POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : Supercalorific : Re: Supercalorific Server Time
29 Jul 2024 02:24:19 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Supercalorific  
From: scott
Date: 6 Feb 2013 03:36:01
Message: <511215f1@news.povray.org>
> Actually, I already have a heart rate monitor. And the weird thing is,
> if I wear it while standing next to the exercise machines, they pick up
> the signal and display my heart rate. It's almost as if somebody devised
> a *standard* for heart rate transmissions...

Or rather there is no standard and they just transmit a "white noise" 
pulse. Mine used to stop working for a 10 seconds or so when I ran under 
power lines or over an electrified train line. I don't think they are 
that sophisticated to run on different channels or frequency hop :-)

> You would think that running at a constant 6 MPH would use a constant
> amount of energy, leading to a constant heart rate.

Once you have reached steady state, yes pretty much...

> You would be wrong.
> When I start running, my heart rate just keeps on climbing. By the end
> of my run, it's usually parked at around 188 BPM or so. (According to
> the graph on the front of the machine, my "maximum heart rate" is 178
> BPM. But what does a machine know?)

..but it sounds like your body is not capable to continuously deliver 
the amount of energy needed for 6 mph. IIRC you want to be aiming for 
about 70% of your maximum heart rate (I set up my watch years ago for 
the heart rate ranges) - so go whatever speed is needed to maintain that 
rate. If your heart rate keeps rising above that then slow down - as 
Warp said if you are really unfit to start with then that may mean you 
have to walk and not even run at all.

> Another interesting thing is that when lifting weights, I often become
> aware of my heart thumbing more forcefully. And yet, according to the
> monitor my heart *rate* hasn't actually increased at all. Strange, but
> true...

What are you doing on weights - get back on that running machine! :-)

> That's kind of my point. I used to think that no matter what you eat,
> you can just burn it off with enough exercise. Now I plainly see that
> there isn't enough time in the universe for that to be even vaguely
> possible. A single meal can /easily/ contain far more calories than you
> could possibly hope to work off if you exercised for 24 hours straight.

You said you burnt 15 cal/min, that's 900 an hour. Do an hour run after 
work and you've pretty much earned yourself an additional meal.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.