context
stringlengths 545
71.9k
| questionsrc
stringlengths 16
10.2k
| question
stringlengths 11
563
|
|---|---|---|
the origins of orientalism snake charmers , carpet vendors , and veiled women may conjure up ideas of the middle east , north africa , and west asia , but they are also partially indebted to orientalist fantasies . to understand these images , we have to understand the concept of orientalism , beginning with the word “ orient ” itself . in its original medieval usage , the `` orient '' referred to the “ east , ” but whose “ east ” did this orient represent ? east of where ? we understand now that this designation reflects a western european view of the `` east , '' and not necessarily the views of the inhabitants of these areas . we also realize today that the label of the “ orient ” hardly captures the wide swath of territory to which it originally referred : the middle east , north africa , and asia . these are at once distinct , contrasting , and yet interconnected regions . scholars often link visual examples of orientalism alongside the romantic literature and music of the early nineteenth century , a period of rising imperialism and tourism when western artists traveled widely to the middle east , north africa , and asia . we now understand that the world has been interconnected for much longer than we initially acknowledged and we can see elements of orientalist representation much earlier—for example , in religious objects of the crusades , or gentile bellini ’ s painting of the ottoman sultan ( ruler ) mehmed ii ( above ) , or in the arabesques ( flowing s-shaped ornamental forms ) of early modern textiles . the politics of orientalism in his groundbreaking 1978 text orientalism , the late cultural critic and theorist edward saïd argued that a dominant european political ideology created the notion of the orient in order to subjugate and control it . saïd explained that the concept embodied distinctions between `` east '' ( the orient ) and `` west '' ( the occident ) precisely so the '' west '' could control and authorize views of the `` east . '' for saïd , this nexus of power and knowledge enabled the `` west '' to generalize and misrepresent north africa , the middle east and asia . though his text has itself received considerable criticism , the book nevertheless remains a pioneering intervention . saïd continues to influence many disciplines of cultural study , including the history of art . representing the “ orient ” as art historian linda nochlin argued in her widely read essay , “ the imaginary orient , ” from 1983 , the task of critical art history is to assess the power structures behind any work of art or artist . [ 1 ] following nochlin ’ s lead , art historians have questioned underlying power dynamics at play in the artistic representations of the `` orient , '' many of them from the nineteenth century . in doing so , these scholars challenged not only the ways that the “ west ” represented the “ east , ” but they also complicate the long held misconception of a unidirectional westward influence . similarly , these scholars questioned how artists have represented people of the orient as passive or licentious subjects . for example , in the painting the snake charmer and his audience , c. 1879 , the french artist jean-léon gérôme ’ s depicts a naked youth holding a serpent as an older man plays the flute—charming both the snake and their audience . gérôme constructs a scene out of his imagination , but he utilizes a highly refined and naturalistic style to suggest that he himself observed the scene . in doing so , gérôme suggests such nudity was a regular and public occurrence in the `` east . '' in contrast , artists like henriette browne and osman hamdi bey created works that provide a counter-narrative to the image of the `` east '' as passive , licentious or decrepit . in a visit : harem interior , constantinople , 1860 , the french painter browne represents women fully clothed in harem scenes . likewise , the école des beaux arts-trained ottoman painter osman hamdi bey depicts islamic scholarship and learnedness in a young emir studying , 1878 . orientalism : fact or fiction ? orientalist paintings and other forms of material culture operate on two registers . first , they depict an “ exotic ” and therefore racialized , feminized , and often sexualized culture from a distant land . second , they simultaneously claim to be a document , an authentic glimpse of a location and its inhabitants , as we see with gérôme 's detailed and naturalistic style . in the snake charmer and his audience , gérôme constructs this layer of exotic `` truth '' by including illegible , faux-arabic tilework in the background . nochlin pointed out that many of gérôme ’ s paintings worked to convince their audiences by carefully mimicking a `` preexisting oriental reality. ” [ 2 ] surprisingly , the invention of photography in 1839 did little to contribute to a greater authenticity of painterly and photographic representations of the `` orient '' by artists , western military officials , technocrats , and travelers . instead , photographs were frequently staged and embellished to appeal to the western imagination . for instance , the french bonfils family , in studio photographs , situated sitters in poses with handheld props against elaborate backdrops to create a fictitious world of the photographer ’ s making . in orientalist secular history paintings ( narrative moments from history ) , western artists portrayed disorderly and often violent battle scenes , creating a conception of an `` orient '' that was rooted in incivility . the common figures and locations of orientalist genre paintings ( scenes of everyday life ) —including the angry despot , licentious harem , chaotic medina , slave market , or the decadent palace—demonstrate a blend of pseudo-ethnography based on descriptions of first-hand observation and outright invention . these paintings created visions of a decaying mythic `` east '' inhabited by a controllable people without regard to geographic specificity . artists operating in this vein include jean-léon gérôme , eugène delacroix , jean-auguste-dominique ingres , and others . in the visual discourses of orientalism , we must systematically question any claim to objectivity or authenticity . global imperialism and consumerism we also must consider the creation of an `` orient '' as a result of imperialism , industrial capitalism , mass consumption , tourism , and settler colonialism in the nineenth-century . in europe , trends of cultural appropriation included a consumerist “ taste ” for materials and objects , like porcelain , textiles , fashion , and carpets , from the middle east and asia . for instance , japonisme was a trend of japonese-inspired decorative arts , as were chinoiserie ( chinese-inspired ) and_turquerie_ ( turkish-inspired ) . the ability of europeans to purchase and own these materials , to some extent confirmed imperial influence in those areas . the phenomenon of world ’ s fairs and cultural-national pavilions ( beginning with the crystal palace in london in 1851 and continuing into the twentieth century ) also supported the goals of colonial expansion . like the decorative arts , they fostered the notion of the `` orient '' as an entity to be consumed through its varied pre-industrial craft traditions . we see this continually in the architectural imitations built on the grounds of these fairs , that sought to provide both spectacle and authenticity to the fair goer . for instance , at the 1867 exposition universelle in paris , the designers of the egyptian section jacques drévet and e. schmitz topped what was supposed to represent the residential khedival ( ottoman empire ruler 's ) palace with a dome typical of mosque architecture . [ 3 ] yet , they also attached to this building a barn ( not typical of a khedival palace ) that housed imported donkeys brought in to give visitors the impression of reality . [ 4 ] the fairs objectified the otherness of non-western peoples , cultures , and practices . orientalism constructs cultural , spatial , and visual mythologies and stereotypes that are often connected to the geopolitical ideologies of governments and institutions . the influence of these mythologies has impacted the formation of knowledge and the process of knowledge production . in this light , as saïd and nochlin remind us , when we see orientalist works like gérôme 's snake charmer , we should ask what idea of the `` orient '' we see , and why ? essay by nancy demerdash [ 1 ] linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” art in america , vol . ixxi , no . 5 ( 1983 ) , pp . 118–31 . [ 2 ] ibid. , 37 . [ 3 ] zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . [ 4 ] timothy mitchell , colonising egypt , ( berkeley : university of california press , 1991 ) . additional resources : roger benjamin , orientalist aesthetics : art , colonialism , and french north africa 1880–1930 ( berkeley : university of california press , 2003 ) . zeynep çelik , “ colonialism , orientalism , and the canon ” the art bulletin 78 , no . 2 ( june 1996 ) : pp . 202-205 . zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . oleg grabar , “ europe and the orient : an ideologically charged exhibition. ” muqarnas vii ( 1990 ) : pp . 1-11 . robert irwin , dangerous knowledge : orientalism and its discontents ( woodstock , ny : overlook press , 2006 ) . j.m . mackenzie , orientalism : history , theory , and the arts ( manchester , ny : manchester university press , 1995 ) . linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” a. america , ixxi/5 ( 1983 ) : pp . 118–31 . edward saïd , orientalism ( new york : vintage books , 1978 ) . edward saïd , “ orientalism reconsidered , ” race & amp ; class 27 , no . 2 ( autumn 1985 ) : pp . 1-15 . nicholas tromans , ed . the lure of the east : british orientalist painting ( london : tate , 2008 ) . stephen vernoit and d. behrens-abouseif , eds . islamic art in the nineteenth century : tradition , innovation , and eclecticism ( leiden ; boston : brill publishers , 2006 ) .
|
orientalist paintings and other forms of material culture operate on two registers . first , they depict an “ exotic ” and therefore racialized , feminized , and often sexualized culture from a distant land . second , they simultaneously claim to be a document , an authentic glimpse of a location and its inhabitants , as we see with gérôme 's detailed and naturalistic style .
|
why is the first picture have a naked lady ?
|
the origins of orientalism snake charmers , carpet vendors , and veiled women may conjure up ideas of the middle east , north africa , and west asia , but they are also partially indebted to orientalist fantasies . to understand these images , we have to understand the concept of orientalism , beginning with the word “ orient ” itself . in its original medieval usage , the `` orient '' referred to the “ east , ” but whose “ east ” did this orient represent ? east of where ? we understand now that this designation reflects a western european view of the `` east , '' and not necessarily the views of the inhabitants of these areas . we also realize today that the label of the “ orient ” hardly captures the wide swath of territory to which it originally referred : the middle east , north africa , and asia . these are at once distinct , contrasting , and yet interconnected regions . scholars often link visual examples of orientalism alongside the romantic literature and music of the early nineteenth century , a period of rising imperialism and tourism when western artists traveled widely to the middle east , north africa , and asia . we now understand that the world has been interconnected for much longer than we initially acknowledged and we can see elements of orientalist representation much earlier—for example , in religious objects of the crusades , or gentile bellini ’ s painting of the ottoman sultan ( ruler ) mehmed ii ( above ) , or in the arabesques ( flowing s-shaped ornamental forms ) of early modern textiles . the politics of orientalism in his groundbreaking 1978 text orientalism , the late cultural critic and theorist edward saïd argued that a dominant european political ideology created the notion of the orient in order to subjugate and control it . saïd explained that the concept embodied distinctions between `` east '' ( the orient ) and `` west '' ( the occident ) precisely so the '' west '' could control and authorize views of the `` east . '' for saïd , this nexus of power and knowledge enabled the `` west '' to generalize and misrepresent north africa , the middle east and asia . though his text has itself received considerable criticism , the book nevertheless remains a pioneering intervention . saïd continues to influence many disciplines of cultural study , including the history of art . representing the “ orient ” as art historian linda nochlin argued in her widely read essay , “ the imaginary orient , ” from 1983 , the task of critical art history is to assess the power structures behind any work of art or artist . [ 1 ] following nochlin ’ s lead , art historians have questioned underlying power dynamics at play in the artistic representations of the `` orient , '' many of them from the nineteenth century . in doing so , these scholars challenged not only the ways that the “ west ” represented the “ east , ” but they also complicate the long held misconception of a unidirectional westward influence . similarly , these scholars questioned how artists have represented people of the orient as passive or licentious subjects . for example , in the painting the snake charmer and his audience , c. 1879 , the french artist jean-léon gérôme ’ s depicts a naked youth holding a serpent as an older man plays the flute—charming both the snake and their audience . gérôme constructs a scene out of his imagination , but he utilizes a highly refined and naturalistic style to suggest that he himself observed the scene . in doing so , gérôme suggests such nudity was a regular and public occurrence in the `` east . '' in contrast , artists like henriette browne and osman hamdi bey created works that provide a counter-narrative to the image of the `` east '' as passive , licentious or decrepit . in a visit : harem interior , constantinople , 1860 , the french painter browne represents women fully clothed in harem scenes . likewise , the école des beaux arts-trained ottoman painter osman hamdi bey depicts islamic scholarship and learnedness in a young emir studying , 1878 . orientalism : fact or fiction ? orientalist paintings and other forms of material culture operate on two registers . first , they depict an “ exotic ” and therefore racialized , feminized , and often sexualized culture from a distant land . second , they simultaneously claim to be a document , an authentic glimpse of a location and its inhabitants , as we see with gérôme 's detailed and naturalistic style . in the snake charmer and his audience , gérôme constructs this layer of exotic `` truth '' by including illegible , faux-arabic tilework in the background . nochlin pointed out that many of gérôme ’ s paintings worked to convince their audiences by carefully mimicking a `` preexisting oriental reality. ” [ 2 ] surprisingly , the invention of photography in 1839 did little to contribute to a greater authenticity of painterly and photographic representations of the `` orient '' by artists , western military officials , technocrats , and travelers . instead , photographs were frequently staged and embellished to appeal to the western imagination . for instance , the french bonfils family , in studio photographs , situated sitters in poses with handheld props against elaborate backdrops to create a fictitious world of the photographer ’ s making . in orientalist secular history paintings ( narrative moments from history ) , western artists portrayed disorderly and often violent battle scenes , creating a conception of an `` orient '' that was rooted in incivility . the common figures and locations of orientalist genre paintings ( scenes of everyday life ) —including the angry despot , licentious harem , chaotic medina , slave market , or the decadent palace—demonstrate a blend of pseudo-ethnography based on descriptions of first-hand observation and outright invention . these paintings created visions of a decaying mythic `` east '' inhabited by a controllable people without regard to geographic specificity . artists operating in this vein include jean-léon gérôme , eugène delacroix , jean-auguste-dominique ingres , and others . in the visual discourses of orientalism , we must systematically question any claim to objectivity or authenticity . global imperialism and consumerism we also must consider the creation of an `` orient '' as a result of imperialism , industrial capitalism , mass consumption , tourism , and settler colonialism in the nineenth-century . in europe , trends of cultural appropriation included a consumerist “ taste ” for materials and objects , like porcelain , textiles , fashion , and carpets , from the middle east and asia . for instance , japonisme was a trend of japonese-inspired decorative arts , as were chinoiserie ( chinese-inspired ) and_turquerie_ ( turkish-inspired ) . the ability of europeans to purchase and own these materials , to some extent confirmed imperial influence in those areas . the phenomenon of world ’ s fairs and cultural-national pavilions ( beginning with the crystal palace in london in 1851 and continuing into the twentieth century ) also supported the goals of colonial expansion . like the decorative arts , they fostered the notion of the `` orient '' as an entity to be consumed through its varied pre-industrial craft traditions . we see this continually in the architectural imitations built on the grounds of these fairs , that sought to provide both spectacle and authenticity to the fair goer . for instance , at the 1867 exposition universelle in paris , the designers of the egyptian section jacques drévet and e. schmitz topped what was supposed to represent the residential khedival ( ottoman empire ruler 's ) palace with a dome typical of mosque architecture . [ 3 ] yet , they also attached to this building a barn ( not typical of a khedival palace ) that housed imported donkeys brought in to give visitors the impression of reality . [ 4 ] the fairs objectified the otherness of non-western peoples , cultures , and practices . orientalism constructs cultural , spatial , and visual mythologies and stereotypes that are often connected to the geopolitical ideologies of governments and institutions . the influence of these mythologies has impacted the formation of knowledge and the process of knowledge production . in this light , as saïd and nochlin remind us , when we see orientalist works like gérôme 's snake charmer , we should ask what idea of the `` orient '' we see , and why ? essay by nancy demerdash [ 1 ] linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” art in america , vol . ixxi , no . 5 ( 1983 ) , pp . 118–31 . [ 2 ] ibid. , 37 . [ 3 ] zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . [ 4 ] timothy mitchell , colonising egypt , ( berkeley : university of california press , 1991 ) . additional resources : roger benjamin , orientalist aesthetics : art , colonialism , and french north africa 1880–1930 ( berkeley : university of california press , 2003 ) . zeynep çelik , “ colonialism , orientalism , and the canon ” the art bulletin 78 , no . 2 ( june 1996 ) : pp . 202-205 . zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . oleg grabar , “ europe and the orient : an ideologically charged exhibition. ” muqarnas vii ( 1990 ) : pp . 1-11 . robert irwin , dangerous knowledge : orientalism and its discontents ( woodstock , ny : overlook press , 2006 ) . j.m . mackenzie , orientalism : history , theory , and the arts ( manchester , ny : manchester university press , 1995 ) . linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” a. america , ixxi/5 ( 1983 ) : pp . 118–31 . edward saïd , orientalism ( new york : vintage books , 1978 ) . edward saïd , “ orientalism reconsidered , ” race & amp ; class 27 , no . 2 ( autumn 1985 ) : pp . 1-15 . nicholas tromans , ed . the lure of the east : british orientalist painting ( london : tate , 2008 ) . stephen vernoit and d. behrens-abouseif , eds . islamic art in the nineteenth century : tradition , innovation , and eclecticism ( leiden ; boston : brill publishers , 2006 ) .
