lose weight like mad (presuming you consume the ice too), since the number of metabolic calories necessary to melt the ice exceeds that of the number of calories you take in from the scotch. If you don't like eating ice cubes, substitute frozen margaritas or strawberry daquiris.
The math is actually correct, but it overlooks one critical point: Your body does not actually need to *burn* more calories than usual in order to melt the ice and heat the drink. Your body is always producing quite a bit of "waste" heat anyway, as a result of its normal metabolic processes, and normally that heat is just radiated away into the room. The average person radiates as much heat as a 100-watt bulb, actually (although over a larger surface, which is why we're not as "hot" as a light bulb), and this is why a roomful of people will be considerably warmer than an empty room.
When you drink reasonable amounts of cold liquids or swallow ice, some of that "waste" heat just ends up warming the stuff in your stomach instead of working its way out to your skin and radiating away. On an infrared scan of your body, you'd just appear a little "cooler" for a few minutes. But no *extra* energy production is needed to warm the ice/drink.
The exception would be if you drank *massive* amounts of cold liquid or ice in a short period. In that case, your body would ramp up its energy production in the same way it always does when it's faced with sharply declining body temperature -- by shivering. The rapid muscle twitching involved in shivering burns more stored energy than usual, and warms the body through the release of more internal heat.
But short of that, you're just diverting the same old waste heat that your body would normally dump anyway. So no weight loss, not even a little, sorry.
And I don't think anyone would be interested in the "shiver off your fat" diet.
Don't really know if I want to believe this one, BUT I will file for future reference in the event that we become snowbound in this part of the country again. ROFLMAO
About 400 watts. 1200 when exercising.
All I needed to do was to add a coupleof numbers to your very well written post.
Saw that one live on air.
In other words, food calories are to chemists kilocalories.
Error self-corrected in #100 on same day.
I noticed after posting...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.