I got the same 20 lbs in my calculations, but I don't think you get to double it. If I'm the gent, my hand is putting 20 lbs of force on the ladies back. At the same time, her back is putting 20 lbs of force on my hand. When we carry a 20 lb object, we're pulling up with 20 lbs of force and it's pulling down with 20 lbs of force, but we don't call it 40 lbs of force.
There's also the fact that despite some of the radial acceleration coming from centripital force, I suspect some of it comes from the feet. I will agree that 10 lbf would be easier than 20 lbf, and if we can handle 16 lbf each (or 20 and 12 or whatever), we could go around 4.5 times which could be even more fun. On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 18:35, Jeff Kaufman <[email protected]> wrote: > John Sweeney wrote: > > > > > If the lady additionally has their left hand on the back of the > > > the gent's right shoulder, then the lady is doing more of the > > > holding together and the gent can do less. > > > > Centrifugal force is not that great - if you are in balance the > > pressure is tiny. > > > > I think you must be talking about much slower swings than I'm talking > about. Let's say we have two 130 pound people who swing 3.5 times > around in a balance and swing. Physics geekery [1] says it takes > fourty pounds of force to hold the two of them together. I'd much > rather have that split over two people. > > Jeff > > [1] Let's approximate the dancers as point masses of 130 pounds nine > inches apart. There are 12 counts of swinging after the balance, > so about six seconds. Rotating 3.5 times in six seconds means 35 > times in sixty seconds, or 35 rpm. Force here is M*w*w*r, where > M is 130 pounds, w is 35rpm, and r is 4.5 inches. This gives > 20lbf for each dancer, or 40lbf total. > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >
