Which is better: increase the working weight or the number of repetitions. Three times less people live in China than is commonly believed It was many times less than that
Today, patriotic circles often mention the desire of the Anglo-Saxon world to drag us into a war with China. Very similar to that. In this regard, it is often heard from various domestic experts that the Chinese are about to throw hats on us, take all of Siberia and other catastrophic forecasts for themselves. Could this be?
I served 3 years in the Far East in the border troops, studied patriotism on the example of the heroes of Damansky, however, as it seems to me, the devil is not so terrible ...
As you know, China, in addition to being the world's factory, is also famous for its huge population of about 1.347 billion. people (some specialists do not stand on ceremony and talk about 1.5 billion - Russian 145 million people as a statistical error), and the average density is about 140 people per 1 sq. km. km) and a fairly decent territory (3rd in the world after Russia and Canada - 9.56 million sq. km).
There is a story that either the orderly, or some other assistant to Suvorov, writing down a report to the capital about the next victory, according to Alexander Vasilyevich, was surprised at the inflated numbers of enemy soldiers killed. To which, Suvorov allegedly said: “Why feel sorry for their adversaries!”
About the population
The Chinese, followed by the Indians, the Indonesians, and indeed the whole of Asia, have clearly grasped that the population of their countries is the same strategic weapon as bombs and missiles.
No one can reliably say what the actual demographic situation is in Asia, in this case, in China. All data is estimated, at best, the information of the Chinese themselves (the last census in 2000).
Surprisingly, despite the government's policy of the last 20 years aimed at limiting the birth rate (one family - one child), the population is still growing at 12 million people a year, according to experts, due to the huge base (i.e. initial) digit.
I'm certainly not a demographer, but 2+2=4. If you have 100 people: two died in a year, one was born, a year later 99. If 100 million or 1 billion, and the ratio of births and deaths is negative, then what is the difference in the initial figure, the result will be negative. The Chinese and demographic experts are paradoxically positive!
A very confusing question. For example, in the monograph by Korotaev, Malkov, Khalturin "Historical Macrodynamics of China" there is an interesting table:
1845 - 430 million;
1870 - 350;
1890 - 380;
1920 - 430;
1940 - 430,
1945 - 490.
I came across an old atlas, which said that in 1939, i.e. before the 2nd World War, in China there were 350 million people. One does not need to be an expert to see the huge discrepancies and the absence of any coherent system in the behavior of the Chinese population.
That fall on 80 million over 25 years, then growth by 50 million over 30 years, then no change over 20 years. The main thing is that the initial figure 430 million taken absolutely from the ceiling who considered their adversaries. But the fact seems to be obvious - for 95 years from 1845 to 1940 the number of Chinese has not changed, as it was, and remains.
But over the next 72 years (taking into account disastrous wars, hunger and poverty, more than 20 years of containment policy) growth of almost a billion!
For example, everyone knows that the USSR lost 27 million people in the Great Patriotic War, but few people know that the second country in terms of human losses - China - 20 million. Human. Some experts (perhaps like our Chubais) talk about 45 million. And despite such monstrous losses and all kinds of hardships from 1940 to 1945, a huge increase in 60 million.! Moreover, in addition to the World War, there was also a civil one in China, and 23 million people now live in Taiwan, who were considered Chinese in the 40th year.
However, as a result of the formation PRC in 1949, the population of the PRC already amounted to 550 million. Human. For 4 years, we do not count those who fled to Taiwan, and growth is simply galloping 60 million people. Then there was the Cultural Revolution with countless repressions and the eating of sparrows in the famine years, and the population grew faster and faster.
And yet, we almost believe and count on our knees. 430 in 1940. This is a lot, of course. 430 million. Approximately half of the woman (in Asia, women are even less, but let). About 200. Of these, grandmothers and girls - another 2/3. Women give birth approximately from 15 to 40 = 25 years, and live beyond 70. We get 70 million. We believe that there are no childless and lesbians in China, + allowance for my demographic unprofessionalism = 70 million childbearing women in 1940.
How many children did these young ladies have to give birth to, so that in 9 years there would be 490 million Chinese, a 15% increase? War, devastation, no medicine, the Japanese are atrocious ... According to science, if my memory serves me right, in order not to simply reduce the population, you need to give birth to 3-3.5. And an additional 90 million for 70 million women in labor, another 1.2 people. Physically, for 9 years, 4-5 children is not easy, but possible, but ....
