If someone is in danger, as a nurse, do you run briskly or walk briskly or jog

Walking running is simply aerobic exercise, and brisk running is anaerobic exercise. Specifically, it is how fast you can run at a brisk pace, and everyone has a different definition. In general, just don't make yourself too uncomfortable.

Whether it is walking or brisk running, it is harmful to the joints, and it is recommended that you can choose to swim if you have the conditions, and the resistance of water is a cushion for the joints.

Cadence and stride length are determined by the speed and length of running. Cadence is the number of times the legs alternately run per unit of time, of course, the more the faster; Stride length is what you call big strides and small steps. With the same cadence, the speed of that big step must be faster.

If the pace is the same, the pace must be fast.

However, the impact on speed between the two is not absolute: some people blindly pursue big strides, but it will affect the slower cadence, resulting in the final slower speed; Some people blindly pursue cadence, but because the pace is too small, they will eventually reduce the speed. So at the right size for your steps, try to increase your cadence as much as possible, so that the speed will be greatly improved.

The reason why you choose steps as the basis for improvement is because steps are greatly affected by your figure, so it is best to suit yourself. Cadence, however, can be greatly improved by exercise. So as to achieve a significant increase in the overall speed).

...This question should be divided into several situations. If the frequency of the big stride is about the same as the frequency of the small stride, which do you say?

I'm used to running long distances between big strides and small steps. In fact, it is difficult to talk about this problem, there is no absolute pros and cons, it depends on personal habits, and small steps. How small are the small steps you are talking about???

The answer is yes, with the same frequency (cadence), the big stride (big stride) is definitely faster than the small stride (small stride).

insisted on walking briskly at night for two years, from 153 pounds, to 96 pounds now, the physique is much better, there is no cold and fever for two years, and it is good to sleep warmly at night.

I feel that brisk walking hurts my knee even more, because I have been running for 3 years without injury, and my knee is basically useless for two months because of work.

Jogging is also running, running is strenuous exercise, and walking is light exercise. Only jogging can burn fat.

If you want to ** or go fast, I personally experienced that I lost ten pounds in a month, from the original 140 pounds to the current 130 pounds, just one month.

If the physical strength is good, it is better to jog, after all, running is empty, and it consumes more energy.

Of course, jogging is good, and after running for a while, the endorphins will come out, and the whole body will be comfortable, and the more you run, the easier it will be.

I think jogging is best for middle-aged people and can exercise the heart and lungs.

In comparison, jogging is better than brisk walking. If your goal is just to get some exercise, go brisk walking. If you want to**, it's best to choose jogging. Step by step, you have to persevere, and after a year, it will give you a surprise!

Jogging is the best choice, jogging burns fat, speeds up metabolism, and exercises people's cardiopulmonary function. People who run for a long time are happy. Of course, exercise is risky, exercise should be appropriate, and it should be gradual.

People across the globe know that jogging is best. I can't run, so I have to go.

I think brisk walking is more suitable for me, and I have been walking 3 kilometers briskly in the community every day, which takes 36 minutes, and I have insisted on it for more than 1 year.

The effect of brisk walking in the elderly is not great, jogging, whole body exercise, especially cardiopulmonary function will become strong, but pay attention to the way and method, otherwise the joint muscles will have problems.

In the long run, brisk walking is relative to jogging is protective for the knees, so the fitness effect brought by long-term regular brisk walking is more obvious than jogging.

Brisk walking is the best option, followed by swimming.

I think what suits me is the best, in line with the actual condition of the body, according to my own pace, and persistence is the most important.

I alternate jogging and brisk walking, 3 kilometers each morning for about an hour.

Jogging is better, it has a great effect on the heart and lungs.

Both jogging and brisk walking in winter have a good effect, but jogging is even better.

Personally, I think jogging is better, jogging is the whole person is moving.

Jogging, because the legs of jogging are larger, and the whole body is constantly swinging with the footsteps, which will speed up the metabolism and make the effect of fat burning better.

