That is a separate phenomena and the first-order calculations are done differently.
Looking at the qualifiers for the 2025 NCAA Div III Outdoor Qualifying 100 meter dash times, the 50th male qualifier clocked in at 10.56 seconds and the 50th female qualifier clocked in at 12.0 even.
Even though it is not a huge difference, the difference in the weight of the "bullet" and "target" also comes into play.
In our example a 187 pound "bullet" hitting a 96 pound "target" at 10 ft/second results in the "target" accelerating to 6.61 feet/second (assuming a totally inelastic collision). A 175 pound "bullet" hitting the same target at 10 ft/second results in the target accelerating to 6.45 ft/second. Since the kinetic energy is the square of the speed, we can estimate that the 187 pound bullet imparted 4.7% more energy to the target even though they hit at the same speed. That kinetic energy gets converted to shear stresses, hydraulic pressure of fluids and hyper-extension of muscles, ligaments and brain-stem&medula.
So, combining our estimate of the speed differences and weight difference for a simple kinetic energy comparison:
187 lb Male 95% hit =(9.47m/s * 0.661(relative mass adjustment))^2 = 39.18 KE/mass
175 lb Female 95% hit =(8.33m/s * 0.645(relative mass adjustment))^2 =28.86 KE/mass
Normalizing by the female 95% number, the male hits about 36% harder on a KE imparted basis.
 |
| Range of body-fat for athletes participating in various sports |
Please remember these are first order estimates. One important variable that these estimates don't comprehend are the "hardness" of the "bullet". Harder "bullets" drive more of the potential energy into the target than softer, more padded bullets. Since women (even the athletes) tend to have more body-fat, they would be softer bullets.
Yep. You start throwing in exponential coefficients and variables and the numbers go up fast. This outhouse math doesn't even scratch secondary issues - the female animal is not built to absorb impacts or stresses that the male is. The Marines fought this tooth and nail when they were forced to revise their PT standards for women: they were blowing out joints and ripping cartilage and muscle. The spirit was willing but the the bod wasn't up to it.
ReplyDeleteIt still amazes me - our female friends on the left side of the political spectrum go out to their "protests" - and start throwing punches at armoured and padded officers and bystanders - fully expecting to take them out! Then they're shocked and horrified when they get flattened.
Such people don't do math and physics well. I wonder if there is some kind of subtle connection? HAR HAR HAR!!! :)
Decades ago I played in a mixed field hockey match, men vs women. The girls were all hockey players. We were a bunch of rugby and soccer players with two hockey players to explain the rules and tactics.
ReplyDeleteThe girls were much more skilful than us, as you'd expect when most of us had never held a hockey stick before. But we slaughtered them. At half time diplomacy and common sense took over and the second half was played out between two mixed teams.