|
though his text has itself received considerable criticism , the book nevertheless remains a pioneering intervention . saïd continues to influence many disciplines of cultural study , including the history of art . representing the “ orient ” as art historian linda nochlin argued in her widely read essay , “ the imaginary orient , ” from 1983 , the task of critical art history is to assess the power structures behind any work of art or artist . [ 1 ] following nochlin ’ s lead , art historians have questioned underlying power dynamics at play in the artistic representations of the `` orient , '' many of them from the nineteenth century .
|
why is the art so ... um provocative ?
|
the origins of orientalism snake charmers , carpet vendors , and veiled women may conjure up ideas of the middle east , north africa , and west asia , but they are also partially indebted to orientalist fantasies . to understand these images , we have to understand the concept of orientalism , beginning with the word “ orient ” itself . in its original medieval usage , the `` orient '' referred to the “ east , ” but whose “ east ” did this orient represent ? east of where ? we understand now that this designation reflects a western european view of the `` east , '' and not necessarily the views of the inhabitants of these areas . we also realize today that the label of the “ orient ” hardly captures the wide swath of territory to which it originally referred : the middle east , north africa , and asia . these are at once distinct , contrasting , and yet interconnected regions . scholars often link visual examples of orientalism alongside the romantic literature and music of the early nineteenth century , a period of rising imperialism and tourism when western artists traveled widely to the middle east , north africa , and asia . we now understand that the world has been interconnected for much longer than we initially acknowledged and we can see elements of orientalist representation much earlier—for example , in religious objects of the crusades , or gentile bellini ’ s painting of the ottoman sultan ( ruler ) mehmed ii ( above ) , or in the arabesques ( flowing s-shaped ornamental forms ) of early modern textiles . the politics of orientalism in his groundbreaking 1978 text orientalism , the late cultural critic and theorist edward saïd argued that a dominant european political ideology created the notion of the orient in order to subjugate and control it . saïd explained that the concept embodied distinctions between `` east '' ( the orient ) and `` west '' ( the occident ) precisely so the '' west '' could control and authorize views of the `` east . '' for saïd , this nexus of power and knowledge enabled the `` west '' to generalize and misrepresent north africa , the middle east and asia . though his text has itself received considerable criticism , the book nevertheless remains a pioneering intervention . saïd continues to influence many disciplines of cultural study , including the history of art . representing the “ orient ” as art historian linda nochlin argued in her widely read essay , “ the imaginary orient , ” from 1983 , the task of critical art history is to assess the power structures behind any work of art or artist . [ 1 ] following nochlin ’ s lead , art historians have questioned underlying power dynamics at play in the artistic representations of the `` orient , '' many of them from the nineteenth century . in doing so , these scholars challenged not only the ways that the “ west ” represented the “ east , ” but they also complicate the long held misconception of a unidirectional westward influence . similarly , these scholars questioned how artists have represented people of the orient as passive or licentious subjects . for example , in the painting the snake charmer and his audience , c. 1879 , the french artist jean-léon gérôme ’ s depicts a naked youth holding a serpent as an older man plays the flute—charming both the snake and their audience . gérôme constructs a scene out of his imagination , but he utilizes a highly refined and naturalistic style to suggest that he himself observed the scene . in doing so , gérôme suggests such nudity was a regular and public occurrence in the `` east . '' in contrast , artists like henriette browne and osman hamdi bey created works that provide a counter-narrative to the image of the `` east '' as passive , licentious or decrepit . in a visit : harem interior , constantinople , 1860 , the french painter browne represents women fully clothed in harem scenes . likewise , the école des beaux arts-trained ottoman painter osman hamdi bey depicts islamic scholarship and learnedness in a young emir studying , 1878 . orientalism : fact or fiction ? orientalist paintings and other forms of material culture operate on two registers . first , they depict an “ exotic ” and therefore racialized , feminized , and often sexualized culture from a distant land . second , they simultaneously claim to be a document , an authentic glimpse of a location and its inhabitants , as we see with gérôme 's detailed and naturalistic style . in the snake charmer and his audience , gérôme constructs this layer of exotic `` truth '' by including illegible , faux-arabic tilework in the background . nochlin pointed out that many of gérôme ’ s paintings worked to convince their audiences by carefully mimicking a `` preexisting oriental reality. ” [ 2 ] surprisingly , the invention of photography in 1839 did little to contribute to a greater authenticity of painterly and photographic representations of the `` orient '' by artists , western military officials , technocrats , and travelers . instead , photographs were frequently staged and embellished to appeal to the western imagination . for instance , the french bonfils family , in studio photographs , situated sitters in poses with handheld props against elaborate backdrops to create a fictitious world of the photographer ’ s making . in orientalist secular history paintings ( narrative moments from history ) , western artists portrayed disorderly and often violent battle scenes , creating a conception of an `` orient '' that was rooted in incivility . the common figures and locations of orientalist genre paintings ( scenes of everyday life ) —including the angry despot , licentious harem , chaotic medina , slave market , or the decadent palace—demonstrate a blend of pseudo-ethnography based on descriptions of first-hand observation and outright invention . these paintings created visions of a decaying mythic `` east '' inhabited by a controllable people without regard to geographic specificity . artists operating in this vein include jean-léon gérôme , eugène delacroix , jean-auguste-dominique ingres , and others . in the visual discourses of orientalism , we must systematically question any claim to objectivity or authenticity . global imperialism and consumerism we also must consider the creation of an `` orient '' as a result of imperialism , industrial capitalism , mass consumption , tourism , and settler colonialism in the nineenth-century . in europe , trends of cultural appropriation included a consumerist “ taste ” for materials and objects , like porcelain , textiles , fashion , and carpets , from the middle east and asia . for instance , japonisme was a trend of japonese-inspired decorative arts , as were chinoiserie ( chinese-inspired ) and_turquerie_ ( turkish-inspired ) . the ability of europeans to purchase and own these materials , to some extent confirmed imperial influence in those areas . the phenomenon of world ’ s fairs and cultural-national pavilions ( beginning with the crystal palace in london in 1851 and continuing into the twentieth century ) also supported the goals of colonial expansion . like the decorative arts , they fostered the notion of the `` orient '' as an entity to be consumed through its varied pre-industrial craft traditions . we see this continually in the architectural imitations built on the grounds of these fairs , that sought to provide both spectacle and authenticity to the fair goer . for instance , at the 1867 exposition universelle in paris , the designers of the egyptian section jacques drévet and e. schmitz topped what was supposed to represent the residential khedival ( ottoman empire ruler 's ) palace with a dome typical of mosque architecture . [ 3 ] yet , they also attached to this building a barn ( not typical of a khedival palace ) that housed imported donkeys brought in to give visitors the impression of reality . [ 4 ] the fairs objectified the otherness of non-western peoples , cultures , and practices . orientalism constructs cultural , spatial , and visual mythologies and stereotypes that are often connected to the geopolitical ideologies of governments and institutions . the influence of these mythologies has impacted the formation of knowledge and the process of knowledge production . in this light , as saïd and nochlin remind us , when we see orientalist works like gérôme 's snake charmer , we should ask what idea of the `` orient '' we see , and why ? essay by nancy demerdash [ 1 ] linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” art in america , vol . ixxi , no . 5 ( 1983 ) , pp . 118–31 . [ 2 ] ibid. , 37 . [ 3 ] zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . [ 4 ] timothy mitchell , colonising egypt , ( berkeley : university of california press , 1991 ) . additional resources : roger benjamin , orientalist aesthetics : art , colonialism , and french north africa 1880–1930 ( berkeley : university of california press , 2003 ) . zeynep çelik , “ colonialism , orientalism , and the canon ” the art bulletin 78 , no . 2 ( june 1996 ) : pp . 202-205 . zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . oleg grabar , “ europe and the orient : an ideologically charged exhibition. ” muqarnas vii ( 1990 ) : pp . 1-11 . robert irwin , dangerous knowledge : orientalism and its discontents ( woodstock , ny : overlook press , 2006 ) . j.m . mackenzie , orientalism : history , theory , and the arts ( manchester , ny : manchester university press , 1995 ) . linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” a. america , ixxi/5 ( 1983 ) : pp . 118–31 . edward saïd , orientalism ( new york : vintage books , 1978 ) . edward saïd , “ orientalism reconsidered , ” race & amp ; class 27 , no . 2 ( autumn 1985 ) : pp . 1-15 . nicholas tromans , ed . the lure of the east : british orientalist painting ( london : tate , 2008 ) . stephen vernoit and d. behrens-abouseif , eds . islamic art in the nineteenth century : tradition , innovation , and eclecticism ( leiden ; boston : brill publishers , 2006 ) .
|
similarly , these scholars questioned how artists have represented people of the orient as passive or licentious subjects . for example , in the painting the snake charmer and his audience , c. 1879 , the french artist jean-léon gérôme ’ s depicts a naked youth holding a serpent as an older man plays the flute—charming both the snake and their audience . gérôme constructs a scene out of his imagination , but he utilizes a highly refined and naturalistic style to suggest that he himself observed the scene .
|
why are all of the girls in the picture naked ?
|
the origins of orientalism snake charmers , carpet vendors , and veiled women may conjure up ideas of the middle east , north africa , and west asia , but they are also partially indebted to orientalist fantasies . to understand these images , we have to understand the concept of orientalism , beginning with the word “ orient ” itself . in its original medieval usage , the `` orient '' referred to the “ east , ” but whose “ east ” did this orient represent ? east of where ? we understand now that this designation reflects a western european view of the `` east , '' and not necessarily the views of the inhabitants of these areas . we also realize today that the label of the “ orient ” hardly captures the wide swath of territory to which it originally referred : the middle east , north africa , and asia . these are at once distinct , contrasting , and yet interconnected regions . scholars often link visual examples of orientalism alongside the romantic literature and music of the early nineteenth century , a period of rising imperialism and tourism when western artists traveled widely to the middle east , north africa , and asia . we now understand that the world has been interconnected for much longer than we initially acknowledged and we can see elements of orientalist representation much earlier—for example , in religious objects of the crusades , or gentile bellini ’ s painting of the ottoman sultan ( ruler ) mehmed ii ( above ) , or in the arabesques ( flowing s-shaped ornamental forms ) of early modern textiles . the politics of orientalism in his groundbreaking 1978 text orientalism , the late cultural critic and theorist edward saïd argued that a dominant european political ideology created the notion of the orient in order to subjugate and control it . saïd explained that the concept embodied distinctions between `` east '' ( the orient ) and `` west '' ( the occident ) precisely so the '' west '' could control and authorize views of the `` east . '' for saïd , this nexus of power and knowledge enabled the `` west '' to generalize and misrepresent north africa , the middle east and asia . though his text has itself received considerable criticism , the book nevertheless remains a pioneering intervention . saïd continues to influence many disciplines of cultural study , including the history of art . representing the “ orient ” as art historian linda nochlin argued in her widely read essay , “ the imaginary orient , ” from 1983 , the task of critical art history is to assess the power structures behind any work of art or artist . [ 1 ] following nochlin ’ s lead , art historians have questioned underlying power dynamics at play in the artistic representations of the `` orient , '' many of them from the nineteenth century . in doing so , these scholars challenged not only the ways that the “ west ” represented the “ east , ” but they also complicate the long held misconception of a unidirectional westward influence . similarly , these scholars questioned how artists have represented people of the orient as passive or licentious subjects . for example , in the painting the snake charmer and his audience , c. 1879 , the french artist jean-léon gérôme ’ s depicts a naked youth holding a serpent as an older man plays the flute—charming both the snake and their audience . gérôme constructs a scene out of his imagination , but he utilizes a highly refined and naturalistic style to suggest that he himself observed the scene . in doing so , gérôme suggests such nudity was a regular and public occurrence in the `` east . '' in contrast , artists like henriette browne and osman hamdi bey created works that provide a counter-narrative to the image of the `` east '' as passive , licentious or decrepit . in a visit : harem interior , constantinople , 1860 , the french painter browne represents women fully clothed in harem scenes . likewise , the école des beaux arts-trained ottoman painter osman hamdi bey depicts islamic scholarship and learnedness in a young emir studying , 1878 . orientalism : fact or fiction ? orientalist paintings and other forms of material culture operate on two registers . first , they depict an “ exotic ” and therefore racialized , feminized , and often sexualized culture from a distant land . second , they simultaneously claim to be a document , an authentic glimpse of a location and its inhabitants , as we see with gérôme 's detailed and naturalistic style . in the snake charmer and his audience , gérôme constructs this layer of exotic `` truth '' by including illegible , faux-arabic tilework in the background . nochlin pointed out that many of gérôme ’ s paintings worked to convince their audiences by carefully mimicking a `` preexisting oriental reality. ” [ 2 ] surprisingly , the invention of photography in 1839 did little to contribute to a greater authenticity of painterly and photographic representations of the `` orient '' by artists , western military officials , technocrats , and travelers . instead , photographs were frequently staged and embellished to appeal to the western imagination . for instance , the french bonfils family , in studio photographs , situated sitters in poses with handheld props against elaborate backdrops to create a fictitious world of the photographer ’ s making . in orientalist secular history paintings ( narrative moments from history ) , western artists portrayed disorderly and often violent battle scenes , creating a conception of an `` orient '' that was rooted in incivility . the common figures and locations of orientalist genre paintings ( scenes of everyday life ) —including the angry despot , licentious harem , chaotic medina , slave market , or the decadent palace—demonstrate a blend of pseudo-ethnography based on descriptions of first-hand observation and outright invention . these paintings created visions of a decaying mythic `` east '' inhabited by a controllable people without regard to geographic specificity . artists operating in this vein include jean-léon gérôme , eugène delacroix , jean-auguste-dominique ingres , and others . in the visual discourses of orientalism , we must systematically question any claim to objectivity or authenticity . global imperialism and consumerism we also must consider the creation of an `` orient '' as a result of imperialism , industrial capitalism , mass consumption , tourism , and settler colonialism in the nineenth-century . in europe , trends of cultural appropriation included a consumerist “ taste ” for materials and objects , like porcelain , textiles , fashion , and carpets , from the middle east and asia . for instance , japonisme was a trend of japonese-inspired decorative arts , as were chinoiserie ( chinese-inspired ) and_turquerie_ ( turkish-inspired ) . the ability of europeans to purchase and own these materials , to some extent confirmed imperial influence in those areas . the phenomenon of world ’ s fairs and cultural-national pavilions ( beginning with the crystal palace in london in 1851 and continuing into the twentieth century ) also supported the goals of colonial expansion . like the decorative arts , they fostered the notion of the `` orient '' as an entity to be consumed through its varied pre-industrial craft traditions . we see this continually in the architectural imitations built on the grounds of these fairs , that sought to provide both spectacle and authenticity to the fair goer . for instance , at the 1867 exposition universelle in paris , the designers of the egyptian section jacques drévet and e. schmitz topped what was supposed to represent the residential khedival ( ottoman empire ruler 's ) palace with a dome typical of mosque architecture . [ 3 ] yet , they also attached to this building a barn ( not typical of a khedival palace ) that housed imported donkeys brought in to give visitors the impression of reality . [ 4 ] the fairs objectified the otherness of non-western peoples , cultures , and practices . orientalism constructs cultural , spatial , and visual mythologies and stereotypes that are often connected to the geopolitical ideologies of governments and institutions . the influence of these mythologies has impacted the formation of knowledge and the process of knowledge production . in this light , as saïd and nochlin remind us , when we see orientalist works like gérôme 's snake charmer , we should ask what idea of the `` orient '' we see , and why ? essay by nancy demerdash [ 1 ] linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” art in america , vol . ixxi , no . 5 ( 1983 ) , pp . 118–31 . [ 2 ] ibid. , 37 . [ 3 ] zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . [ 4 ] timothy mitchell , colonising egypt , ( berkeley : university of california press , 1991 ) . additional resources : roger benjamin , orientalist aesthetics : art , colonialism , and french north africa 1880–1930 ( berkeley : university of california press , 2003 ) . zeynep çelik , “ colonialism , orientalism , and the canon ” the art bulletin 78 , no . 2 ( june 1996 ) : pp . 202-205 . zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . oleg grabar , “ europe and the orient : an ideologically charged exhibition. ” muqarnas vii ( 1990 ) : pp . 1-11 . robert irwin , dangerous knowledge : orientalism and its discontents ( woodstock , ny : overlook press , 2006 ) . j.m . mackenzie , orientalism : history , theory , and the arts ( manchester , ny : manchester university press , 1995 ) . linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” a. america , ixxi/5 ( 1983 ) : pp . 118–31 . edward saïd , orientalism ( new york : vintage books , 1978 ) . edward saïd , “ orientalism reconsidered , ” race & amp ; class 27 , no . 2 ( autumn 1985 ) : pp . 1-15 . nicholas tromans , ed . the lure of the east : british orientalist painting ( london : tate , 2008 ) . stephen vernoit and d. behrens-abouseif , eds . islamic art in the nineteenth century : tradition , innovation , and eclecticism ( leiden ; boston : brill publishers , 2006 ) .
