2007-02-06 05:45:26 · 9 answers · asked by Puzzled 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
The energy used to get from one place on the hill to the other should be the same regardless ... at least theoretically.
To be precise, you'd really have to consider the efficiency of each mode of travel - how much energy is lost to friction between moving parts, how much energy is lost to heat in the body's chemical reactions, etc. (the fact that cycling might take a more intense effort and cause you to sweat a lot more doesn't necessarily mean it will require more energy - walking may not require as intense an effort, but the effort will be spread out over a longer period of time).
There's probably a way to calculate how much energy is wasted as heat for each mode of travel, but it would require some detailed knowledge about the human body.
The simple answer, ignoring energy loss, is that the energy used will be the difference between the potential energy for each of the two locations. In other words:
E = mgh_f - mgh_i
mass * gravitational acceleration * height for each location.
You can set the initial position as being zero height and the energy used is the difference in height times mass times gravitational acceleration.
Edit: mail_jenil has a point about needing to include the mass of the bicycle, as well. Cycling would require more energy just because the mass would be greater.
2007-02-06 05:59:43 · answer #1 · answered by Bob G 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Cycling. You have to get the weight of the bike up the hill too.
2007-02-06 06:10:55 · answer #2 · answered by Gene 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Cycling would use more energy as you need to overcome friction of bearings within the pedal assembly and wheels.
It will be difficult to calculate since there are many variables to take into consideration.
2007-02-06 05:55:40 · answer #3 · answered by Robert S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You use exactly the same amount of energy. I remember doing the experiment at school. Cant remember about how we proved it tho.
Bob G has reminded me about the potential energy link. Our experiment was walking v running up a flight of stairs. The variables being time accelleration height of the staircase number of risers gravity and distance. I cant think, but I know there is an equation there somewhere.
2007-02-06 05:55:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you could work it out if u new the k.e or p.e and the mass of the person and the bike and how long it had taken but without these you can find out that answer to your question..... oH! and u could do with knowing the height of which hes climbed and the distnace and the angel of the slope would be betta haha :P
2007-02-09 03:24:29 · answer #5 · answered by lithium20202 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
More energy is used in cycling because you along with cycle has to be taken up and along we have to carry ourself. So its totally logical.
2007-02-06 05:56:29 · answer #6 · answered by mail_jenil 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends what gear the bike is in, and I doubt that you could measure the amount of energy used.
2007-02-06 06:01:31 · answer #7 · answered by jackboote 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he walked and then he cycled. he IS cycling which means hes currently riding his bike he WAS walking, which means he walked before getting on his bike
2016-03-29 07:55:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i would say cycling, but then again i know less than zero.
2007-02-06 05:53:04 · answer #9 · answered by Troubled Joe(the ghost of) 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