I don't know which post is more idiotic, this one....or the one comparing a Gorilla's structure to a human's.
A 23" arm would be 11" tall? We live in a 3 dimensional world, assnugget.
Groink,
Good point... I should have been more specific. I didn't mean vertical height.
What I meant is that when taped and photographed; a 23'' arm would have at least 11 of the one inch degradations on the tape visible from the front or the back. That holds true for any oval cross-section, so long as it is viewed along the narrow axis.
Kovacs' photos are a perfect examples of this:
His arm seemingly tapes out at 25''... but only the degradations for 0''; 1'' and 2'' are visible on the end of the tape passing over the peak of his bicep, the other end of the tape shows the degradations for 25''; 24''; 23''; 22''; 21''; 20''; 19''; and 18'' before it tucks under the belly of his tricep.
That's a total of 9 inches of circumference... another 9 on the other side is 18'' and a generous discrepancy allowance of 2'' gives us a total of 20''.
A crease is pegged into the measuring tape on the other side of his arm... it's an old trick.
Even Ronnie Coleman, the biggest and most muscularly developed human the world has ever seen doesn't have a 23'' arm while in good condition. That's only an inch short of Valentino's scar tissue swollen arms (Guinness' records people taped his pumped arm at 24.5'' on TV), and Valentino's arms are spherical.
The Luke