|
[ 4 ] timothy mitchell , colonising egypt , ( berkeley : university of california press , 1991 ) . additional resources : roger benjamin , orientalist aesthetics : art , colonialism , and french north africa 1880–1930 ( berkeley : university of california press , 2003 ) . zeynep çelik , “ colonialism , orientalism , and the canon ” the art bulletin 78 , no .
|
what does orientalist have to do with art ?
|
the origins of orientalism snake charmers , carpet vendors , and veiled women may conjure up ideas of the middle east , north africa , and west asia , but they are also partially indebted to orientalist fantasies . to understand these images , we have to understand the concept of orientalism , beginning with the word “ orient ” itself . in its original medieval usage , the `` orient '' referred to the “ east , ” but whose “ east ” did this orient represent ? east of where ? we understand now that this designation reflects a western european view of the `` east , '' and not necessarily the views of the inhabitants of these areas . we also realize today that the label of the “ orient ” hardly captures the wide swath of territory to which it originally referred : the middle east , north africa , and asia . these are at once distinct , contrasting , and yet interconnected regions . scholars often link visual examples of orientalism alongside the romantic literature and music of the early nineteenth century , a period of rising imperialism and tourism when western artists traveled widely to the middle east , north africa , and asia . we now understand that the world has been interconnected for much longer than we initially acknowledged and we can see elements of orientalist representation much earlier—for example , in religious objects of the crusades , or gentile bellini ’ s painting of the ottoman sultan ( ruler ) mehmed ii ( above ) , or in the arabesques ( flowing s-shaped ornamental forms ) of early modern textiles . the politics of orientalism in his groundbreaking 1978 text orientalism , the late cultural critic and theorist edward saïd argued that a dominant european political ideology created the notion of the orient in order to subjugate and control it . saïd explained that the concept embodied distinctions between `` east '' ( the orient ) and `` west '' ( the occident ) precisely so the '' west '' could control and authorize views of the `` east . '' for saïd , this nexus of power and knowledge enabled the `` west '' to generalize and misrepresent north africa , the middle east and asia . though his text has itself received considerable criticism , the book nevertheless remains a pioneering intervention . saïd continues to influence many disciplines of cultural study , including the history of art . representing the “ orient ” as art historian linda nochlin argued in her widely read essay , “ the imaginary orient , ” from 1983 , the task of critical art history is to assess the power structures behind any work of art or artist . [ 1 ] following nochlin ’ s lead , art historians have questioned underlying power dynamics at play in the artistic representations of the `` orient , '' many of them from the nineteenth century . in doing so , these scholars challenged not only the ways that the “ west ” represented the “ east , ” but they also complicate the long held misconception of a unidirectional westward influence . similarly , these scholars questioned how artists have represented people of the orient as passive or licentious subjects . for example , in the painting the snake charmer and his audience , c. 1879 , the french artist jean-léon gérôme ’ s depicts a naked youth holding a serpent as an older man plays the flute—charming both the snake and their audience . gérôme constructs a scene out of his imagination , but he utilizes a highly refined and naturalistic style to suggest that he himself observed the scene . in doing so , gérôme suggests such nudity was a regular and public occurrence in the `` east . '' in contrast , artists like henriette browne and osman hamdi bey created works that provide a counter-narrative to the image of the `` east '' as passive , licentious or decrepit . in a visit : harem interior , constantinople , 1860 , the french painter browne represents women fully clothed in harem scenes . likewise , the école des beaux arts-trained ottoman painter osman hamdi bey depicts islamic scholarship and learnedness in a young emir studying , 1878 . orientalism : fact or fiction ? orientalist paintings and other forms of material culture operate on two registers . first , they depict an “ exotic ” and therefore racialized , feminized , and often sexualized culture from a distant land . second , they simultaneously claim to be a document , an authentic glimpse of a location and its inhabitants , as we see with gérôme 's detailed and naturalistic style . in the snake charmer and his audience , gérôme constructs this layer of exotic `` truth '' by including illegible , faux-arabic tilework in the background . nochlin pointed out that many of gérôme ’ s paintings worked to convince their audiences by carefully mimicking a `` preexisting oriental reality. ” [ 2 ] surprisingly , the invention of photography in 1839 did little to contribute to a greater authenticity of painterly and photographic representations of the `` orient '' by artists , western military officials , technocrats , and travelers . instead , photographs were frequently staged and embellished to appeal to the western imagination . for instance , the french bonfils family , in studio photographs , situated sitters in poses with handheld props against elaborate backdrops to create a fictitious world of the photographer ’ s making . in orientalist secular history paintings ( narrative moments from history ) , western artists portrayed disorderly and often violent battle scenes , creating a conception of an `` orient '' that was rooted in incivility . the common figures and locations of orientalist genre paintings ( scenes of everyday life ) —including the angry despot , licentious harem , chaotic medina , slave market , or the decadent palace—demonstrate a blend of pseudo-ethnography based on descriptions of first-hand observation and outright invention . these paintings created visions of a decaying mythic `` east '' inhabited by a controllable people without regard to geographic specificity . artists operating in this vein include jean-léon gérôme , eugène delacroix , jean-auguste-dominique ingres , and others . in the visual discourses of orientalism , we must systematically question any claim to objectivity or authenticity . global imperialism and consumerism we also must consider the creation of an `` orient '' as a result of imperialism , industrial capitalism , mass consumption , tourism , and settler colonialism in the nineenth-century . in europe , trends of cultural appropriation included a consumerist “ taste ” for materials and objects , like porcelain , textiles , fashion , and carpets , from the middle east and asia . for instance , japonisme was a trend of japonese-inspired decorative arts , as were chinoiserie ( chinese-inspired ) and_turquerie_ ( turkish-inspired ) . the ability of europeans to purchase and own these materials , to some extent confirmed imperial influence in those areas . the phenomenon of world ’ s fairs and cultural-national pavilions ( beginning with the crystal palace in london in 1851 and continuing into the twentieth century ) also supported the goals of colonial expansion . like the decorative arts , they fostered the notion of the `` orient '' as an entity to be consumed through its varied pre-industrial craft traditions . we see this continually in the architectural imitations built on the grounds of these fairs , that sought to provide both spectacle and authenticity to the fair goer . for instance , at the 1867 exposition universelle in paris , the designers of the egyptian section jacques drévet and e. schmitz topped what was supposed to represent the residential khedival ( ottoman empire ruler 's ) palace with a dome typical of mosque architecture . [ 3 ] yet , they also attached to this building a barn ( not typical of a khedival palace ) that housed imported donkeys brought in to give visitors the impression of reality . [ 4 ] the fairs objectified the otherness of non-western peoples , cultures , and practices . orientalism constructs cultural , spatial , and visual mythologies and stereotypes that are often connected to the geopolitical ideologies of governments and institutions . the influence of these mythologies has impacted the formation of knowledge and the process of knowledge production . in this light , as saïd and nochlin remind us , when we see orientalist works like gérôme 's snake charmer , we should ask what idea of the `` orient '' we see , and why ? essay by nancy demerdash [ 1 ] linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” art in america , vol . ixxi , no . 5 ( 1983 ) , pp . 118–31 . [ 2 ] ibid. , 37 . [ 3 ] zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . [ 4 ] timothy mitchell , colonising egypt , ( berkeley : university of california press , 1991 ) . additional resources : roger benjamin , orientalist aesthetics : art , colonialism , and french north africa 1880–1930 ( berkeley : university of california press , 2003 ) . zeynep çelik , “ colonialism , orientalism , and the canon ” the art bulletin 78 , no . 2 ( june 1996 ) : pp . 202-205 . zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . oleg grabar , “ europe and the orient : an ideologically charged exhibition. ” muqarnas vii ( 1990 ) : pp . 1-11 . robert irwin , dangerous knowledge : orientalism and its discontents ( woodstock , ny : overlook press , 2006 ) . j.m . mackenzie , orientalism : history , theory , and the arts ( manchester , ny : manchester university press , 1995 ) . linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” a. america , ixxi/5 ( 1983 ) : pp . 118–31 . edward saïd , orientalism ( new york : vintage books , 1978 ) . edward saïd , “ orientalism reconsidered , ” race & amp ; class 27 , no . 2 ( autumn 1985 ) : pp . 1-15 . nicholas tromans , ed . the lure of the east : british orientalist painting ( london : tate , 2008 ) . stephen vernoit and d. behrens-abouseif , eds . islamic art in the nineteenth century : tradition , innovation , and eclecticism ( leiden ; boston : brill publishers , 2006 ) .
|
orientalism : fact or fiction ? orientalist paintings and other forms of material culture operate on two registers . first , they depict an “ exotic ” and therefore racialized , feminized , and often sexualized culture from a distant land . second , they simultaneously claim to be a document , an authentic glimpse of a location and its inhabitants , as we see with gérôme 's detailed and naturalistic style .
|
how was this culture depicted as feminized ?
|
the origins of orientalism snake charmers , carpet vendors , and veiled women may conjure up ideas of the middle east , north africa , and west asia , but they are also partially indebted to orientalist fantasies . to understand these images , we have to understand the concept of orientalism , beginning with the word “ orient ” itself . in its original medieval usage , the `` orient '' referred to the “ east , ” but whose “ east ” did this orient represent ? east of where ? we understand now that this designation reflects a western european view of the `` east , '' and not necessarily the views of the inhabitants of these areas . we also realize today that the label of the “ orient ” hardly captures the wide swath of territory to which it originally referred : the middle east , north africa , and asia . these are at once distinct , contrasting , and yet interconnected regions . scholars often link visual examples of orientalism alongside the romantic literature and music of the early nineteenth century , a period of rising imperialism and tourism when western artists traveled widely to the middle east , north africa , and asia . we now understand that the world has been interconnected for much longer than we initially acknowledged and we can see elements of orientalist representation much earlier—for example , in religious objects of the crusades , or gentile bellini ’ s painting of the ottoman sultan ( ruler ) mehmed ii ( above ) , or in the arabesques ( flowing s-shaped ornamental forms ) of early modern textiles . the politics of orientalism in his groundbreaking 1978 text orientalism , the late cultural critic and theorist edward saïd argued that a dominant european political ideology created the notion of the orient in order to subjugate and control it . saïd explained that the concept embodied distinctions between `` east '' ( the orient ) and `` west '' ( the occident ) precisely so the '' west '' could control and authorize views of the `` east . '' for saïd , this nexus of power and knowledge enabled the `` west '' to generalize and misrepresent north africa , the middle east and asia . though his text has itself received considerable criticism , the book nevertheless remains a pioneering intervention . saïd continues to influence many disciplines of cultural study , including the history of art . representing the “ orient ” as art historian linda nochlin argued in her widely read essay , “ the imaginary orient , ” from 1983 , the task of critical art history is to assess the power structures behind any work of art or artist . [ 1 ] following nochlin ’ s lead , art historians have questioned underlying power dynamics at play in the artistic representations of the `` orient , '' many of them from the nineteenth century . in doing so , these scholars challenged not only the ways that the “ west ” represented the “ east , ” but they also complicate the long held misconception of a unidirectional westward influence . similarly , these scholars questioned how artists have represented people of the orient as passive or licentious subjects . for example , in the painting the snake charmer and his audience , c. 1879 , the french artist jean-léon gérôme ’ s depicts a naked youth holding a serpent as an older man plays the flute—charming both the snake and their audience . gérôme constructs a scene out of his imagination , but he utilizes a highly refined and naturalistic style to suggest that he himself observed the scene . in doing so , gérôme suggests such nudity was a regular and public occurrence in the `` east . '' in contrast , artists like henriette browne and osman hamdi bey created works that provide a counter-narrative to the image of the `` east '' as passive , licentious or decrepit . in a visit : harem interior , constantinople , 1860 , the french painter browne represents women fully clothed in harem scenes . likewise , the école des beaux arts-trained ottoman painter osman hamdi bey depicts islamic scholarship and learnedness in a young emir studying , 1878 . orientalism : fact or fiction ? orientalist paintings and other forms of material culture operate on two registers . first , they depict an “ exotic ” and therefore racialized , feminized , and often sexualized culture from a distant land . second , they simultaneously claim to be a document , an authentic glimpse of a location and its inhabitants , as we see with gérôme 's detailed and naturalistic style . in the snake charmer and his audience , gérôme constructs this layer of exotic `` truth '' by including illegible , faux-arabic tilework in the background . nochlin pointed out that many of gérôme ’ s paintings worked to convince their audiences by carefully mimicking a `` preexisting oriental reality. ” [ 2 ] surprisingly , the invention of photography in 1839 did little to contribute to a greater authenticity of painterly and photographic representations of the `` orient '' by artists , western military officials , technocrats , and travelers . instead , photographs were frequently staged and embellished to appeal to the western imagination . for instance , the french bonfils family , in studio photographs , situated sitters in poses with handheld props against elaborate backdrops to create a fictitious world of the photographer ’ s making . in orientalist secular history paintings ( narrative moments from history ) , western artists portrayed disorderly and often violent battle scenes , creating a conception of an `` orient '' that was rooted in incivility . the common figures and locations of orientalist genre paintings ( scenes of everyday life ) —including the angry despot , licentious harem , chaotic medina , slave market , or the decadent palace—demonstrate a blend of pseudo-ethnography based on descriptions of first-hand observation and outright invention . these paintings created visions of a decaying mythic `` east '' inhabited by a controllable people without regard to geographic specificity . artists operating in this vein include jean-léon gérôme , eugène delacroix , jean-auguste-dominique ingres , and others . in the visual discourses of orientalism , we must systematically question any claim to objectivity or authenticity . global imperialism and consumerism we also must consider the creation of an `` orient '' as a result of imperialism , industrial capitalism , mass consumption , tourism , and settler colonialism in the nineenth-century . in europe , trends of cultural appropriation included a consumerist “ taste ” for materials and objects , like porcelain , textiles , fashion , and carpets , from the middle east and asia . for instance , japonisme was a trend of japonese-inspired decorative arts , as were chinoiserie ( chinese-inspired ) and_turquerie_ ( turkish-inspired ) . the ability of europeans to purchase and own these materials , to some extent confirmed imperial influence in those areas . the phenomenon of world ’ s fairs and cultural-national pavilions ( beginning with the crystal palace in london in 1851 and continuing into the twentieth century ) also supported the goals of colonial expansion . like the decorative arts , they fostered the notion of the `` orient '' as an entity to be consumed through its varied pre-industrial craft traditions . we see this continually in the architectural imitations built on the grounds of these fairs , that sought to provide both spectacle and authenticity to the fair goer . for instance , at the 1867 exposition universelle in paris , the designers of the egyptian section jacques drévet and e. schmitz topped what was supposed to represent the residential khedival ( ottoman empire ruler 's ) palace with a dome typical of mosque architecture . [ 3 ] yet , they also attached to this building a barn ( not typical of a khedival palace ) that housed imported donkeys brought in to give visitors the impression of reality . [ 4 ] the fairs objectified the otherness of non-western peoples , cultures , and practices . orientalism constructs cultural , spatial , and visual mythologies and stereotypes that are often connected to the geopolitical ideologies of governments and institutions . the influence of these mythologies has impacted the formation of knowledge and the process of knowledge production . in this light , as saïd and nochlin remind us , when we see orientalist works like gérôme 's snake charmer , we should ask what idea of the `` orient '' we see , and why ? essay by nancy demerdash [ 1 ] linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” art in america , vol . ixxi , no . 5 ( 1983 ) , pp . 118–31 . [ 2 ] ibid. , 37 . [ 3 ] zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . [ 4 ] timothy mitchell , colonising egypt , ( berkeley : university of california press , 1991 ) . additional resources : roger benjamin , orientalist aesthetics : art , colonialism , and french north africa 1880–1930 ( berkeley : university of california press , 2003 ) . zeynep çelik , “ colonialism , orientalism , and the canon ” the art bulletin 78 , no . 2 ( june 1996 ) : pp . 202-205 . zeynep çelik , displaying the orient : architecture of islam at nineteenth-century world ’ s fairs ( berkeley : university of california press , 1992 ) . oleg grabar , “ europe and the orient : an ideologically charged exhibition. ” muqarnas vii ( 1990 ) : pp . 1-11 . robert irwin , dangerous knowledge : orientalism and its discontents ( woodstock , ny : overlook press , 2006 ) . j.m . mackenzie , orientalism : history , theory , and the arts ( manchester , ny : manchester university press , 1995 ) . linda nochlin , “ the imaginary orient , ” a. america , ixxi/5 ( 1983 ) : pp . 118–31 . edward saïd , orientalism ( new york : vintage books , 1978 ) . edward saïd , “ orientalism reconsidered , ” race & amp ; class 27 , no . 2 ( autumn 1985 ) : pp . 1-15 . nicholas tromans , ed . the lure of the east : british orientalist painting ( london : tate , 2008 ) . stephen vernoit and d. behrens-abouseif , eds . islamic art in the nineteenth century : tradition , innovation , and eclecticism ( leiden ; boston : brill publishers , 2006 ) .