The Internet writes that according to the 1953 census 594 million, and in 1949 not 490, but 549 million. Over 4 years forty five million. In 13 years, the population has grown from 430 to 594, by 164 million, more than a third. Thus, 70 million women in 13 years gave birth to 3.5 for each for reproduction + about 2.5 (163:70) = 6 .
Someone will object that in Russia there was also a boom at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. But in Russia at that time, the Japanese did not massacre 20 million people + 20 million did not flee to Taiwan. And, returning to the table, what prevented the Chinese from increasing by at least 10 million in the previous 100 years? Immediately, in 13 years, 164 million, as if from a bush, into hunger and war. Yes, I almost forgot, such trifles as the Korean War, where about 150 thousand more childbearing Chinese men were killed, are completely ridiculous to consider. In the following decades, the Chinese bred and multiplied simply beyond measure.
I think they their Chinese like Fed dollars, just draw from the air. Nobody argues, there are a lot of Chinese, as well as Indians and Indonesians, there are still plenty of Nigerians, Iranians, Pakistanis. But many many strife. And the Indians - well done, picked up the initiative in time.
Now a little about the territory. China is big, but... Take a look at the administrative map of China. There are so-called autonomous regions (Ary) in China. There are 5 of them, but now we are talking about 3: Xinjiang Uighur, Inner Mongolia and Tibetan.
These three ARs occupy respectively 1.66 million sq. km, 1.19 million sq. km. km and 1.22 million sq. km, only about 4 million sq. km, almost half of the territory of China! Lives in these areas 19,6 million people 23,8 million and 2,74 million, total about 46 million people, about 3% population of the PRC. Of course, these areas are not the most wonderful for living (mountains, deserts, steppes), but no worse than Outer Mongolia or our Tuva or, for example, Kyrgyzstan or Kazakhstan.
Most Chinese live between the Yellow River and the Yangtze and on the warm coast (South and Southeast). Speaking of Mongolia. If Inner Mongolia is larger in territory than France and Germany combined, then Mongolia-Outer Mongolia is almost 1.5 times larger than Inner Mongolia = 1.56 million square meters. km. There is practically no population of 2.7 million people (the density is 1.7 people per sq. km, in the PRC, let me remind you, 140, including the above-named Ares, where the density is respectively: 12, 20 and 2 people / sq. km; in Mesopotamia lives under 300 people per square kilometer, cockroaches and only, according to statistics).
The resources, for which the Chinese allegedly go to Siberia, at the risk of running into Russian atomic bombs, in Mongolia, and in Kazakhstan the same, are full, but there are no bombs. Not only that, why not move the idea of reunification-unification of the Mongolian people under the wing of the Celestial Empire?
There are 150-200 thousand Chinese in Russia. Total! The total population of the Khabarovsk, Primorsky Territories, the Amur Region and the Jewish Autonomous Region (about 5 million), of course, cannot be compared with the border province of Heilongjiang (38 million), but still.
However, the Mongols are sleeping peacefully (the Chinese and Russians in Mongolia combined 0.1% of the population - about 2 thousand somewhere), the Kazakhs are also not very tense.
It seems to me that I need to be afraid Burma with its 50 million population and a fairly large territory of 678 thousand square meters. km. The same South China billion hangs over it, it is in Myanmar that the dictatorial regime is, they are the villains of the Chinese minority (1.5 million !! people) oppress. And, most importantly, the equator is near, the sea coast is huge and warm, warm.
But even the Burmese comrades, as they say, do not worry, and we are in a panic.
Well, okay, the Chinese communists are afraid of the Americans in Taiwanese affairs to put things in order, but Vietnam frankly runs up, shouting that it is not afraid, constantly reminds of the last scuffle, Laos and Cambodia undertook to supervise, the newly minted Big Brother. China and Vietnam are arguing about the oil islands, and so is the world.
Weird Chinese. The people are already sitting on each other's heads, and they are not even developing their vast territories, not to mention weak neighbors such as Burma and Mongolia. But Buryatia will definitely be attacked, the 150,000th expeditionary force has already been sent out, half of them got stuck in Moscow for some reason, someone in warm Vladivostok, but this is nonsense, at the first call - to Siberia.
