ABT swing anybody?

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Horvath1.. » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:48:11



wrote this crap:

Quote:
>> >Reactive centrifugal force is not a force applied on something to
>> >accelerate it. It is the counter force to centripetal force that is
>> >applied on an object.

>> Hyperbolic acceleration around a gravitonal field is well known to
>> scientists.

>Which has absolutely nothing to do with centrifugal forces...

>And it's not "hyperbolic acceleration" at all. It's acceleration due to
>gravity which happens to create movement that is in the shape of a
>hyperbola.

You are correct.  But why are you nitpicking?  It's acceleration that
happens from gravity when an object increases velocity due to a
hyperbolic movement around a gravitional field.  Amatoors often call
it the, "slingshot effect."

This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Alan Bake » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:50:42


Quote:


> wrote this crap:

> >> >> Velocity and direction are just vectors.

> >> >Direction is not a vector. Direction is a part of what makes up a
> >> >vector: direction and quantity.

> >> A vector is a quantity having both magnitude and direction.  If the
> >> velocity is a unit then the direction makes the vector.  I'm not
> >> saying that you are wrong.

> >I know what a vector is. You by your earlier statement showed you did
> >not.

> OK, we're going to go through this again.  I WAS WRONG. I made a
> slight error.  velocity is a scalar and direction is a scalar.  You
> need to add them together to get a vector.

Velocity is not a scalar. Velocity IS a vector.

Speed is a scalar. Take speed and direction and you get a vector...

...called velocity.

Quote:

> Are you happy now?  I always assume that everything is a vector.  If
> direction is 30 degrees I assume that there is a velocity from 0 to c.

Yes. I'm happy. The correct thing to do when someone points out you are
wrong and demonstrates it is to admit it.

THAT is leadership.

Quote:
> And if there is a velocity there has to be a direction.  That's just
> the way things happen.  Unless velocity is zero and direction is zero.

> Don't drink and drive.  Unless you have a good cup holder.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Alan Bake » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:51:54


Quote:


> wrote this crap:

> >> >Reactive centrifugal force is not a force applied on something to
> >> >accelerate it. It is the counter force to centripetal force that is
> >> >applied on an object.

> >> Hyperbolic acceleration around a gravitonal field is well known to
> >> scientists.

> >Which has absolutely nothing to do with centrifugal forces...

> >And it's not "hyperbolic acceleration" at all. It's acceleration due to
> >gravity which happens to create movement that is in the shape of a
> >hyperbola.

> You are correct.  But why are you nitpicking?  It's acceleration that
> happens from gravity when an object increases velocity due to a
> hyperbolic movement around a gravitional field.  Amatoors often call
> it the, "slingshot effect."

And it is yet another diversion by you.

Gravity is a real force that can result in a real acceleration of an
object.

It has nothing to do with centrifugal force which cannot accelerate
anything.

Quote:

> This signature is now the ultimate
> power in the universe

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Horvath1.. » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:32:02


wrote this crap:

Quote:
>> >> >Direction is not a vector. Direction is a part of what makes up a
>> >> >vector: direction and quantity.

>> >> A vector is a quantity having both magnitude and direction.  If the
>> >> velocity is a unit then the direction makes the vector.  I'm not
>> >> saying that you are wrong.

>> >I know what a vector is. You by your earlier statement showed you did
>> >not.

>> OK, we're going to go through this again.  I WAS WRONG. I made a
>> slight error.  velocity is a scalar and direction is a scalar.  You
>> need to add them together to get a vector.

>Velocity is not a scalar. Velocity IS a vector.

>Speed is a scalar. Take speed and direction and you get a vector...

>...called velocity.

I think you should check your notes.  Speed is a variable and velocity
is a constant.

Do you have a speedometer on your car or a velocitymeter?

Don't drink and drive.  Unless you have a good cup holder.

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Alan Bake » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:45:54


Quote:


> wrote this crap:

> >> >> >Direction is not a vector. Direction is a part of what makes up a
> >> >> >vector: direction and quantity.

> >> >> A vector is a quantity having both magnitude and direction.  If the
> >> >> velocity is a unit then the direction makes the vector.  I'm not
> >> >> saying that you are wrong.

> >> >I know what a vector is. You by your earlier statement showed you did
> >> >not.

> >> OK, we're going to go through this again.  I WAS WRONG. I made a
> >> slight error.  velocity is a scalar and direction is a scalar.  You
> >> need to add them together to get a vector.

> >Velocity is not a scalar. Velocity IS a vector.

> >Speed is a scalar. Take speed and direction and you get a vector...

> >...called velocity.

> I think you should check your notes.  Speed is a variable and velocity
> is a constant.