|
though his text has itself received considerable criticism , the book nevertheless remains a pioneering intervention . saïd continues to influence many disciplines of cultural study , including the history of art . representing the “ orient ” as art historian linda nochlin argued in her widely read essay , “ the imaginary orient , ” from 1983 , the task of critical art history is to assess the power structures behind any work of art or artist . [ 1 ] following nochlin ’ s lead , art historians have questioned underlying power dynamics at play in the artistic representations of the `` orient , '' many of them from the nineteenth century .
|
what role does economics play in this art style ?
|
a significant discovery approximately 25,000 years ago , in a rock shelter in the huns mountains of namibia on the southwest coast of africa ( today part of the ai-ais richtersveld transfrontier park ) , an animal was drawn in charcoal on a hand-sized slab of stone . the stone was left behind , over time becoming buried on the floor of the cave by layers of sediment and debris until 1969 when a team led by german archaeologist w.e . wendt excavated the rock shelter and found the first fragment ( above , left ) . wendt named the cave `` apollo 11 '' upon hearing on his shortwave radio of nasa ’ s successful space mission to the moon . it was more than three years later however , after a subsequent excavation , when wendt discovered the matching fragment ( above , right ) , that archaeologists and art historians began to understand the significance of the find . indirect dating techniques in total seven stone fragments of brown-grey quartzite , some of them depicting traces of animal figures drawn in charcoal , ocher , and white , were found buried in a concentrated area of the cave floor less than two meters square . while it is not possible to learn the actual date of the fragments , it is possible to estimate when the rocks were buried by radiocarbon dating the archaeological layer in which they were found . archaeologists estimate that the cave stones were buried between 25,500 and 25,300 years ago during the middle stone age period in southern africa making them , at the time of their discovery , the oldest dated art known on the african continent and among the earliest evidence of human artistic expression worldwide . while more recent discoveries of much older human artistic endeavors have corrected our understanding ( consider the 2008 discovery of a 100,000-year-old paint workshop in the blombos cave on the southern coast of africa ) , the stones remain the oldest examples of figurative art from the african continent . their discovery contributes to our conception of early humanity ’ s creative attempts , before the invention of formal writing , to express their thoughts about the world around them . the origins of art ? genetic and fossil evidence tells us that homo sapiens ( anatomically modern humans who evolved from an earlier species of hominids ) developed on the continent of africa more than 100,000 years ago and spread throughout the world . but what we do not know—what we have only been able to assume—is that art too began in africa . is africa , where humanity originated , home to the world ’ s oldest art ? if so , can we say that art began in africa ? 100,000 years of human occupation the apollo 11 rock shelter overlooks a dry gorge , sitting twenty meters above what was once a river that ran along the valley floor . the cave entrance is wide , about twenty-eight meters across , and the cave itself is deep : eleven meters from front to back . while today a person can stand upright only in the front section of the cave , during the middle stone age , as well as in the periods before and after , the rock shelter was an active site of ongoing human settlement . inside the cave , above and below the layer where the apollo 11 cave stones were found , archaeologists unearthed a sequence of cultural layers representing over 100,000 years of human occupation . in these layers stone artifacts , typical of the middle stone age period—such as blades , pointed flakes , and scraper—were found in raw materials not native to the region , signaling stone tool technology transported over long distances . among the remnants of hearths , ostrich eggshell fragments bearing traces of red color were also found—either remnants of ornamental painting or evidence that the eggshells were used as containers for pigment . on the cave walls , belonging to the later stone age period , rock paintings were discovered depicting white and red zigzags , two handprints , three geometric images , and traces of color . and on the banks of the riverbed just upstream from the cave , engravings of a variety of animals , some with zigzag lines leading upwards , were found and dated to less than 2000 years ago . the apollo 11 cave stones but the most well-known of the rock shelter ’ s finds , and the most enigmatic , remain the apollo 11 cave stones ( image above ) . on the cleavage face of what was once a complete slab , an unidentified animal form was drawn resembling a feline in appearance but with human hind legs that were probably added later . barely visible on the head of the animal are two slightly-curved horns likely belonging to an oryx , a large grazing antelope ; on the animal ’ s underbelly , possibly the sexual organ of a bovid . perhaps we have some kind of supernatural creature—a therianthrope , part human and part animal ? if so , this may suggest a complex system of shamanistic belief . taken together with the later rock paintings and the engravings , apollo 11 becomes more than just a cave offering shelter from the elements . it becomes a site of ritual significance used by many over thousands of years . the global origins of art in the middle stone age period in southern africa prehistoric man was a hunter-gatherer , moving from place to place in search of food and shelter . but this modern human also drew an animal form with charcoal—a form as much imagined as it was observed . this is what makes the apollo 11 cave stones find so interesting : the stones offer evidence that homo sapiens in the middle stone age—us , some 25,000 years ago—were not only anatomically modern , but behaviorally modern as well . that is to say , these early humans possessed the new and unique capacity for modern symbolic thought , “ the human capacity , ” long before what was previously understood . the cave stones are what archaeologists term art mobilier —small-scale prehistoric art that is moveable . but mobile art , and rock art generally , is not unique to africa . rock art is a global phenomenon that can be found across the world—in europe , asia , australia , and north and south america . while we can not know for certain what these early humans intended by the things that they made , by focusing on art as the product of humanity ’ s creativity and imagination we can begin to explore where , and hypothesize why , art began . essay by nathalie hager additional resources : introduction to prehistoric art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history apollo 11 and wonderwerk cave stones on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history african rock art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history '' africa : continent of origins , '' lecture was delivered by dr. ian tattersall at the metropolitan museum of art on the occasion of the symposium `` genesis : exploration of origins '' on march 7 , 2003 '' homo sapiens , '' from becoming human british museum – rock art and the origins of art in africa namibia from the tara , the trust for african rock art bradshaw foundation – africa rock art archive john masson , “ apollo 11 cave in southwest namibia : some observations on the site and its rock art , '' the south african archaeological bulletin 61 , no . 183 ( 2006 ) , pp . 76-89 ralf vogelsang , “ the rock-shelter “ apollo 11 ” - evidence of early modern humans in south-western namibia , ” in heritage and cultures in modern namibia - in-depth views of the country , edited by cornelia limpricht and megan biesele ( göttingen , windhoek-namibia : klaus hess publishers , 2008 ) , pp . 183-196 . w. e. wendt , “ ‘ art mobilier ' from the apollo 11 cave , south west africa : africa ’ s oldest dated works of art , ” the south african archaeological bulletin vol . 31 , no . 121/122 ( 1976 ) , pp . 5-11 .
|
and on the banks of the riverbed just upstream from the cave , engravings of a variety of animals , some with zigzag lines leading upwards , were found and dated to less than 2000 years ago . the apollo 11 cave stones but the most well-known of the rock shelter ’ s finds , and the most enigmatic , remain the apollo 11 cave stones ( image above ) . on the cleavage face of what was once a complete slab , an unidentified animal form was drawn resembling a feline in appearance but with human hind legs that were probably added later .
|
have they considered that the apollo 11 cave stones may represent two different drawings ?
|
a significant discovery approximately 25,000 years ago , in a rock shelter in the huns mountains of namibia on the southwest coast of africa ( today part of the ai-ais richtersveld transfrontier park ) , an animal was drawn in charcoal on a hand-sized slab of stone . the stone was left behind , over time becoming buried on the floor of the cave by layers of sediment and debris until 1969 when a team led by german archaeologist w.e . wendt excavated the rock shelter and found the first fragment ( above , left ) . wendt named the cave `` apollo 11 '' upon hearing on his shortwave radio of nasa ’ s successful space mission to the moon . it was more than three years later however , after a subsequent excavation , when wendt discovered the matching fragment ( above , right ) , that archaeologists and art historians began to understand the significance of the find . indirect dating techniques in total seven stone fragments of brown-grey quartzite , some of them depicting traces of animal figures drawn in charcoal , ocher , and white , were found buried in a concentrated area of the cave floor less than two meters square . while it is not possible to learn the actual date of the fragments , it is possible to estimate when the rocks were buried by radiocarbon dating the archaeological layer in which they were found . archaeologists estimate that the cave stones were buried between 25,500 and 25,300 years ago during the middle stone age period in southern africa making them , at the time of their discovery , the oldest dated art known on the african continent and among the earliest evidence of human artistic expression worldwide . while more recent discoveries of much older human artistic endeavors have corrected our understanding ( consider the 2008 discovery of a 100,000-year-old paint workshop in the blombos cave on the southern coast of africa ) , the stones remain the oldest examples of figurative art from the african continent . their discovery contributes to our conception of early humanity ’ s creative attempts , before the invention of formal writing , to express their thoughts about the world around them . the origins of art ? genetic and fossil evidence tells us that homo sapiens ( anatomically modern humans who evolved from an earlier species of hominids ) developed on the continent of africa more than 100,000 years ago and spread throughout the world . but what we do not know—what we have only been able to assume—is that art too began in africa . is africa , where humanity originated , home to the world ’ s oldest art ? if so , can we say that art began in africa ? 100,000 years of human occupation the apollo 11 rock shelter overlooks a dry gorge , sitting twenty meters above what was once a river that ran along the valley floor . the cave entrance is wide , about twenty-eight meters across , and the cave itself is deep : eleven meters from front to back . while today a person can stand upright only in the front section of the cave , during the middle stone age , as well as in the periods before and after , the rock shelter was an active site of ongoing human settlement . inside the cave , above and below the layer where the apollo 11 cave stones were found , archaeologists unearthed a sequence of cultural layers representing over 100,000 years of human occupation . in these layers stone artifacts , typical of the middle stone age period—such as blades , pointed flakes , and scraper—were found in raw materials not native to the region , signaling stone tool technology transported over long distances . among the remnants of hearths , ostrich eggshell fragments bearing traces of red color were also found—either remnants of ornamental painting or evidence that the eggshells were used as containers for pigment . on the cave walls , belonging to the later stone age period , rock paintings were discovered depicting white and red zigzags , two handprints , three geometric images , and traces of color . and on the banks of the riverbed just upstream from the cave , engravings of a variety of animals , some with zigzag lines leading upwards , were found and dated to less than 2000 years ago . the apollo 11 cave stones but the most well-known of the rock shelter ’ s finds , and the most enigmatic , remain the apollo 11 cave stones ( image above ) . on the cleavage face of what was once a complete slab , an unidentified animal form was drawn resembling a feline in appearance but with human hind legs that were probably added later . barely visible on the head of the animal are two slightly-curved horns likely belonging to an oryx , a large grazing antelope ; on the animal ’ s underbelly , possibly the sexual organ of a bovid . perhaps we have some kind of supernatural creature—a therianthrope , part human and part animal ? if so , this may suggest a complex system of shamanistic belief . taken together with the later rock paintings and the engravings , apollo 11 becomes more than just a cave offering shelter from the elements . it becomes a site of ritual significance used by many over thousands of years . the global origins of art in the middle stone age period in southern africa prehistoric man was a hunter-gatherer , moving from place to place in search of food and shelter . but this modern human also drew an animal form with charcoal—a form as much imagined as it was observed . this is what makes the apollo 11 cave stones find so interesting : the stones offer evidence that homo sapiens in the middle stone age—us , some 25,000 years ago—were not only anatomically modern , but behaviorally modern as well . that is to say , these early humans possessed the new and unique capacity for modern symbolic thought , “ the human capacity , ” long before what was previously understood . the cave stones are what archaeologists term art mobilier —small-scale prehistoric art that is moveable . but mobile art , and rock art generally , is not unique to africa . rock art is a global phenomenon that can be found across the world—in europe , asia , australia , and north and south america . while we can not know for certain what these early humans intended by the things that they made , by focusing on art as the product of humanity ’ s creativity and imagination we can begin to explore where , and hypothesize why , art began . essay by nathalie hager additional resources : introduction to prehistoric art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history apollo 11 and wonderwerk cave stones on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history african rock art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history '' africa : continent of origins , '' lecture was delivered by dr. ian tattersall at the metropolitan museum of art on the occasion of the symposium `` genesis : exploration of origins '' on march 7 , 2003 '' homo sapiens , '' from becoming human british museum – rock art and the origins of art in africa namibia from the tara , the trust for african rock art bradshaw foundation – africa rock art archive john masson , “ apollo 11 cave in southwest namibia : some observations on the site and its rock art , '' the south african archaeological bulletin 61 , no . 183 ( 2006 ) , pp . 76-89 ralf vogelsang , “ the rock-shelter “ apollo 11 ” - evidence of early modern humans in south-western namibia , ” in heritage and cultures in modern namibia - in-depth views of the country , edited by cornelia limpricht and megan biesele ( göttingen , windhoek-namibia : klaus hess publishers , 2008 ) , pp . 183-196 . w. e. wendt , “ ‘ art mobilier ' from the apollo 11 cave , south west africa : africa ’ s oldest dated works of art , ” the south african archaeological bulletin vol . 31 , no . 121/122 ( 1976 ) , pp . 5-11 .
|
that is to say , these early humans possessed the new and unique capacity for modern symbolic thought , “ the human capacity , ” long before what was previously understood . the cave stones are what archaeologists term art mobilier —small-scale prehistoric art that is moveable . but mobile art , and rock art generally , is not unique to africa .
