Monday, February 8, 2010

TIPPING THE RICHTER SCALE or not

The nightmares started last night as I found myself tied to the cold and impersonal train tracks, ear married to the rail, and a burgeoning sense of fear echoed by the approaching LOCOmotive. After several attempts to escape and evade I realized that resistance was futile and my only chances of survival would be a head on collision.

My crude attempt at constructing the equivalent of a homemade nuclear reactor began with the injection of mental neutrons into my epicenter of energy. Inspired by the prospects of starting a chain reaction by splitting motivation into an exponential explosion, I sought to tip the scale with no less than a megaton yield.

All seismic data collecting devices were ready and the anxiety-provoking countdown began. As the neutron generator fired at will the fission reaction brought reactivity one step closer to going super critical. Unfortunately, the core lacked the necessary density to reflect the commands and recycle the energy back into itself. The objective of achieving at least a megaton yield, the minimum criteria for tipping the Richter scale, failed to materialize. Instead of the desired Tsar Bomba type reaction, this nuclear fitness test yielded a fizzle result only the wacky pakis would be proud of, a low order product that inspired more chaos than cutting edge progress.

1 comment:

  1. bdy wt 205
    BP: Straight to 18, rest then 2 more reps for 20 total.
    First bdywt volley: Fast except for final seven push ups but unbroken.
    DL: This was the turning point of the wod, the part where the foundation erodes from the inside out and everything above topples into the black hole created by said inversion. 42 reps total. Light weight but the fuel/air mixture was insufficient to keep the pistons going. Oil levels were low and fuel was evaporating faster than it could be used.
    2nd bdywt volley: slow but consistent. This is where I lost time. How is one supposed to perform air squats with speed and vigor prior to getting under the bar for back squats? I've only done this one other time but it was with 135 pounds. Big difference. This combination crossed cerebral wires, short circuiting strategy, perception, motivation, and ultimately performance. I took rest and got under the bar doing sets of 7 for 27 total.
    Time was 14:17
    Reps 89
    This wod is a nasty prescription that, if there was the equivalent to the AMA for promoting self-preservation and slothurgy, would adamantly oppose it. Without delving to deeply into the philosophical discourse regarding body weight it should be noted that this wod, with precision accuracy, will relegate those who can't handle their body weight into a sad and lonely mire of abjection.
    There are a couple important scientific factors at work in this wod.
    1. body weight
    2. weight lifted
    3. time
    After some serious brain busting research on calculations and nearly losing my mind, we decided to work smarter than harder. If you are interested in the science behind the perception go to www.cathletics.com.
    We left sit ups out because of lack of menu choice.
    Final numbers:
    Work performed: 143131.24 joules
    Power output: 167.01 watts
    horse power: .23
    Injecting science into the experience has a way of canceling our feeble and pathetic interpretations. I feel more like a dim light bulb than a transformer.
    Now that I've discovered the resources for fanning the smoke and breaking the mirrors, new training measurements will be installed.

    ReplyDelete