2 ms·
1. They stand on 4 limbs, rather than 2. 2. That would be assuming that human legs are sized at the max capacity they can carry, which is not true.
by ndr 2mo ago
1. They stand on 4 limbs, rather than 2.
2. That would be assuming that human legs are sized at the max capacity they can carry, which is not true.
- necovek 2mo agoRegarding 1, horses in particular are known to jump off two hind legs and land on their two forelegs, putting a lot more force on them than their stationary weight. On 2, I believe that's the GP's point too — human leg bones (or horses') can obviously take a lot more than their standing/walking/running weight.
- ndr 2mo agoAgree re 1, but point 2 still stands. They can take more stress than standing, but the scaling law is still there. If you scale linearly height/section the max stress won't scale linearly because the weight will scale cubically.
- necovek 2mo agoAs I mentioned elsewhere, eg. femur can take at least 30x body weight, and we've got two to carry us. If a giant is 10x the size, and femur is just scaled linearly, even with 10x the relative weight, it can still take 3x giant's body weight. So perhaps no jumping on one leg anymore, but walking or light jogging should be fine. But, their bones could also have larger cross-section and a giant could be stockier yet still appear "human like".