|
is there any artist making very small scale artwork in the modern age ?
|
a significant discovery approximately 25,000 years ago , in a rock shelter in the huns mountains of namibia on the southwest coast of africa ( today part of the ai-ais richtersveld transfrontier park ) , an animal was drawn in charcoal on a hand-sized slab of stone . the stone was left behind , over time becoming buried on the floor of the cave by layers of sediment and debris until 1969 when a team led by german archaeologist w.e . wendt excavated the rock shelter and found the first fragment ( above , left ) . wendt named the cave `` apollo 11 '' upon hearing on his shortwave radio of nasa ’ s successful space mission to the moon . it was more than three years later however , after a subsequent excavation , when wendt discovered the matching fragment ( above , right ) , that archaeologists and art historians began to understand the significance of the find . indirect dating techniques in total seven stone fragments of brown-grey quartzite , some of them depicting traces of animal figures drawn in charcoal , ocher , and white , were found buried in a concentrated area of the cave floor less than two meters square . while it is not possible to learn the actual date of the fragments , it is possible to estimate when the rocks were buried by radiocarbon dating the archaeological layer in which they were found . archaeologists estimate that the cave stones were buried between 25,500 and 25,300 years ago during the middle stone age period in southern africa making them , at the time of their discovery , the oldest dated art known on the african continent and among the earliest evidence of human artistic expression worldwide . while more recent discoveries of much older human artistic endeavors have corrected our understanding ( consider the 2008 discovery of a 100,000-year-old paint workshop in the blombos cave on the southern coast of africa ) , the stones remain the oldest examples of figurative art from the african continent . their discovery contributes to our conception of early humanity ’ s creative attempts , before the invention of formal writing , to express their thoughts about the world around them . the origins of art ? genetic and fossil evidence tells us that homo sapiens ( anatomically modern humans who evolved from an earlier species of hominids ) developed on the continent of africa more than 100,000 years ago and spread throughout the world . but what we do not know—what we have only been able to assume—is that art too began in africa . is africa , where humanity originated , home to the world ’ s oldest art ? if so , can we say that art began in africa ? 100,000 years of human occupation the apollo 11 rock shelter overlooks a dry gorge , sitting twenty meters above what was once a river that ran along the valley floor . the cave entrance is wide , about twenty-eight meters across , and the cave itself is deep : eleven meters from front to back . while today a person can stand upright only in the front section of the cave , during the middle stone age , as well as in the periods before and after , the rock shelter was an active site of ongoing human settlement . inside the cave , above and below the layer where the apollo 11 cave stones were found , archaeologists unearthed a sequence of cultural layers representing over 100,000 years of human occupation . in these layers stone artifacts , typical of the middle stone age period—such as blades , pointed flakes , and scraper—were found in raw materials not native to the region , signaling stone tool technology transported over long distances . among the remnants of hearths , ostrich eggshell fragments bearing traces of red color were also found—either remnants of ornamental painting or evidence that the eggshells were used as containers for pigment . on the cave walls , belonging to the later stone age period , rock paintings were discovered depicting white and red zigzags , two handprints , three geometric images , and traces of color . and on the banks of the riverbed just upstream from the cave , engravings of a variety of animals , some with zigzag lines leading upwards , were found and dated to less than 2000 years ago . the apollo 11 cave stones but the most well-known of the rock shelter ’ s finds , and the most enigmatic , remain the apollo 11 cave stones ( image above ) . on the cleavage face of what was once a complete slab , an unidentified animal form was drawn resembling a feline in appearance but with human hind legs that were probably added later . barely visible on the head of the animal are two slightly-curved horns likely belonging to an oryx , a large grazing antelope ; on the animal ’ s underbelly , possibly the sexual organ of a bovid . perhaps we have some kind of supernatural creature—a therianthrope , part human and part animal ? if so , this may suggest a complex system of shamanistic belief . taken together with the later rock paintings and the engravings , apollo 11 becomes more than just a cave offering shelter from the elements . it becomes a site of ritual significance used by many over thousands of years . the global origins of art in the middle stone age period in southern africa prehistoric man was a hunter-gatherer , moving from place to place in search of food and shelter . but this modern human also drew an animal form with charcoal—a form as much imagined as it was observed . this is what makes the apollo 11 cave stones find so interesting : the stones offer evidence that homo sapiens in the middle stone age—us , some 25,000 years ago—were not only anatomically modern , but behaviorally modern as well . that is to say , these early humans possessed the new and unique capacity for modern symbolic thought , “ the human capacity , ” long before what was previously understood . the cave stones are what archaeologists term art mobilier —small-scale prehistoric art that is moveable . but mobile art , and rock art generally , is not unique to africa . rock art is a global phenomenon that can be found across the world—in europe , asia , australia , and north and south america . while we can not know for certain what these early humans intended by the things that they made , by focusing on art as the product of humanity ’ s creativity and imagination we can begin to explore where , and hypothesize why , art began . essay by nathalie hager additional resources : introduction to prehistoric art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history apollo 11 and wonderwerk cave stones on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history african rock art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history '' africa : continent of origins , '' lecture was delivered by dr. ian tattersall at the metropolitan museum of art on the occasion of the symposium `` genesis : exploration of origins '' on march 7 , 2003 '' homo sapiens , '' from becoming human british museum – rock art and the origins of art in africa namibia from the tara , the trust for african rock art bradshaw foundation – africa rock art archive john masson , “ apollo 11 cave in southwest namibia : some observations on the site and its rock art , '' the south african archaeological bulletin 61 , no . 183 ( 2006 ) , pp . 76-89 ralf vogelsang , “ the rock-shelter “ apollo 11 ” - evidence of early modern humans in south-western namibia , ” in heritage and cultures in modern namibia - in-depth views of the country , edited by cornelia limpricht and megan biesele ( göttingen , windhoek-namibia : klaus hess publishers , 2008 ) , pp . 183-196 . w. e. wendt , “ ‘ art mobilier ' from the apollo 11 cave , south west africa : africa ’ s oldest dated works of art , ” the south african archaeological bulletin vol . 31 , no . 121/122 ( 1976 ) , pp . 5-11 .
|
that is to say , these early humans possessed the new and unique capacity for modern symbolic thought , “ the human capacity , ” long before what was previously understood . the cave stones are what archaeologists term art mobilier —small-scale prehistoric art that is moveable . but mobile art , and rock art generally , is not unique to africa .
|
anyone out there know of artists that paint in a very small `` transportable '' manner ?
|
a significant discovery approximately 25,000 years ago , in a rock shelter in the huns mountains of namibia on the southwest coast of africa ( today part of the ai-ais richtersveld transfrontier park ) , an animal was drawn in charcoal on a hand-sized slab of stone . the stone was left behind , over time becoming buried on the floor of the cave by layers of sediment and debris until 1969 when a team led by german archaeologist w.e . wendt excavated the rock shelter and found the first fragment ( above , left ) . wendt named the cave `` apollo 11 '' upon hearing on his shortwave radio of nasa ’ s successful space mission to the moon . it was more than three years later however , after a subsequent excavation , when wendt discovered the matching fragment ( above , right ) , that archaeologists and art historians began to understand the significance of the find . indirect dating techniques in total seven stone fragments of brown-grey quartzite , some of them depicting traces of animal figures drawn in charcoal , ocher , and white , were found buried in a concentrated area of the cave floor less than two meters square . while it is not possible to learn the actual date of the fragments , it is possible to estimate when the rocks were buried by radiocarbon dating the archaeological layer in which they were found . archaeologists estimate that the cave stones were buried between 25,500 and 25,300 years ago during the middle stone age period in southern africa making them , at the time of their discovery , the oldest dated art known on the african continent and among the earliest evidence of human artistic expression worldwide . while more recent discoveries of much older human artistic endeavors have corrected our understanding ( consider the 2008 discovery of a 100,000-year-old paint workshop in the blombos cave on the southern coast of africa ) , the stones remain the oldest examples of figurative art from the african continent . their discovery contributes to our conception of early humanity ’ s creative attempts , before the invention of formal writing , to express their thoughts about the world around them . the origins of art ? genetic and fossil evidence tells us that homo sapiens ( anatomically modern humans who evolved from an earlier species of hominids ) developed on the continent of africa more than 100,000 years ago and spread throughout the world . but what we do not know—what we have only been able to assume—is that art too began in africa . is africa , where humanity originated , home to the world ’ s oldest art ? if so , can we say that art began in africa ? 100,000 years of human occupation the apollo 11 rock shelter overlooks a dry gorge , sitting twenty meters above what was once a river that ran along the valley floor . the cave entrance is wide , about twenty-eight meters across , and the cave itself is deep : eleven meters from front to back . while today a person can stand upright only in the front section of the cave , during the middle stone age , as well as in the periods before and after , the rock shelter was an active site of ongoing human settlement . inside the cave , above and below the layer where the apollo 11 cave stones were found , archaeologists unearthed a sequence of cultural layers representing over 100,000 years of human occupation . in these layers stone artifacts , typical of the middle stone age period—such as blades , pointed flakes , and scraper—were found in raw materials not native to the region , signaling stone tool technology transported over long distances . among the remnants of hearths , ostrich eggshell fragments bearing traces of red color were also found—either remnants of ornamental painting or evidence that the eggshells were used as containers for pigment . on the cave walls , belonging to the later stone age period , rock paintings were discovered depicting white and red zigzags , two handprints , three geometric images , and traces of color . and on the banks of the riverbed just upstream from the cave , engravings of a variety of animals , some with zigzag lines leading upwards , were found and dated to less than 2000 years ago . the apollo 11 cave stones but the most well-known of the rock shelter ’ s finds , and the most enigmatic , remain the apollo 11 cave stones ( image above ) . on the cleavage face of what was once a complete slab , an unidentified animal form was drawn resembling a feline in appearance but with human hind legs that were probably added later . barely visible on the head of the animal are two slightly-curved horns likely belonging to an oryx , a large grazing antelope ; on the animal ’ s underbelly , possibly the sexual organ of a bovid . perhaps we have some kind of supernatural creature—a therianthrope , part human and part animal ? if so , this may suggest a complex system of shamanistic belief . taken together with the later rock paintings and the engravings , apollo 11 becomes more than just a cave offering shelter from the elements . it becomes a site of ritual significance used by many over thousands of years . the global origins of art in the middle stone age period in southern africa prehistoric man was a hunter-gatherer , moving from place to place in search of food and shelter . but this modern human also drew an animal form with charcoal—a form as much imagined as it was observed . this is what makes the apollo 11 cave stones find so interesting : the stones offer evidence that homo sapiens in the middle stone age—us , some 25,000 years ago—were not only anatomically modern , but behaviorally modern as well . that is to say , these early humans possessed the new and unique capacity for modern symbolic thought , “ the human capacity , ” long before what was previously understood . the cave stones are what archaeologists term art mobilier —small-scale prehistoric art that is moveable . but mobile art , and rock art generally , is not unique to africa . rock art is a global phenomenon that can be found across the world—in europe , asia , australia , and north and south america . while we can not know for certain what these early humans intended by the things that they made , by focusing on art as the product of humanity ’ s creativity and imagination we can begin to explore where , and hypothesize why , art began . essay by nathalie hager additional resources : introduction to prehistoric art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history apollo 11 and wonderwerk cave stones on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history african rock art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history '' africa : continent of origins , '' lecture was delivered by dr. ian tattersall at the metropolitan museum of art on the occasion of the symposium `` genesis : exploration of origins '' on march 7 , 2003 '' homo sapiens , '' from becoming human british museum – rock art and the origins of art in africa namibia from the tara , the trust for african rock art bradshaw foundation – africa rock art archive john masson , “ apollo 11 cave in southwest namibia : some observations on the site and its rock art , '' the south african archaeological bulletin 61 , no . 183 ( 2006 ) , pp . 76-89 ralf vogelsang , “ the rock-shelter “ apollo 11 ” - evidence of early modern humans in south-western namibia , ” in heritage and cultures in modern namibia - in-depth views of the country , edited by cornelia limpricht and megan biesele ( göttingen , windhoek-namibia : klaus hess publishers , 2008 ) , pp . 183-196 . w. e. wendt , “ ‘ art mobilier ' from the apollo 11 cave , south west africa : africa ’ s oldest dated works of art , ” the south african archaeological bulletin vol . 31 , no . 121/122 ( 1976 ) , pp . 5-11 .
|
a significant discovery approximately 25,000 years ago , in a rock shelter in the huns mountains of namibia on the southwest coast of africa ( today part of the ai-ais richtersveld transfrontier park ) , an animal was drawn in charcoal on a hand-sized slab of stone . the stone was left behind , over time becoming buried on the floor of the cave by layers of sediment and debris until 1969 when a team led by german archaeologist w.e .
|
huns mountains larger than the grand canyon ?
|
a significant discovery approximately 25,000 years ago , in a rock shelter in the huns mountains of namibia on the southwest coast of africa ( today part of the ai-ais richtersveld transfrontier park ) , an animal was drawn in charcoal on a hand-sized slab of stone . the stone was left behind , over time becoming buried on the floor of the cave by layers of sediment and debris until 1969 when a team led by german archaeologist w.e . wendt excavated the rock shelter and found the first fragment ( above , left ) . wendt named the cave `` apollo 11 '' upon hearing on his shortwave radio of nasa ’ s successful space mission to the moon . it was more than three years later however , after a subsequent excavation , when wendt discovered the matching fragment ( above , right ) , that archaeologists and art historians began to understand the significance of the find . indirect dating techniques in total seven stone fragments of brown-grey quartzite , some of them depicting traces of animal figures drawn in charcoal , ocher , and white , were found buried in a concentrated area of the cave floor less than two meters square . while it is not possible to learn the actual date of the fragments , it is possible to estimate when the rocks were buried by radiocarbon dating the archaeological layer in which they were found . archaeologists estimate that the cave stones were buried between 25,500 and 25,300 years ago during the middle stone age period in southern africa making them , at the time of their discovery , the oldest dated art known on the african continent and among the earliest evidence of human artistic expression worldwide . while more recent discoveries of much older human artistic endeavors have corrected our understanding ( consider the 2008 discovery of a 100,000-year-old paint workshop in the blombos cave on the southern coast of africa ) , the stones remain the oldest examples of figurative art from the african continent . their discovery contributes to our conception of early humanity ’ s creative attempts , before the invention of formal writing , to express their thoughts about the world around them . the origins of art ? genetic and fossil evidence tells us that homo sapiens ( anatomically modern humans who evolved from an earlier species of hominids ) developed on the continent of africa more than 100,000 years ago and spread throughout the world . but what we do not know—what we have only been able to assume—is that art too began in africa . is africa , where humanity originated , home to the world ’ s oldest art ? if so , can we say that art began in africa ? 100,000 years of human occupation the apollo 11 rock shelter overlooks a dry gorge , sitting twenty meters above what was once a river that ran along the valley floor . the cave entrance is wide , about twenty-eight meters across , and the cave itself is deep : eleven meters from front to back . while today a person can stand upright only in the front section of the cave , during the middle stone age , as well as in the periods before and after , the rock shelter was an active site of ongoing human settlement . inside the cave , above and below the layer where the apollo 11 cave stones were found , archaeologists unearthed a sequence of cultural layers representing over 100,000 years of human occupation . in these layers stone artifacts , typical of the middle stone age period—such as blades , pointed flakes , and scraper—were found in raw materials not native to the region , signaling stone tool technology transported over long distances . among the remnants of hearths , ostrich eggshell fragments bearing traces of red color were also found—either remnants of ornamental painting or evidence that the eggshells were used as containers for pigment . on the cave walls , belonging to the later stone age period , rock paintings were discovered depicting white and red zigzags , two handprints , three geometric images , and traces of color . and on the banks of the riverbed just upstream from the cave , engravings of a variety of animals , some with zigzag lines leading upwards , were found and dated to less than 2000 years ago . the apollo 11 cave stones but the most well-known of the rock shelter ’ s finds , and the most enigmatic , remain the apollo 11 cave stones ( image above ) . on the cleavage face of what was once a complete slab , an unidentified animal form was drawn resembling a feline in appearance but with human hind legs that were probably added later . barely visible on the head of the animal are two slightly-curved horns likely belonging to an oryx , a large grazing antelope ; on the animal ’ s underbelly , possibly the sexual organ of a bovid . perhaps we have some kind of supernatural creature—a therianthrope , part human and part animal ? if so , this may suggest a complex system of shamanistic belief . taken together with the later rock paintings and the engravings , apollo 11 becomes more than just a cave offering shelter from the elements . it becomes a site of ritual significance used by many over thousands of years . the global origins of art in the middle stone age period in southern africa prehistoric man was a hunter-gatherer , moving from place to place in search of food and shelter . but this modern human also drew an animal form with charcoal—a form as much imagined as it was observed . this is what makes the apollo 11 cave stones find so interesting : the stones offer evidence that homo sapiens in the middle stone age—us , some 25,000 years ago—were not only anatomically modern , but behaviorally modern as well . that is to say , these early humans possessed the new and unique capacity for modern symbolic thought , “ the human capacity , ” long before what was previously understood . the cave stones are what archaeologists term art mobilier —small-scale prehistoric art that is moveable . but mobile art , and rock art generally , is not unique to africa . rock art is a global phenomenon that can be found across the world—in europe , asia , australia , and north and south america . while we can not know for certain what these early humans intended by the things that they made , by focusing on art as the product of humanity ’ s creativity and imagination we can begin to explore where , and hypothesize why , art began . essay by nathalie hager additional resources : introduction to prehistoric art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history apollo 11 and wonderwerk cave stones on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history african rock art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history '' africa : continent of origins , '' lecture was delivered by dr. ian tattersall at the metropolitan museum of art on the occasion of the symposium `` genesis : exploration of origins '' on march 7 , 2003 '' homo sapiens , '' from becoming human british museum – rock art and the origins of art in africa namibia from the tara , the trust for african rock art bradshaw foundation – africa rock art archive john masson , “ apollo 11 cave in southwest namibia : some observations on the site and its rock art , '' the south african archaeological bulletin 61 , no . 183 ( 2006 ) , pp . 76-89 ralf vogelsang , “ the rock-shelter “ apollo 11 ” - evidence of early modern humans in south-western namibia , ” in heritage and cultures in modern namibia - in-depth views of the country , edited by cornelia limpricht and megan biesele ( göttingen , windhoek-namibia : klaus hess publishers , 2008 ) , pp . 183-196 . w. e. wendt , “ ‘ art mobilier ' from the apollo 11 cave , south west africa : africa ’ s oldest dated works of art , ” the south african archaeological bulletin vol . 31 , no . 121/122 ( 1976 ) , pp . 5-11 .