Well, perhaps that's all, as a first approximation.
Additional thoughts on this...
Earth population rapidly declining. It is possible to estimate this reduction at least by the real population China. Viktor Mekhov wrote a very interesting article in which he argues that the population of China 3-4 times less than we were taught to think (there is a very interesting video there). Surely the same can be said about India, and about other obviously poor countries, with a “large” population that is unaffordable ...
Checking this is easy enough: you need to go to Wikipedia and sum up the population of the 20 largest cities China. And you get an impressive number of about 230 million people (including the population of the districts). Where do the rest of the people live? Where does the rest of the billion live? In the countryside? Do you live in cottages? Where do they grow food then? In the mountains of Tibet, which occupy almost half of the country? But they need a lot of food, if you believe that 1 billion 340 million people live in China!
Let's look further. Duropedia reports that in 2010, China produced 546 million tons of grain, despite the fact that the sown area in China is 155,7 million hectares And to ensure the normal nutrition of the population, the country needs to grow an average of about 1 ton of grain per year per person. Part of this grain is used to feed livestock, and part is used to make bread and other needs. So China is clearly not self-sufficient in grain, if you believe that it has such a large population. Or it provides if the population there is 3 times less than it is considered.
By the way, you can easily check according to the US. And immediately everything will be clear and understandable! See: in USA collected on average about 60 million tons of wheat per year from an area of about 20 million hectares. In addition, they collect 334 million tons of corn from 37.8 million hectares, and 91,47 million tons of soybeans from an area of 30.9 million hectares. Thus, the total grain harvest is about 485 million tons from an area of about 89 million hectares. And the US population is only about 300 million people! Surplus cereals are exported.
This immediately shows that the lack of grain production in China is about 800 million tons per year, which are practically nowhere, if you believe that the population is 1.4 billion people. And if you do not believe in this fairy tale, then everything falls into place, and the population of China should be no more than 500 million. Human!
And one more clue: Wikipedia says that dOlya urban population in 2011 for the first time was 51,27% , which also confirms the hypothesis that the real population of China does not exceed 500 million people.
The same thing happens with India! Let's count the population of the 20 largest cities India. The answer will surprise you very much: it is only about 75 million people. 75 million people! Where are the rest billion two hundred million live? The territory of the country is a little more 3 million sq. km. Apparently, they live in nature with a density of about 400 people per 1 sq. km.
The population density in India is twice that of Germany. But in Germany - continuous cities throughout the territory. And in India, in cities, he allegedly lives about 5% population. For comparison: in Russia 73% , with population density 8,56 person/sq.km. But in USA the proportion of the urban population is 81,4% , with population density 34 person/sq. km.
Can the official information about India be true? Of course not! The population density in rural areas is always only a few people per sq. km. km, i.e. 100 times lower than in India. And this is a clear confirmation that the population in India 5-10 times less than is written in official sources.
In addition, according to Wikipedia, almost 70% Indians live in rural areas, thus, we counted 75 million urban residents are about 30% the population of India. Therefore, the total population of this proportion will be about 250 million people, which is much more true than the fairy tale about a billion.
; If you lift a lot of weight and do few reps, you work on volume. But it's not all that simple...
- 1 to 5 reps- the lower range, which develops physical strength (heavy weight).
- 6 to 12 reps- the average range, which is mainly associated with an increase in muscle volume (any weight).
- 12 to 15+ reps- any exercise repeated more than 12 times develops strength endurance (medium and light weight).
Low reps + high weight. Strength Development
A small number of repetitions in one approach with a large weight develops strength. The results of a study published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research show:
If you want to develop strength, your method is low reps + heavy weight.
Another study of the strength training of weightlifters showed that not only our muscles are responsible for the possibility, but also the central nervous system, that is, muscle memory. Trainer Greg Nuckols believes that fewer reps combined with more weight helps our nervous system remember how to use the muscles most effectively to lift weights.
If you are using your maximum weight or 90% of it, do one to three reps per set. Reducing weight allows you to increase the number of repetitions: at 50-60% of the maximum weight, it is recommended to do up to 10-12 repetitions.
