The strongest bites in the animal kingdom

[LonePredator]

(05-16-2022, 05:55 PM)Wrapp Wrote:

(05-16-2022, 05:51 PM)LonePredator Wrote: Okay so my calculation was indeed wrong. I'm sorry for stretching it for this long and arguing for this long, I'll delete the previous posts now.

Here is the ACTUALLY CORRECT calculation:

200kg/100kg (new mass of Jaguar/old mass of Jaguar) = 2

Now, the bite force will increase by 2^2/3 times which means the bite force will become the following:

750N x 2^2/3 = 750x1.5874 = 1190N

So IF the 100kg Jaguar had a bite force of 750N then the new 200kg Jaguar will have a bite force of 1190N.

Once again, I'm sorry I streched this argument for this long and I'll delete my previous posts now.

(What you said about the square-cube law still wasn't correct though)

There you come! I appreciate you for the correction once again. Atleast now you are able to understand things. Anywhays, this is a quick post and will be getting back to you once again after reviewing your method. (Whatever I said about the square cube law was correct though. People who read it will understand.)

What you said about square cube law was COMPLETELY WRONG! You said the following and I QUOTE:

"The cross sectional surface area doesn’t increase with the power of 2 or 1/2 if the volume is by the "cube" or cube root (obviously), even if the composition/ density and everything is the same."

That is what you said and I quoted you word by word.



And now this is the exact definition of the square cube law below:

“When an object undergoes a proportional increase in size, its new surface area is proportional to the square of the multiplier and its new volume is proportional to the cube of the multiplier.”

So the exact definition of the square cube law is EXACTLY OPPOSITE of what you said.



If you are still going to try and justify that, then you’re just ridiculing yourself. You were still wrong about some of the very basic things of physics and yet you are too arrogant as if you are the expert. Are you here on wildfact just to show off despite the fact that you lack even high school level knowledge?

And what will you review about my method? To review my method you first need to know the concept of the square cube law (which you have no idea about).

If you really were going to correct me then why didn’t YOU do the correct calculation yourself till now? If you really knew the all the concepts then shouldn’t you have already done the correction in my calculation till now? Reply