|
inside the cave , above and below the layer where the apollo 11 cave stones were found , archaeologists unearthed a sequence of cultural layers representing over 100,000 years of human occupation . in these layers stone artifacts , typical of the middle stone age period—such as blades , pointed flakes , and scraper—were found in raw materials not native to the region , signaling stone tool technology transported over long distances . among the remnants of hearths , ostrich eggshell fragments bearing traces of red color were also found—either remnants of ornamental painting or evidence that the eggshells were used as containers for pigment .
|
how did the animals get on the stone ?
|
a significant discovery approximately 25,000 years ago , in a rock shelter in the huns mountains of namibia on the southwest coast of africa ( today part of the ai-ais richtersveld transfrontier park ) , an animal was drawn in charcoal on a hand-sized slab of stone . the stone was left behind , over time becoming buried on the floor of the cave by layers of sediment and debris until 1969 when a team led by german archaeologist w.e . wendt excavated the rock shelter and found the first fragment ( above , left ) . wendt named the cave `` apollo 11 '' upon hearing on his shortwave radio of nasa ’ s successful space mission to the moon . it was more than three years later however , after a subsequent excavation , when wendt discovered the matching fragment ( above , right ) , that archaeologists and art historians began to understand the significance of the find . indirect dating techniques in total seven stone fragments of brown-grey quartzite , some of them depicting traces of animal figures drawn in charcoal , ocher , and white , were found buried in a concentrated area of the cave floor less than two meters square . while it is not possible to learn the actual date of the fragments , it is possible to estimate when the rocks were buried by radiocarbon dating the archaeological layer in which they were found . archaeologists estimate that the cave stones were buried between 25,500 and 25,300 years ago during the middle stone age period in southern africa making them , at the time of their discovery , the oldest dated art known on the african continent and among the earliest evidence of human artistic expression worldwide . while more recent discoveries of much older human artistic endeavors have corrected our understanding ( consider the 2008 discovery of a 100,000-year-old paint workshop in the blombos cave on the southern coast of africa ) , the stones remain the oldest examples of figurative art from the african continent . their discovery contributes to our conception of early humanity ’ s creative attempts , before the invention of formal writing , to express their thoughts about the world around them . the origins of art ? genetic and fossil evidence tells us that homo sapiens ( anatomically modern humans who evolved from an earlier species of hominids ) developed on the continent of africa more than 100,000 years ago and spread throughout the world . but what we do not know—what we have only been able to assume—is that art too began in africa . is africa , where humanity originated , home to the world ’ s oldest art ? if so , can we say that art began in africa ? 100,000 years of human occupation the apollo 11 rock shelter overlooks a dry gorge , sitting twenty meters above what was once a river that ran along the valley floor . the cave entrance is wide , about twenty-eight meters across , and the cave itself is deep : eleven meters from front to back . while today a person can stand upright only in the front section of the cave , during the middle stone age , as well as in the periods before and after , the rock shelter was an active site of ongoing human settlement . inside the cave , above and below the layer where the apollo 11 cave stones were found , archaeologists unearthed a sequence of cultural layers representing over 100,000 years of human occupation . in these layers stone artifacts , typical of the middle stone age period—such as blades , pointed flakes , and scraper—were found in raw materials not native to the region , signaling stone tool technology transported over long distances . among the remnants of hearths , ostrich eggshell fragments bearing traces of red color were also found—either remnants of ornamental painting or evidence that the eggshells were used as containers for pigment . on the cave walls , belonging to the later stone age period , rock paintings were discovered depicting white and red zigzags , two handprints , three geometric images , and traces of color . and on the banks of the riverbed just upstream from the cave , engravings of a variety of animals , some with zigzag lines leading upwards , were found and dated to less than 2000 years ago . the apollo 11 cave stones but the most well-known of the rock shelter ’ s finds , and the most enigmatic , remain the apollo 11 cave stones ( image above ) . on the cleavage face of what was once a complete slab , an unidentified animal form was drawn resembling a feline in appearance but with human hind legs that were probably added later . barely visible on the head of the animal are two slightly-curved horns likely belonging to an oryx , a large grazing antelope ; on the animal ’ s underbelly , possibly the sexual organ of a bovid . perhaps we have some kind of supernatural creature—a therianthrope , part human and part animal ? if so , this may suggest a complex system of shamanistic belief . taken together with the later rock paintings and the engravings , apollo 11 becomes more than just a cave offering shelter from the elements . it becomes a site of ritual significance used by many over thousands of years . the global origins of art in the middle stone age period in southern africa prehistoric man was a hunter-gatherer , moving from place to place in search of food and shelter . but this modern human also drew an animal form with charcoal—a form as much imagined as it was observed . this is what makes the apollo 11 cave stones find so interesting : the stones offer evidence that homo sapiens in the middle stone age—us , some 25,000 years ago—were not only anatomically modern , but behaviorally modern as well . that is to say , these early humans possessed the new and unique capacity for modern symbolic thought , “ the human capacity , ” long before what was previously understood . the cave stones are what archaeologists term art mobilier —small-scale prehistoric art that is moveable . but mobile art , and rock art generally , is not unique to africa . rock art is a global phenomenon that can be found across the world—in europe , asia , australia , and north and south america . while we can not know for certain what these early humans intended by the things that they made , by focusing on art as the product of humanity ’ s creativity and imagination we can begin to explore where , and hypothesize why , art began . essay by nathalie hager additional resources : introduction to prehistoric art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history apollo 11 and wonderwerk cave stones on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history african rock art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history '' africa : continent of origins , '' lecture was delivered by dr. ian tattersall at the metropolitan museum of art on the occasion of the symposium `` genesis : exploration of origins '' on march 7 , 2003 '' homo sapiens , '' from becoming human british museum – rock art and the origins of art in africa namibia from the tara , the trust for african rock art bradshaw foundation – africa rock art archive john masson , “ apollo 11 cave in southwest namibia : some observations on the site and its rock art , '' the south african archaeological bulletin 61 , no . 183 ( 2006 ) , pp . 76-89 ralf vogelsang , “ the rock-shelter “ apollo 11 ” - evidence of early modern humans in south-western namibia , ” in heritage and cultures in modern namibia - in-depth views of the country , edited by cornelia limpricht and megan biesele ( göttingen , windhoek-namibia : klaus hess publishers , 2008 ) , pp . 183-196 . w. e. wendt , “ ‘ art mobilier ' from the apollo 11 cave , south west africa : africa ’ s oldest dated works of art , ” the south african archaeological bulletin vol . 31 , no . 121/122 ( 1976 ) , pp . 5-11 .
|
but this modern human also drew an animal form with charcoal—a form as much imagined as it was observed . this is what makes the apollo 11 cave stones find so interesting : the stones offer evidence that homo sapiens in the middle stone age—us , some 25,000 years ago—were not only anatomically modern , but behaviorally modern as well . that is to say , these early humans possessed the new and unique capacity for modern symbolic thought , “ the human capacity , ” long before what was previously understood .
|
how big is the stones ?
|
a significant discovery approximately 25,000 years ago , in a rock shelter in the huns mountains of namibia on the southwest coast of africa ( today part of the ai-ais richtersveld transfrontier park ) , an animal was drawn in charcoal on a hand-sized slab of stone . the stone was left behind , over time becoming buried on the floor of the cave by layers of sediment and debris until 1969 when a team led by german archaeologist w.e . wendt excavated the rock shelter and found the first fragment ( above , left ) . wendt named the cave `` apollo 11 '' upon hearing on his shortwave radio of nasa ’ s successful space mission to the moon . it was more than three years later however , after a subsequent excavation , when wendt discovered the matching fragment ( above , right ) , that archaeologists and art historians began to understand the significance of the find . indirect dating techniques in total seven stone fragments of brown-grey quartzite , some of them depicting traces of animal figures drawn in charcoal , ocher , and white , were found buried in a concentrated area of the cave floor less than two meters square . while it is not possible to learn the actual date of the fragments , it is possible to estimate when the rocks were buried by radiocarbon dating the archaeological layer in which they were found . archaeologists estimate that the cave stones were buried between 25,500 and 25,300 years ago during the middle stone age period in southern africa making them , at the time of their discovery , the oldest dated art known on the african continent and among the earliest evidence of human artistic expression worldwide . while more recent discoveries of much older human artistic endeavors have corrected our understanding ( consider the 2008 discovery of a 100,000-year-old paint workshop in the blombos cave on the southern coast of africa ) , the stones remain the oldest examples of figurative art from the african continent . their discovery contributes to our conception of early humanity ’ s creative attempts , before the invention of formal writing , to express their thoughts about the world around them . the origins of art ? genetic and fossil evidence tells us that homo sapiens ( anatomically modern humans who evolved from an earlier species of hominids ) developed on the continent of africa more than 100,000 years ago and spread throughout the world . but what we do not know—what we have only been able to assume—is that art too began in africa . is africa , where humanity originated , home to the world ’ s oldest art ? if so , can we say that art began in africa ? 100,000 years of human occupation the apollo 11 rock shelter overlooks a dry gorge , sitting twenty meters above what was once a river that ran along the valley floor . the cave entrance is wide , about twenty-eight meters across , and the cave itself is deep : eleven meters from front to back . while today a person can stand upright only in the front section of the cave , during the middle stone age , as well as in the periods before and after , the rock shelter was an active site of ongoing human settlement . inside the cave , above and below the layer where the apollo 11 cave stones were found , archaeologists unearthed a sequence of cultural layers representing over 100,000 years of human occupation . in these layers stone artifacts , typical of the middle stone age period—such as blades , pointed flakes , and scraper—were found in raw materials not native to the region , signaling stone tool technology transported over long distances . among the remnants of hearths , ostrich eggshell fragments bearing traces of red color were also found—either remnants of ornamental painting or evidence that the eggshells were used as containers for pigment . on the cave walls , belonging to the later stone age period , rock paintings were discovered depicting white and red zigzags , two handprints , three geometric images , and traces of color . and on the banks of the riverbed just upstream from the cave , engravings of a variety of animals , some with zigzag lines leading upwards , were found and dated to less than 2000 years ago . the apollo 11 cave stones but the most well-known of the rock shelter ’ s finds , and the most enigmatic , remain the apollo 11 cave stones ( image above ) . on the cleavage face of what was once a complete slab , an unidentified animal form was drawn resembling a feline in appearance but with human hind legs that were probably added later . barely visible on the head of the animal are two slightly-curved horns likely belonging to an oryx , a large grazing antelope ; on the animal ’ s underbelly , possibly the sexual organ of a bovid . perhaps we have some kind of supernatural creature—a therianthrope , part human and part animal ? if so , this may suggest a complex system of shamanistic belief . taken together with the later rock paintings and the engravings , apollo 11 becomes more than just a cave offering shelter from the elements . it becomes a site of ritual significance used by many over thousands of years . the global origins of art in the middle stone age period in southern africa prehistoric man was a hunter-gatherer , moving from place to place in search of food and shelter . but this modern human also drew an animal form with charcoal—a form as much imagined as it was observed . this is what makes the apollo 11 cave stones find so interesting : the stones offer evidence that homo sapiens in the middle stone age—us , some 25,000 years ago—were not only anatomically modern , but behaviorally modern as well . that is to say , these early humans possessed the new and unique capacity for modern symbolic thought , “ the human capacity , ” long before what was previously understood . the cave stones are what archaeologists term art mobilier —small-scale prehistoric art that is moveable . but mobile art , and rock art generally , is not unique to africa . rock art is a global phenomenon that can be found across the world—in europe , asia , australia , and north and south america . while we can not know for certain what these early humans intended by the things that they made , by focusing on art as the product of humanity ’ s creativity and imagination we can begin to explore where , and hypothesize why , art began . essay by nathalie hager additional resources : introduction to prehistoric art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history apollo 11 and wonderwerk cave stones on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history african rock art on the metropolitan museum of art 's heilbrunn timeline of art history '' africa : continent of origins , '' lecture was delivered by dr. ian tattersall at the metropolitan museum of art on the occasion of the symposium `` genesis : exploration of origins '' on march 7 , 2003 '' homo sapiens , '' from becoming human british museum – rock art and the origins of art in africa namibia from the tara , the trust for african rock art bradshaw foundation – africa rock art archive john masson , “ apollo 11 cave in southwest namibia : some observations on the site and its rock art , '' the south african archaeological bulletin 61 , no . 183 ( 2006 ) , pp . 76-89 ralf vogelsang , “ the rock-shelter “ apollo 11 ” - evidence of early modern humans in south-western namibia , ” in heritage and cultures in modern namibia - in-depth views of the country , edited by cornelia limpricht and megan biesele ( göttingen , windhoek-namibia : klaus hess publishers , 2008 ) , pp . 183-196 . w. e. wendt , “ ‘ art mobilier ' from the apollo 11 cave , south west africa : africa ’ s oldest dated works of art , ” the south african archaeological bulletin vol . 31 , no . 121/122 ( 1976 ) , pp . 5-11 .
|
the stone was left behind , over time becoming buried on the floor of the cave by layers of sediment and debris until 1969 when a team led by german archaeologist w.e . wendt excavated the rock shelter and found the first fragment ( above , left ) . wendt named the cave `` apollo 11 '' upon hearing on his shortwave radio of nasa ’ s successful space mission to the moon .
