There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
04-28-2022, 08:55 PM( This post was last modified: 04-28-2022, 08:59 PM by LonePredator )
(04-28-2022, 08:50 PM)Pckts Wrote: If the chest/abdominal girth has more muscle and weight while being shorter in comparison, I fail to see how it’s less dense? And if an animal in general is shorter in height and length while being heavier, I again fail to see how it’s less dense?
The longer body length and longer limbs of the Tiger are also made of muscle and weight. That isn’t made of thin air, is it?
It’s shorter in length and height BUT it is larger in chest and belly girth and therefore the volume is equal. Not more.
The Tiger has volume through length and height while the Jaguar has volume through belly and chest. Therefore, both are equally dense because both have equal volume. Now do you see what I mean?
If the Sumatran Tiger is heavier in weight despite having a thinner belly and chest (in volume), then that makes the Sumatran more dense. This is just simple physics.