Pauses between sets should be from two to six minutes to restore reserves. The optimal number of repetitions in one approach is from six to 12.
Lots of reps + low weight. Development of strength endurance
A high number of repetitions without weight or using a small weight increases your endurance.
Occurs due to many factors, among them - mechanical tissue damage, mechanical stress and metabolic stress. So it is also possible to increase the volume of muscles with a small weight, but for this you will have to do very, very, very many repetitions. In fact, it is much easier to take more weight and not bring yourself to exhaustion.
For example, when working with a weight that is 25% of the maximum, from 47 to 120 repetitions are performed.By doing high reps with low weights, you develop strength endurance.
Is it any wonder now that those who move from group fitness classes to the gym are not able to immediately take a lot of weight, and those who work out in the gym with a lot of weight do not withstand the number of approaches that are usually performed in group training even though even with a weight three to four times less than usual.
But in any case, regardless of the weight and number of repetitions, if you want to achieve, you will have to work at full strength.
Ideal training option
Many balance coaches design a program to include maximum strength training and endurance training.
Example 1 Linear
- Day 1:
- Day 2:
- Day 3:
Example 2: Cyclic
- Week 1: 10-12 repetitions in one approach.
- Week 2: 6-8 repetitions in one approach.
- Week 3: 2-4 repetitions in one approach.
- Week 4: 10-12 reps with increased weight in one set.
If you want to go to the next level, then you need to increase the weight, the number of sets, or both, but you need to do it right. It is advisable to consult with a trainer!
1) a (y), pl. times, times, m. actions. Life is given once, and you want to live it cheerfully, meaningfully, beautifully. Chekhov, The Story of an Unknown Man. Bamboo… … Small Academic Dictionary
less- I. compare. Art. to Small and Small (1 2, 4 digits). The girl was the mother of her peers. Story m. story. Chair m. armchairs. Mal mala m. (about small children). II. compare. Art. adv. to Little (1 2 digits). I must speak. M. began to run. Who l. should m. ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary
just- See, by the way, by chance, to be exact, just ... Dictionary of Russian synonyms and expressions similar in meaning. under. ed. N. Abramova, M .: Russian Dictionaries, 1999. exactly, right, (c) exactly, just right, just right, tutelka in tutelka, by the way, by chance ... Synonym dictionary
less / less(,) than- words as part of a comparative turnover As a rule, inside the combination, a comma is placed before the word “what”. For cases where a comma before the word "than" is not needed, see the article "more than". The last thought killed me as much as my aunt, and I… … Punctuation Dictionary
neither more nor less than...- see more; Not more / more (and) not less than ...; no more / more (and) no less than ..., in zn. particles. Exactly as much as it is named, indicated; exactly, just... Dictionary of many expressions
no more and no less than- adverb, number of synonyms: 4 exactly (28) just (48) no more and no less than (11) ... Synonym dictionary
no more, no less- exactly, tick to tick, like in a pharmacy, penny to penny, exactly, exactly, tick to tick, exactly, tyutelka to tyutelka, exactly, absolutely, exactly Dictionary of Russian Synonyms ... Synonym dictionary
no more, no less- adverb, number of synonyms: 15 exactly (14) exactly (22) as in a pharmacy (8) ... Synonym dictionary
no more no less than...- see less; Not more (and) not less/less than...; No more (and) no less/less like..., in zn. particles. Exactly, just… Dictionary of many expressions
Second time in a month- at the peak of the Cold War (the economic and psychological confrontation between the USA and the USSR in the 50s and 80s of the last century, accompanied by an arms race and demonstrative provocative actions), there was a mutual military hysteria, ... ... Lem's world - dictionary and guide
No more, no less- Razg. 1. Exactly as much as named, indicated. 2. Just like that, just like that (act, act). FSRYA, 42 ... Big dictionary of Russian sayings
Books
- , Usova Tatiana. With the help of this book, your child will learn to count to ten, master the concepts of "equal", "greater", "less", "even", "odd", be able to show numbers with his fingers. How many legs does… Buy for 496 rubles
- One, two, three, four, five, I'm learning to count! , Usova Tatiana. With the help of this book, your child will learn to count up to ten, master the concepts of `equal`, `greater`, `less`, `even`, `odd`, will be able to show numbers with his fingers. How many legs does an octopus have?...