|
who discover the first painting an where ?
|
what is the fundamental theorem of calculus ? the theorem has two versions . a ) $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt=f ( x ) $ we start with a continuous function $ f $ and we define a new function for the area under the curve $ y=f ( t ) $ : $ f ( x ) =\displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt $ what this version of the theorem says is that the derivative of $ f $ is $ f $ . in other words , $ f $ is an antiderivative of $ f $ . thus , the theorem relates differential and integral calculus , and tells us how we can find the area under a curve using antidifferentiation . b ) $ \displaystyle\int_a^b ! ! f ( x ) dx=f ( b ) ! - ! ! f ( a ) $ this version gives more direct instructions to finding the area under the curve $ y=f ( x ) $ between $ x=a $ and $ x=b $ . simply find an antiderivative $ f $ and take $ f ( b ) -f ( a ) $ . want to learn more about the fundamental theorem of calculus ? check out this video . practice set 1 : applying the theorem want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise . practice set 2 : applying the theorem with chain rule we can use the theorem in more hairy situations . let 's find , for example , the expression for $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . note that the interval is between $ 0 $ and $ x^3 $ , not $ x $ . to help us , we define $ \displaystyle f ( x ) = \int_ { 0 } ^ { x } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ . now we can use the chain rule : $ \begin { align } & amp ; \phantom { = } \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt \\ & amp ; =\dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =f ' ( x^3 ) \cdot\dfrac { d } { dx } ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =\sin ( x^3 ) \cdot 3x^2 \end { align } $ want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise .
|
the theorem has two versions . a ) $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt=f ( x ) $ we start with a continuous function $ f $ and we define a new function for the area under the curve $ y=f ( t ) $ : $ f ( x ) =\displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt $ what this version of the theorem says is that the derivative of $ f $ is $ f $ . in other words , $ f $ is an antiderivative of $ f $ .
|
so the derivative of an integral of a function is just the function ?
|
what is the fundamental theorem of calculus ? the theorem has two versions . a ) $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt=f ( x ) $ we start with a continuous function $ f $ and we define a new function for the area under the curve $ y=f ( t ) $ : $ f ( x ) =\displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt $ what this version of the theorem says is that the derivative of $ f $ is $ f $ . in other words , $ f $ is an antiderivative of $ f $ . thus , the theorem relates differential and integral calculus , and tells us how we can find the area under a curve using antidifferentiation . b ) $ \displaystyle\int_a^b ! ! f ( x ) dx=f ( b ) ! - ! ! f ( a ) $ this version gives more direct instructions to finding the area under the curve $ y=f ( x ) $ between $ x=a $ and $ x=b $ . simply find an antiderivative $ f $ and take $ f ( b ) -f ( a ) $ . want to learn more about the fundamental theorem of calculus ? check out this video . practice set 1 : applying the theorem want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise . practice set 2 : applying the theorem with chain rule we can use the theorem in more hairy situations . let 's find , for example , the expression for $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . note that the interval is between $ 0 $ and $ x^3 $ , not $ x $ . to help us , we define $ \displaystyle f ( x ) = \int_ { 0 } ^ { x } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ . now we can use the chain rule : $ \begin { align } & amp ; \phantom { = } \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt \\ & amp ; =\dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =f ' ( x^3 ) \cdot\dfrac { d } { dx } ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =\sin ( x^3 ) \cdot 3x^2 \end { align } $ want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise .
|
let 's find , for example , the expression for $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . note that the interval is between $ 0 $ and $ x^3 $ , not $ x $ . to help us , we define $ \displaystyle f ( x ) = \int_ { 0 } ^ { x } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ .
|
but the difference is if x matters since the part being cut is constantly being increase as x increases and the functions derivative is the same as the function being measured ?
|
what is the fundamental theorem of calculus ? the theorem has two versions . a ) $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt=f ( x ) $ we start with a continuous function $ f $ and we define a new function for the area under the curve $ y=f ( t ) $ : $ f ( x ) =\displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt $ what this version of the theorem says is that the derivative of $ f $ is $ f $ . in other words , $ f $ is an antiderivative of $ f $ . thus , the theorem relates differential and integral calculus , and tells us how we can find the area under a curve using antidifferentiation . b ) $ \displaystyle\int_a^b ! ! f ( x ) dx=f ( b ) ! - ! ! f ( a ) $ this version gives more direct instructions to finding the area under the curve $ y=f ( x ) $ between $ x=a $ and $ x=b $ . simply find an antiderivative $ f $ and take $ f ( b ) -f ( a ) $ . want to learn more about the fundamental theorem of calculus ? check out this video . practice set 1 : applying the theorem want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise . practice set 2 : applying the theorem with chain rule we can use the theorem in more hairy situations . let 's find , for example , the expression for $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . note that the interval is between $ 0 $ and $ x^3 $ , not $ x $ . to help us , we define $ \displaystyle f ( x ) = \int_ { 0 } ^ { x } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ . now we can use the chain rule : $ \begin { align } & amp ; \phantom { = } \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt \\ & amp ; =\dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =f ' ( x^3 ) \cdot\dfrac { d } { dx } ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =\sin ( x^3 ) \cdot 3x^2 \end { align } $ want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise .
|
what is the fundamental theorem of calculus ? the theorem has two versions .
|
why is there no +c ?
|
what is the fundamental theorem of calculus ? the theorem has two versions . a ) $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt=f ( x ) $ we start with a continuous function $ f $ and we define a new function for the area under the curve $ y=f ( t ) $ : $ f ( x ) =\displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt $ what this version of the theorem says is that the derivative of $ f $ is $ f $ . in other words , $ f $ is an antiderivative of $ f $ . thus , the theorem relates differential and integral calculus , and tells us how we can find the area under a curve using antidifferentiation . b ) $ \displaystyle\int_a^b ! ! f ( x ) dx=f ( b ) ! - ! ! f ( a ) $ this version gives more direct instructions to finding the area under the curve $ y=f ( x ) $ between $ x=a $ and $ x=b $ . simply find an antiderivative $ f $ and take $ f ( b ) -f ( a ) $ . want to learn more about the fundamental theorem of calculus ? check out this video . practice set 1 : applying the theorem want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise . practice set 2 : applying the theorem with chain rule we can use the theorem in more hairy situations . let 's find , for example , the expression for $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . note that the interval is between $ 0 $ and $ x^3 $ , not $ x $ . to help us , we define $ \displaystyle f ( x ) = \int_ { 0 } ^ { x } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ . now we can use the chain rule : $ \begin { align } & amp ; \phantom { = } \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt \\ & amp ; =\dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =f ' ( x^3 ) \cdot\dfrac { d } { dx } ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =\sin ( x^3 ) \cdot 3x^2 \end { align } $ want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise .
|
in other words , $ f $ is an antiderivative of $ f $ . thus , the theorem relates differential and integral calculus , and tells us how we can find the area under a curve using antidifferentiation . b ) $ \displaystyle\int_a^b ! !
|
so is the derivative the inverse of the integral ?
|
what is the fundamental theorem of calculus ? the theorem has two versions . a ) $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt=f ( x ) $ we start with a continuous function $ f $ and we define a new function for the area under the curve $ y=f ( t ) $ : $ f ( x ) =\displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt $ what this version of the theorem says is that the derivative of $ f $ is $ f $ . in other words , $ f $ is an antiderivative of $ f $ . thus , the theorem relates differential and integral calculus , and tells us how we can find the area under a curve using antidifferentiation . b ) $ \displaystyle\int_a^b ! ! f ( x ) dx=f ( b ) ! - ! ! f ( a ) $ this version gives more direct instructions to finding the area under the curve $ y=f ( x ) $ between $ x=a $ and $ x=b $ . simply find an antiderivative $ f $ and take $ f ( b ) -f ( a ) $ . want to learn more about the fundamental theorem of calculus ? check out this video . practice set 1 : applying the theorem want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise . practice set 2 : applying the theorem with chain rule we can use the theorem in more hairy situations . let 's find , for example , the expression for $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . note that the interval is between $ 0 $ and $ x^3 $ , not $ x $ . to help us , we define $ \displaystyle f ( x ) = \int_ { 0 } ^ { x } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ . now we can use the chain rule : $ \begin { align } & amp ; \phantom { = } \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt \\ & amp ; =\dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =f ' ( x^3 ) \cdot\dfrac { d } { dx } ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =\sin ( x^3 ) \cdot 3x^2 \end { align } $ want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise .
|
according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ . now we can use the chain rule : $ \begin { align } & amp ; \phantom { = } \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt \\ & amp ; =\dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =f ' ( x^3 ) \cdot\dfrac { d } { dx } ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =\sin ( x^3 ) \cdot 3x^2 \end { align } $ want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise .
|
( x^3 ) ' what 's the difference between d/dx and ' ?
|
what is the fundamental theorem of calculus ? the theorem has two versions . a ) $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt=f ( x ) $ we start with a continuous function $ f $ and we define a new function for the area under the curve $ y=f ( t ) $ : $ f ( x ) =\displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt $ what this version of the theorem says is that the derivative of $ f $ is $ f $ . in other words , $ f $ is an antiderivative of $ f $ . thus , the theorem relates differential and integral calculus , and tells us how we can find the area under a curve using antidifferentiation . b ) $ \displaystyle\int_a^b ! ! f ( x ) dx=f ( b ) ! - ! ! f ( a ) $ this version gives more direct instructions to finding the area under the curve $ y=f ( x ) $ between $ x=a $ and $ x=b $ . simply find an antiderivative $ f $ and take $ f ( b ) -f ( a ) $ . want to learn more about the fundamental theorem of calculus ? check out this video . practice set 1 : applying the theorem want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise . practice set 2 : applying the theorem with chain rule we can use the theorem in more hairy situations . let 's find , for example , the expression for $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . note that the interval is between $ 0 $ and $ x^3 $ , not $ x $ . to help us , we define $ \displaystyle f ( x ) = \int_ { 0 } ^ { x } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ . now we can use the chain rule : $ \begin { align } & amp ; \phantom { = } \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt \\ & amp ; =\dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =f ' ( x^3 ) \cdot\dfrac { d } { dx } ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =\sin ( x^3 ) \cdot 3x^2 \end { align } $ want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise .
|
to help us , we define $ \displaystyle f ( x ) = \int_ { 0 } ^ { x } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ .
|
is f ( x ) in the first version of the fundamental theorem of calculus the antiderivative of 'f ' ?
|
what is the fundamental theorem of calculus ? the theorem has two versions . a ) $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt=f ( x ) $ we start with a continuous function $ f $ and we define a new function for the area under the curve $ y=f ( t ) $ : $ f ( x ) =\displaystyle\int_a^x f ( t ) \ , dt $ what this version of the theorem says is that the derivative of $ f $ is $ f $ . in other words , $ f $ is an antiderivative of $ f $ . thus , the theorem relates differential and integral calculus , and tells us how we can find the area under a curve using antidifferentiation . b ) $ \displaystyle\int_a^b ! ! f ( x ) dx=f ( b ) ! - ! ! f ( a ) $ this version gives more direct instructions to finding the area under the curve $ y=f ( x ) $ between $ x=a $ and $ x=b $ . simply find an antiderivative $ f $ and take $ f ( b ) -f ( a ) $ . want to learn more about the fundamental theorem of calculus ? check out this video . practice set 1 : applying the theorem want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise . practice set 2 : applying the theorem with chain rule we can use the theorem in more hairy situations . let 's find , for example , the expression for $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . note that the interval is between $ 0 $ and $ x^3 $ , not $ x $ . to help us , we define $ \displaystyle f ( x ) = \int_ { 0 } ^ { x } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ . now we can use the chain rule : $ \begin { align } & amp ; \phantom { = } \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt \\ & amp ; =\dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =f ' ( x^3 ) \cdot\dfrac { d } { dx } ( x^3 ) \\ & amp ; =\sin ( x^3 ) \cdot 3x^2 \end { align } $ want to try more problems like this ? check out this exercise .
|
to help us , we define $ \displaystyle f ( x ) = \int_ { 0 } ^ { x } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ . according to the fundamental theorem of calculus , $ f ' ( x ) =\sin ( x ) $ . it follows from our definition that $ \displaystyle\int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ f ( x^3 ) $ , which means that $ \dfrac { d } { dx } \displaystyle \int_ { 0 } ^ { x^3 } \sin ( t ) \ , dt $ is $ \dfrac { d } { dx } f ( x^3 ) $ .
|
is f ( x ) in the first version of the fundamental theorem of calculus the antiderivative of 'f ' ?
|
the evolution of cubism beginning in 1908 , and continuing through the first few months of 1912 , braque and picasso co-invent the first phase of cubism . since it is dominated by the analysis of form , this first stage is usually referred to as analytic cubism . but then during the summer of 1912 , braque leaves paris to take a holiday in provence . during his time there , he wanders into a hardware store , and there he finds a roll of oil cloth . oil cloth is an early version of contact paper , the vinyl adhesive used to line the shelves or drawers in a cupboard . then , as now , these materials come in a variety of pre-printed patterns . braque purchased some oil cloth printed with a fake wood grain . that particular pattern drew his attention because he was at work on a cubist drawing of a guitar , and he was about to render the grain of the wood in pencil . instead , he cut the oil cloth and pasted a piece of the factory-printed grain pattern right into his drawing . with this collage , braque changed the direction of art for the next ninety years . collage as you might expect , picasso was not far behind braque . picasso immediately begins to create collage with oil cloth as well—and adds other elements to the mix ( but remember , it was really braque who introduced collage—he never gets enough credit ) . so what is the big deal ? oil cloth , collage , wood grain patterns—what does this have to do with art and cubism ? one of the keys to understanding the importance of cubism , of picasso and braque , is to consider their actions and how unusual they were for the time . when braque , and then picasso placed industrially-produced objects ( `` low '' commercial culture ) into the realm of fine art ( `` high '' culture ) they acted as artistic iconoclasts ( icon=image/clast=destroyer ) . moreover , they questioned the elitism of the art world , which had always dictated the separation of common , everyday experience from the rarefied , contemplative realm of artistic creation . of equal importance , their work highlighted—and separated—the role of technical skill from art-making . braque and picasso introduced a “ fake ” element on purpose , not to mislead or fool their audience , but rather to force a discussion of art and craft , of high and low , of unique and mass-produced objects . they ask : “ can this object still be art if i don ’ t actually render its forms myself , if the quality of the art is no longer directly tied to my technical skills or level of craftsmanship ? '' still-life with chair caning virtually all avant-garde art of the second half of the twentieth century is indebted to this brave renunciation . but that does n't make this kind of cubism , often called synthetic cubism ( piecing together , or synthesis of form ) , any easier to interpret . at first glance , picasso 's still-life with chair caning of 1912 might seem a mish-mash of forms instead of clear picture . but we can understand the image—and other like it—by breaking down cubist pictorial language into parts . let ’ s start at the upper right : almost at the edge of the canvas ( at two o ’ clock ) there is the handle of a knife . follow it to the left to find the blade . the knife cuts a piece of citrus fruit . you can make out the rind and the segments of the slice at the bottom right corner of the blade . below the fruit , which is probably a lemon , is the white , scalloped edge of a napkin . to the left of these things and standing vertically in the top center of the canvas ( twelve o ’ clock ) is a wine glass . it ’ s hard to see at first , so look carefully . just at the top edge of the chair caning is the glass ’ s base , above it is the stem ( thicker than you might expect ) , and then the bowl of the glass . it is difficult to find the forms you would expect because picasso depicts the glass from more than one angle . at eleven o ’ clock is the famous “ jou , ” which means `` game '' in french , but also the first three letters of the french word for newspaper ( or more literally , `` daily '' ; journal=daily ) . in fact , you can make out the bulk of the folded paper quite clearly . don ’ t be confused by the pipe that lays across the newspaper . do you see its stem and bowl ? looking down and looking through but there are still big questions : why the chair caning , what is the gray diagonal at the bottom of the glass , and why the rope frame ? ( think of a ship 's port hole . the port hole reference is an important clue . ) also , why don ’ t the letters sit better on the newspaper ? finally , why is the canvas oval ? it has already been determined that this still life is composed of a sliced lemon , a glass , newspaper , and a pipe . perhaps this is a breakfast setting , with a citron pressé ( french lemonade ) . in any case , these items are arranged upon a glass tabletop . you can see the reflection of the glass . in fact , the glass allows us to see below the table ’ s surface , which is how we see the chair caning—which represents the seat tucked in below the table . okay , so far so good . but why is the table elliptical in shape ? this appears to be a café table , which are round or square but never oval . yet , when we look at a circular table , we never see it from directly above . instead , we see it at an angle , and it appears elliptical in shape as we approach the table to sit down . but what about the rope , which was not mass-produced , nor made by picasso , but rather something made especially for this painting ? we can view it as the bumper of a table , as it was used in some cafés , or as the frame of a ship 's port hole , which we can look `` through , '' to see the objects represented . the rope 's simultaneous horizontal and vertical orientation creates a way for the viewer ( us ) to read the image in two ways—looking down and looking through/across . put simply , picasso wants us to remember that the painting is something different from that which it represents . or as gertrude stein said , “ a rose is a rose is a rose. ” essay by dr. beth harris and dr. steven zucker
|
put simply , picasso wants us to remember that the painting is something different from that which it represents . or as gertrude stein said , “ a rose is a rose is a rose. ” essay by dr. beth harris and dr. steven zucker
|
is the author of this article saying that , to picasso , the painting is not the represented item , and so a paining of a rose is not a rose , and as gertrude stein said , the thing ( a rose ) is just a thing , not a representation of something else ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ?