It is generally assumed that the sooner you get to shelter, the less rain you will get underneath. In fact, this is a puzzle for mathematicians, and it depends on three factors: the size and angle at which the rain falls, the exposed area of the body, and the time of the rain.

Assuming that the rain is the same size, when the raindrops always fall vertically, only the top of the head, shoulders and other parts will be wet, then we can run to reduce the time spent in the rain, which will naturally make it rainless. But in fact, when it rains, there is usually wind, and when we run, we also cause the air around us to flow, so that the rain is slanted on the body, exposing more parts of the body to the rain. If so, it's possible to get more rain from running than from walking, and the faster you run, the more rain you get.

How do you calculate the amount of rain that falls on your body? When you stand, the rain above your head will fall on your body, and when you run, the rain in front of you will also fall on your body. It seems that it is difficult to calculate.

There's a trick. Imagine that the rain in the sky is stationary, that is, the space is evenly distributed with water droplets. A person can be simplified into a cuboid with a height of H (height), width of W (shoulder width), and thickness of L (chest thickness).

The movement of people in the rain is equivalent to making an oblique hole in the space of water droplets, and the oblique angle is the ratio of the rain velocity VR to the human movement speed VP. The horizontal direction of this diagonal hole is a fixed value s, and the vertical length is the speed of rain falling multiplied by the time it takes for people to pass. Both VR*S VP.

You have to think about the cross-sectional area of the hole, which is the cross-sectional area in the vertical direction. This is important. This cross-section is the vertical component of the front area of the person plus the top area, that is, h*w + w*l (v rain v man).

The volume of this hole is the amount of rain that people are showered with. That is, the vertical cross-sectional area of the hole multiplied by the horizontal distance s.

Rainfall volume = s*h*w + s*w*l*( v rain v person).

Only (v person) is the variable here, and it can be seen that the slower the person's speed, the more rain will be showered, but no matter how fast the person runs, the rain volume will be at least s*h*w.

Running drenched a lot.

This is a classic mathematical modeling problem. In this question, we will roughly think of a person as a cuboid that stays for the same time in a rainy day, and the rain that a person is drenched in consists of two parts, one is drenched on the head, that is, the upper surface of the cuboid is drenched; Part of it is the rain that is pouring in your face. We can do the math.

Let the upper surface area of the person be s, the area in front of it be s, the rainfall of rainfall on the unit area per unit time is k, and the rainfall per unit space per unit time is l. The velocity of the person is v.

Then the amount of rain that is drenched by rain on top of a person in a unit time t is:

In a unit of time, the rain that a person encounters head-on is:

Therefore, when the nature of the rain is the same, running and jogging will encounter more rain head-on, and the rain encountered above will be the same. So running drenched a lot.

I think it might be more telling to explain it with a phenomenon in my life.

Use two handfuls of the same.

Other conditions are the same) of the mop, in a house mop the floor with water (the water is the same). If the first mop mops the entire house in the same amount of time (e.g. 20 minutes), and the second mop only mops half of the house in the same amount of time. It can be imagined that the second handful will definitely absorb less water than the first.

I don't know how this works. But the truth is obvious. It feels the same as a physics experiment in junior high school: if the pot head with the same width is heated at only one of the points, then the water temperature in it rises very slowly; Otherwise, it's much faster.

It must be slow to fall on the body with less rain.

Because time is the same, just like a game of catching beads, the faster the speed, the larger the effective area. Therefore, the more rain falls on the body.

Let's start by assuming that the rain falls vertically to the ground;

Let the number of raindrops per unit time to the unit area be n, and the time spent in the rain is t, and the horizontal area of the rain falling on the body when the person is standing in the rain at rest is s (here we do not consider that a person is very fat, or that the thickness of the person's chest to the back is 1, assuming that the length of both shoulders is s); All of the above variables are certain.

Its variable velocity is v, and the total number of raindrops falling on the body is .

n=v*t*s*n；

When the velocity is greater, the more n.

You're talking about the same length of stay, not the same distance they're traveling, and there's a difference. And I think of it this way: both of them went from A to B. If he runs fast, he will take less time.

