Biomechanical properties of the penis

Yaog,

have you read this thread? Why BPEL < BPFSL: One idea You might find it interesting.

I’d like to hear your thoughts on my ramblings about the same, as noted in post #25 of that thread and here as well: mgus - Has anyone gained using the O-BEND?

The key to learning is asking the question…

Figure I’ll break my lurking to add to science.

Yaog, in order to stretch and expand a plastic bottle, you need to deform the matrix structure. Using the numbers given in the article, you would need almost two thousand pounds of pressure to achieve this deformation in the tunica. Many bad things will happen before you start gaining length this way.

Nice post though. Good to see some still people take in interest in the science behind PE.

Thanks diego. Thats what I was saying how we can’t change the structure of our bodies.

If you believe that going, how do you explain this?

I’m going to use the balloon example. In order to increase the size of a balloon, we simply blow air into it…and it expands correct? We didn’t have to change the molecular structure of it so it could expand right? There you go, squeeze a balloon it gets bigger - clamping. Plain and simple, use what you have since you can’t change the material of the balloon (your penis), and just blow into it (make it bigger).

Xeno, those gains were made by hanging, jelqing, and clamping. I dont see how pointing out how plastic bottles expand under a ton of pressure and other mammals tunicae are made up show anything towards my gains.

Xeno, gains aren’t made by changing the actual layout of our bodies, we’re making tears in our bodies and healing them at a bigger state. That has nothign to do with what our penis is made out of, its just tissue tearing and healing, we’re not transforming it into wood or metal. Pre-PE penis’ are made out of the same stuff as Post-PE penis’ right?

Also, dont think anything of the last paragraph in my last post, I posted that then was editing the above paragraph in its place.

going,

I was wondering your age after your posts, then saw it in another thread.

These posts are basically a call to laziness & ignorance. A lot of thought, energy, effort & research (informal) has gone into the things that are considered common practices here. And they were gathered from seemingly unrelated sources, seeing as how these is no actual academic research done on PE.

And worst case scenario, let’s say nothing comes of Yaog’s post. So? The man is contributing to a process. I can’t believe that reading & learning has to be defended……..

Thank you anony. I was disinclined to present even a modicum of respect for going’s attitude with a response of any sort. You did it for me. Thanks.

Again, I should have never posted in here in the first place. I dont believe this should be so scientific as we make it, its just a hobby after all. Sorry for even continuing the arguing. If you want to learn more than do so, I hope you find something, but I’m just here for fun.

Where was your first statement of such an opinion? Had you posted such, you would have been right.

post #15

Shoulda stopped there.

Should have, but I’m an idiot.

I wouldn’t say that going. Just not advisable to speak against inquiry. That’s what’s at the origin of PE.