How would you accurately calculate the weight of a pair of tits?

Discussion in 'Bulletin Board ARCHIVE' started by Simon De Montforte, Dec 23, 2011.

  1. Sim

    Simon De Montforte Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Missus was reading a woman's article about this woman with massive jugs and it said they weighed in at 5Kg which got me thinking. Aside from lobbing them out onto some scales, how would they know what they weighed? I mean, the mammories would still be attached to the body so what compensation factor would you use for that fact. Chopping them off to weigh them isn't really an option unless the person is already deceased so how could they be accurately weighed. If they were perfectly spherical I suppose you could use the calculation for the volume of a sphere and then multiply by the specific gravity of a tit but who would know that any way. Amazing how your mind starts to wander innit?:p
     
    Simon De Montforte, Dec 23, 2011
    #1
  2. Bossman

    Bossman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    15,068
    Likes Received:
    14,271
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Carlton
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I really don't know but what I will say is you are one of my favourite posters
     
    Bossman, Dec 23, 2011
    #2
  3. Jack Tatty

    Jack Tatty Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    21,752
    Likes Received:
    15,416
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Stanley,Wakefield
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Depends if you could fit Hemmsy n Dyson on a set of scales big enough

    am here all week (except Xmas Day n Boxing Day)
     
    Jack Tatty, Dec 23, 2011
    #3
  4. Sim

    Simon De Montforte Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Been giving it some thought

    I reckon one of those latex rubber casts they use for producing bronze statues would work. Daub the latex over the breasts, let it set and slowly peel it off taking care not to rip it. Weigh the mould on a balance and then fill it with saline which I reckon is going to be around the same density as a tit. Subtract the gross weight from the mould weight and hey presto, an accurate weight of a pair of tits. All we need now is a volunteer to test the theory.
    ;);)
     
    Simon De Montforte, Dec 23, 2011
    #4
  5. Dragon Tyke

    Dragon Tyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    18,566
    Likes Received:
    5,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Saint Athan
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    well I would just ask JLWBL..he would get it right to within a gramme

    he is our resident expert I would say.
     
    Dragon Tyke, Dec 23, 2011
    #5
  6. Tek

    Tekkytyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    7,378
    Likes Received:
    4,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Italy
    Style:
    Barnsley Dark
    Re: Been giving it some thought

    "All we need now is a volunteer to test the theory".

    Sorry to interject - but my wife (who has worryingly been following this thread) says unless you use a dead body and subsequently remove said items and compare against the dervied net weight how would you know if you were right?
     
    Tekkytyke, Dec 23, 2011
    #6
  7. Sim

    Simon De Montforte Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Eureka

    Just dawned on me - "Archimedes displacement principle" which states that any object, wholly or partially immersed in a fluid, is buoyed up by a force equal to the weight of the fluid displaced by the object.

    In layman's terms - Get a bucket brim full of water, get her to totally immerse her tits in the water and collect the water displaced. The weight of the water displaced will be the weight of the pair of tits immersed in the bucket assuming they have the same density.

    I knew that GCSE in General Science would come in handy one day.
     
    Simon De Montforte, Dec 23, 2011
    #7
  8. Sim

    Simon De Montforte Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Re: Been giving it some thought

    Good point that. I think we'd need the volunteer to be somebody on their death bed.
     
    Simon De Montforte, Dec 23, 2011
    #8
  9. Tek

    Tekkytyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    7,378
    Likes Received:
    4,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Italy
    Style:
    Barnsley Dark
    Re: Eureka

    She's at it again!! "Tits are NOT water but contain a considerable amount of fat...so the density is not the same!!

    Smart-ar*e woman!!
     
    Tekkytyke, Dec 23, 2011
    #9
  10. Tek

    Tekkytyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    7,378
    Likes Received:
    4,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Italy
    Style:
    Barnsley Dark
    Re: Eureka

    Apparently your principle is reasonable but ...
    Breast tissue is less dense than water. Multiply the weight of the water by 0.9 to compensate for this

    Also weigh each one separately as breasts are NOT symmetrical!
     
    Tekkytyke, Dec 23, 2011
    #10
  11. Sim

    Simon De Montforte Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Re: Eureka

    I've no problems with weighing them separately but the displacement will take care of them both at the same time. e.g. if one was 500 cubic cm and the other 480 cu cm, the amount of water displaced would be 980 cubic cm. Using your factor for the density of a breast of 0.9 then the total weight would be 980 x 0.9 = 882 grammes. I think we might be onto something here mate. Theoretically we could also work out the volume of the woman's 5Kg tits by dividing by the density
     
    Simon De Montforte, Dec 23, 2011
    #11
  12. Gor

    Gordon Ottershaw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    4,447
    Likes Received:
    3,098
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Old Town
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Re: Eureka

    Put 'thereev' on one set of scales and hemsworth-tyke on the other?
     
    Gordon Ottershaw, Dec 23, 2011
    #12
  13. Bossman

    Bossman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    15,068
    Likes Received:
    14,271
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Carlton
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I really don't know but what I will say is you are one of my favourite posters
     
    Bossman, Dec 23, 2011
    #13
  14. BorderTerrier

    BorderTerrier Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,256
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Doghouse
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    It seems that cup size equates to a certain amount of body flesh/fat.

    Apparently a pound equals 454 grams, which is equal to 3 cup sizes, so one cup size equals 151.33 recurring grams.

    Therefore multiply the cup size by 151.33 to get the weight of the tits in grams.

    European manufacturers tend to use a standard AA, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, ... scale thus avoiding the DD, DDD, EE confusion.

    I reckon a AA size pair of tits weigh 151.33 grams, an A pair 302.66 grams and so on.

    I may be wrong though.
     
    BorderTerrier, Dec 23, 2011
    #14
  15. Boaty Tyke

    Boaty Tyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,001
    Likes Received:
    9,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Floatin' abart somewhere........
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley
    gratuitous, but more than worthy...................


    [​IMG]
     
    Boaty Tyke, Dec 23, 2011
    #15
  16. Archey

    Archey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    23,007
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    Style:
    Barnsley
    Re: Been giving it some thought

    Quote of the year.
     
    Archey, Dec 23, 2011
    #16
  17. Whi

    Whitey Guest

    Whitey, Dec 23, 2011
    #17
  18. sadbrewer

    sadbrewer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2006
    Messages:
    10,273
    Likes Received:
    5,289
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Re: Been giving it some thought

    they only need to be hand weighed IMO,anything else is a waste of time.
     
    sadbrewer, Dec 24, 2011
    #18
  19. sapphire red

    sapphire red Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Re: Been giving it some thought

    get one in each hand and jiggle `em up and down shouting "whaaay" job done



    hope THIS helps
     
    sapphire red, Dec 24, 2011
    #19

Share This Page