If he walks slowly, it will take him longer. If the two of them are walking the same path. Then the person who walks fast may be a little less drenched in the rain.

I didn't take into account the speed of people. with the speed at which the raindrops are falling. Because it's too cumbersome to think about it that way.

I don't know much advanced math. Can't give you the right data)

If it's the same time. That is, they were all rained for 10 minutes. It doesn't make sense to be fast or slow.

Because they were in the rain for 10 minutes. Rainfall has been uniform. So they should be drenched as much.

The above considerations do not take into account the speed at which a person walks or the speed at which the raindrops fall on a person. Because this thing is simply too tedious. If there is a piece of clothing that can test the amount of water absorbed.

That should be the most accurate.

In fact, it doesn't matter how much rain you get on a rainy day. If you like the rain, you can spend more time in the rain, and if you don't want to, just use an umbrella. Hehe.

1.Rainfall is even. 2.The same people. 3.The dwell time is the same, so if you run fast, you can run far, if you run slowly, you will get closer, if you run fast and far, you will naturally provoke more water, and if you are slow, you will naturally attract less water.

Here's some more authoritative evidence: my university teacher told me that the faster you run on a rainy day, the more rain you get!

If you don't believe me, you should always trust the university teachers. What's more, it's a beautiful teacher, haha.

Ah, go see the Ultimate Class

One of the characters talks about this

In short, absolute authority

I believe that even the absolute meter is wrong

It is said that there is less drenching when you run.

If we assume that two people have to move the same distance, the same area of rain, and the person who runs faster than the person who walks, then the time of exposure to rain is shorter, and the amount of rain that falls is less.

Of course, some people will think that the runner will get drenched in the part that is not drenched, but the person who walks will still get more drenched, because the speed is slow, so it will drench his own part and several other parts that he would not have to drench, of course, the running will not be drenched in excess.

The same distance, if you walk, do not run, clothes soaked to reach the destination.

If you run. Clothes may be half wet.

You should have heard the story of the pony crossing the river.

Try it yourself and you'll know the answer!

If you don't know ... One time!

1.Rainfall is even. 2.The same people. 3.The dwell time is the same.

Kindness. I think brisk running will get more raindrops. Because the rain is uniform and stays in the rain for the same amount of time, it means that the brisk runner walks longer distances and is exposed to the rain more often, so he will be exposed to more raindrops.

That's as much! Depending on your conditions, the rainfall is uniform and the same time.

Well, according to the theory of relativity, you can think of both people as relatively stationary, and the answer is obvious: there are as many as that.

But in reality, it's different: people who run want to shorten their time in the rain.

Of course, it was a brisk run.

If you want your speed to become infinite, then you will only be in the rain in the front, but not in the shoulders and head.

If the rain on the road is evenly distributed, every moment, the rain in front of the person will be drenched on the person, because the rain falls evenly, it can be seen as relatively static, and the person who runs fast sweeps the volume more, and the rain is more.

If the stay time is the same, then the run is also a white run, and the person who does not run will definitely be drenched lightly.

Because the runner "absorbs" the rain in front and behind.

Since this is the case, the dwell time (same) * the amount of rain that falls on people per unit time (also the same) = the total amount of rain (so it is the same).

This problem, to be honest, cannot be explained too scientifically, if you want to be precise, I am afraid that you must know the average precipitation, wind direction, and wind speed (we are not like a piece of glass). The speed at which the person walks, of course, knows that you want to express it at a constant speed. There is still time.

But I also have to say something: assuming there is no wind (easy to understand and express), the rain is not too big or small, and time does not make that innocent person suffer too much, regardless of the style of clothing and hairstyle, of course, something must be worn. So, imagine that.

What do you think? You may find that the person running quickly begins to blur his or her vision, and the person who walks may think that he or she is playing the wrong role, why??? Answer:

The back in front is still beautiful (female)! Everyone fainted! In fact, each has its own characteristics.

You tell me? Hahahaha. Don't be dizzy, don't be dizzy.