|
why do we say `` i am 70 kilograms '' then if weight has units of newton and mass has units of kg ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ .
|
how do we define how much is a kilogram , or a pound , etc ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass .
|
when i step on a scale , does it measure my weight or mass ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ .
|
would an astronaut who jumps out of the iss fall down to earth ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ?
|
and do the pods that bring astronauts back from iss missions need an engine for acceleration ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward .
|
my question related to the value of force of gravity is how do we know whether to take -9.8m/s2 or +9.8m/s2 ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ .
|
why does free fall create weightlessness ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e .
|
what makes the gravitational force fall off if the gravity exerted by earth is infinite in range ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) .
|
would saying that mass is the amount of matter in an object as accurate as the above definition ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ?
|
whats the point of the 6700 n force of the thrusters and 4300 n of the air resistance have to do with problem 1 ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ .
|
what does `` free fall orbit '' mean ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward .
|
what is the difference between balanced and unbalanced force ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight .
|
why do we feel weightlessness in space station ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ .
|
if force is equal to mass times acceleration , how does anything resting on the surface of the earth have downward force ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight .
|
in the explanation for `` what if we go outer space ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ .
|
`` , does this mean that earth is also affected by forces of gravity of other planets ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ?
|
my science teacher had a weird explanation but i 'm sure this is n't possible as the friction has to be opposite to the direction because of the third law ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward .
|
is the normalforce the same as the force counteracting from newtons third law ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward .
|
should n't weight be negative since the acceleration due to gravity is negative and weight is a force downward ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward .
|
if the weighing machine show reading as 70kg or to be more precise 70n as my mass then as the force of gravity is present wouldnt it be my weight and or is the actual reading over g is shown in the scale ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ .
|
in example 1 , i know that air resistance is negligible for the question asked , but in what direction would it be acting in ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward .
|
how the absence of any forces but gravity leads to weightlessness ( especially when force gravity is the weight ) ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward .
|
how is weight the same thing as the force of gravity ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ .
|
all the people express their weights in kilograms.why ca n't we express our weight in newtons ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e .
|
and is normal and gravitational force always equal to each other ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth .
|
if weight is a gravitational force that acts at all times , then is there a way to stop it from acting ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass .
|
how weight varies from place to place but mass never varies ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ?
|
why do we say `` i am 120 kilograms '' then if weight has units of newton and mass has units of kg ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon .
|
why does the force of gravity decrease as an object moves further away from the earth 's surface ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects .
|
then why do we say that acceleration produced due to gravity on the surface of earth is 9.8m/s^2 ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e .
|
is weight the downward force of an object specifically based on its gravity and mass ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward .
|
or is weight the downward net force affected by gravity ?
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ . weight is a force that acts at all times on all objects near earth . the earth pulls on all objects with a force of gravity downward toward the center of the earth . the magnitude of the force of gravity can be found by multiplying the mass $ m $ of the object by the magnitude of the acceleration due to gravity $ g=+9.8 \dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } $ . this force of gravity $ f_g=mg $ ( or `` weight '' ) is exerted on all objects by the earth regardless of which way those objects are moving , and what other forces are exerted on the objects . in other words , there will be a gravitational force of magnitude $ mg $ exerted downward on all objects near the earth whether they are falling down , flying up at an angle , sitting at rest on a table , or accelerating upward in an elevator . there may be other forces that contribute to the acceleration of the object , but the force of gravity is always present . is weight different from mass ? yes , weight is different from mass . weight $ w $ is the force of gravity $ f_g $ exerted on an object . mass $ m $ is a measure of the inertia of the object ( i.e . how much it resists changes in velocity ) . they are related since larger masses will have larger weights due to $ w=mg $ . for example , a mass of $ 2\text { kg } $ will have a weight of magnitude $ w= ( 2\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text m } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =19.6\text { n } $ . the weight of an object will change if the object is brought farther away from earth , or placed on a different planet , since the force of gravity on the object will be smaller . however the mass of the object will remain the same regardless of whether the object is on earth , in outer space , or on the moon . many people confuse mass with weight . keep in mind that mass has units of $ \text { kg } $ , but since weight is a force it has units of $ \text { n } $ . what do examples involving weight ( force of gravity ) look like ? example 1 : airplane weight an airplane of mass $ 4,500 \text { kg } $ is taking off , flying through the air accelerating forward and upward . there is a thruster force of $ 6,700\text { n } $ on the plane in the direction of motion and an air resistance force of $ 4,300 \text { n } $ . what is the force of gravity on the airplane during takeoff ? the force of gravity is always nothing more nor less than $ mg $ regardless of any other forces or accelerations involved . so we can find the force of gravity on the plane ( i.e . weight ) by simply using , $ f_g=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ f_g= ( 4,500\text { kg } ) ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) =44,100 \text { n } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate ) } $ example 2 : finding mass an african forest elephant has a weight of $ 25,000 \text { n } $ . what is the mass of the african forest elephant ? weight is another word for the force of gravity $ mg $ . we can solve for the mass using the formula $ w=f_g=mg. $ $ w=mg \quad \text { ( use the formula for weight ) } $ $ 25,000\text { n } =m ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) \quad \text { ( plug in values for weight and g ) } $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } \quad \text { ( solve for mass } m ) $ $ m=\dfrac { 25,000\text { n } } { ( 9.8\dfrac { \text { m } } { \text { s } ^2 } ) } =2,551 \text { kg } \quad \text { ( calculate and celebrate } ) $
|
what is weight ? weight $ w $ is just another word for the force of gravity $ f_g $ .
|
is the `` lighter '' force your weight or is your weight still 98n despite being in water ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) .
|
what is diastolic and systolic blood pressure ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin .
|
is there a circumstance where the lung capillaries would be exposed to such high pressure that they burst , causing blood to enter the lungs ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen .
|
a little off topic , but , how can you figure the blood in the body is blue before it hits o2 ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well .
|
and how does the o2 change the color to red ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) .
|
how much blood is in the lungs getting oxygenated ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart .
|
does blood go from the right ventricle pump , then into the lungs pump , then into the left atrium pump , then into the aorta ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle .
|
what i 'm trying to ask is how long the blood is in the lungs before it gets pumped back into the heart for distribution ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins .
|
what does the symbol ~ mean before numbers ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ?
|
also , if we have to have a four chambered heart , how are amphibians able to get by with a three chambered heart ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) .
|
how long does it take for the heart to pump all the blood in your body ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ?
|
if the heart stops beating how many seconds would cells stay alive without oxygen ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ?
|
why do we need atriums ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen .
|
could n't the blood flow directly into the ventricles ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body .
|
what can i compare a 5 mmhg and 120 mmhg pressure to ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 .
|
the pressure of a car on your foot ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs .
|
does the heart distribute air to the rest of the body ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) .
|
for the blood test blood is taken out from arteries or vein ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) .
|
what is considered as the normal blood pressure of a human ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ?
|
why do reptiles do n't have a four chambered heart ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ?
|
why does the heart need to be closer to the left side of our body ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) .
|
but as blood flows from the capillaries to the veins , what causes the blood pressure in veins ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) .
|
when you described a hemoglobin being a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , what happens when the body lacks iron ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood .
|
does something happen with the blood flow or does it interfere with binding the oxygen molecules to the hemoglobin ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
general/loosely related question : is it common/possible for larger animals or animals that live in different extremes ( ie : pressure of ocean depths ) to have varying numbers of ventricles/pumps in their hearts ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs .
|
but what is their energy source ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 .
|
are they able to provide energy without mitochondria ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) .
|
what is diastolic and systolic blood pressure ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ?
|
can you tell me how can the heart make the different between the right and left ventricle squeezes ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ?
|
do the left and right ventricle pump at the same time ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle .
|
why is the `` carotid artery `` at the middle of the aortic arch labeled as the '' left common carotid artery `` ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ?
|
in the image of the heart , why are the pulmonary veins drawn red while the arteries are blue ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) .
|
is 80 % of what we inhale nitrogen then ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood .
|
i just wanted to ask that why is an `` electrolyte '' important for the cell ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) .
|
what does mmhg stand for ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well .
|
what happens to the oxygen molecules floating freely in the blood ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ?
|
what is the twinge that we sometimes feel in the heart area ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) .
|
how long does it take for the heart to pump all the blood in your body ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood .
|
how long exactly does the oxygen molecules go to long body distances such as the toe cell if there was no heart ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body .
|
is the `` semilunar valves '' just another name for the pulmonary valve ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time !
|
is n't this technically inaccurate as they need a source of atp which could come from ketones ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny .
|
what is the `` fluid interstitial space of the lung '' ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
how does high or low blood pressure affect the human body ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart .
|
can someone please explain to me why we can not use technology to modify our bodies so we can run on just one pump ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) .
|
can someone tell me which term is correct ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ?
|
did some primitive organisms have only one ventricle ?
|
the heart is a double pump what cells need to understand the critical importance of the heart requires taking a step back so we understand the needs of each cell in our body . remember that our body is composed of over 10 trillion cells that work together in remarkable unity ( a lesson in good governance ! ) . cells have basic needs , and at the top of the list would be these four things : 1 ) access to oxygen 2 ) a source of glucose 3 ) a balanced fluid environment with the right amount of water/electrolytes 4 ) removal of waste ( such as carbon dioxide ) consider how this compares to basic human needs : breathing air in and breathing out , eating food , drinking water , and getting rid of urine/stool . when you really stop and think about it , many of the things that we do can be traced back to our cellular needs . a breath of air now let ’ s follow a single breath of air . 21 % of the molecules in this breath are oxygen molecules , and as they race down into the lungs , they end up in the alveoli which are tiny air-filled sacs . the story could end there , if not for the remarkable nature of lungs . the lungs allow the oxygen molecules to continue their journey from the gas phase into a new liquid phase . meanwhile carbon dioxide molecules make the opposite trip from liquid to gas similar to what happens at the surface of a carbonated beverage . the oxygen diffuses ( think of the drop of ink in a pool of water ) into the fluid interstitial space of the lung , and is then absorbed into the blood stream , and then enters into the red blood cells themselves . this diffusion occurs in a fraction of a second because the distance between the alveoli and the red blood cell is so tiny . why you need your heart now let ’ s pause and ponder the following : what would happen if there was no heart ? well , diffusion of oxygen works wonders when the distances are very small , but what about large distances like the distance from your lungs to your feet ? could a single molecule of oxygen simply diffuse all the way there ? in theory , it could—but it would take a really long time ! by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood . while air is going in and out of the lungs , the heart is busy working as well . blood enters the heart through the superior and inferior vena cava , which are the large veins that bring blood back from the top and bottom of the body respectively . then , the blood remains in the right atrium , which can be thought of as a waiting room for the right ventricle . the right ventricle ( pump # 1 ) has muscular walls that squeeze down and softly push the blood into the arteries , arterioles , and capillaries of the lungs . next , the oxygen diffuses from an area of high concentration ( alveoli ) to an area of low concentration ( blood ) , before the blood returns ( through pulmonary veins ) to the left of the heart . just like the right atrium , the left atrium can be thought of as a waiting room for the left ventricle . the left ventricle is a room with even stronger , thicker , and more muscular walls than the right ventricle . as a result , the left ventricle ( pump # 2 ) forcefully pushes the blood through the arteries and capillaries of the body to get to the trillions of cells in need of oxygen . for the return trip , blood travels through the veins of the body to get back to the right side of the heart and repeat the process . so there you have it – one heart – two pumps : the right ventricle and the left ventricle . why are there two ventricles ? now here ’ s a thought experiment : why not just have just one ventricle ( single pump ) that moves blood to the lungs and then onwards to the rest of the body ? it ’ s actually a great question , since at first glance it seems like it would be more efficient to just allow the blood to go out to the body instead of taking a return trip to the heart . think of it this way using numbers . pressure is needed to move blood through the resistance of a large network of blood vessels like arteries , capillaries , and veins . even if the right ventricle squeezes down and raises the pressure of the blood to about 25mmhg , after passing through the lungs , the blood pressure is back down to about 5mmhg ( a reduction of 20mmhg ) . it goes into the left ventricle where it gets a second squeeze causing the pressure to rise back up to about 120mmhg ( almost 5 times the pulmonary pressure ! ) . that ’ s enough pressure to make it through all of the organs in the body . getting the pressure right now , let ’ s say that the right ventricle raised the pressure up to 140mmhg , then you may be able to have the blood pressure drop 20mmhg and still be at 120mmhg . that sounds like a great solution , except for the fact : 1 . if exposed to those high pressures , fluid would get pushed right out of the capillaries and into the lungs ( some capillaries would actually break ! ) , and 2.at high pressures , blood would move past the alveoli so quickly that o2 molecules would n't have time to diffuse into the blood and bind to hemoglobin . this makes sense when you remember that none of the capillaries in the body are exposed to extremely high pressures ( 120-140mmhg ) , because by the time blood gets down to the capillaries it has already passed through arteries ( and arterioles ) , and the pressure has dramatically fallen . having lower pressures in the pulmonary circulation is particularly important given the large amount of o2 that needs to diffuse across from the alveoli to the capillaries—every extra millisecond helps ! that ’ s why the human body needs two pumps working at different pressures , high pressure to allow the blood to circulate around the body , and low pressure to allow for optimal gas exchange in the lungs without broken capillaries !
|
by the time the oxygen arrived in your toes by simple diffusion , they would have died and fallen off . once the oxygen has gotten into the blood stream , there has to be a way to rapidly “ move ” the oxygen molecules from one place to another . this is where hemoglobin , a protein that uses iron to help bind to o2 molecules , comes to the rescue . each red blood cell is filled with ~250 million hemoglobin proteins , and each hemoglobin protein can bind to 4 o2 molecules ( the bound form is called “ oxyhemoglobin ” ) . that means that each red blood cell can bind ~1 billion oxygen molecules ! as a result , the vast majority ( & gt ; 97 % ) of the o2 molecules are actually bound to oxyhemoglobin ; with only a minority of o2 molecules floating freely in the blood .
|
please help me to find my answer that if the heart stop working hemoglobin present in the blood provides oxygen for four to five minutes is it correct or false ?
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.