You are (and this is getting to be quite a habit with you).

Quote:

> Do you have a speedometer on your car or a velocitymeter?

The device in your car isn't measuring direction, so it can't be
providing you a velocity.

"velocity
noun ( pl. velocities )
the speed of something in a given direction: the velocities of the
emitted particles."

See: this is where you should step up and simply say, "Sorry. I had that
wrong."

"In kinematics, velocity is the rate of change of the position of an
object, equivalent to a specification of its speed and direction of
motion. Speed describes only how fast an object is moving, whereas
velocity gives both how fast and in what direction the object is moving."

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity>

And Wikipedia's source:

"Vector analysis; a text-book for the use of students ... . Gibbs, J.
Willard (Josiah Willard), 1839-1903."

<http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015000962285;seq=149;view=1u
p;num=125>

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Horvath1.. » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:58:43


wrote this crap:

Quote:



>> wrote this crap:

>> >> >Reactive centrifugal force is not a force applied on something to
>> >> >accelerate it. It is the counter force to centripetal force that is
>> >> >applied on an object.

>> >> Hyperbolic acceleration around a gravitonal field is well known to
>> >> scientists.

>> >Which has absolutely nothing to do with centrifugal forces...

>> >And it's not "hyperbolic acceleration" at all. It's acceleration due to
>> >gravity which happens to create movement that is in the shape of a
>> >hyperbola.

>> You are correct.  But why are you nitpicking?  It's acceleration that
>> happens from gravity when an object increases velocity due to a
>> hyperbolic movement around a gravitional field.  Amatoors often call
>> it the, "slingshot effect."

>And it is yet another diversion by you.

>Gravity is a real force that can result in a real acceleration of an
>object.

>It has nothing to do with centrifugal force which cannot accelerate
>anything.

A collapsing star starts spinning faster accelerating it's rotation.

A figure skater pulls in her arms accelerating her spin.  These are
two examples of how centrifugal force can accelerate something.

This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Alan Bake » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 12:01:27


Quote:


> wrote this crap:




> >> wrote this crap:

> >> >> >Reactive centrifugal force is not a force applied on something to
> >> >> >accelerate it. It is the counter force to centripetal force that is
> >> >> >applied on an object.

> >> >> Hyperbolic acceleration around a gravitonal field is well known to
> >> >> scientists.

> >> >Which has absolutely nothing to do with centrifugal forces...

> >> >And it's not "hyperbolic acceleration" at all. It's acceleration due to
> >> >gravity which happens to create movement that is in the shape of a
> >> >hyperbola.

> >> You are correct.  But why are you nitpicking?  It's acceleration that
> >> happens from gravity when an object increases velocity due to a
> >> hyperbolic movement around a gravitional field.  Amatoors often call
> >> it the, "slingshot effect."

> >And it is yet another diversion by you.

> >Gravity is a real force that can result in a real acceleration of an
> >object.

> >It has nothing to do with centrifugal force which cannot accelerate
> >anything.

> A collapsing star starts spinning faster accelerating it's rotation.

Which still has nothing to do with anything we've been discussing.

Quote:

> A figure skater pulls in her arms accelerating her spin.  These are
> two examples of how centrifugal force can accelerate something.

Nope. They are examples of conservation of angular momentum.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Silvi » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 20:49:38

Quote:

> And your webpage says:

> " Late in the swing, centrifugal force is *** the clubhead toward
> impact."

> and

> " When viewing them, bear in mind that the release is powered, at least
> in part, by centrifugal force -- and centrifugal clubhead acceleration
> depends on:"

> Those show an explicit misunderstanding of what centrifugal force is.

You are splitting hairs here. Call it reactive centrifugal force,
inertia or whatever, the point remains that the angle between the arms
and the club changes during the down-swing at an angular speed that is
influenced by a number of swing factors as well as the mass of the club.

The ***of the club moves at the same speed as the hands while the club
head moves a lot faster, not only because of the greater arc radius but
much more because of the club itself is rotating around the hands/wrists
joint.

The discussion was whether the hands can effectively increase the speed
of the latter rotation by applying force to the club to make it rotate
faster or not.
In able to do this the hands would have to be able to rotate faster on
their own moving freely without a club than they are rotating as a
result of being tied to the rotating club. And they can not. In fact the
hands are in the way of the club holding it back. That is why swing
robots get greater club head speed with a slower "arm" rotation: their
attachment to the club forms a joint with much less resistance than our
hands and wrists do.

When you try to manipulate the club you have to tighten your grip to be
able to apply force. Tightening the grip increases the join resistance
and as a result you decrease the club head speed in an attempt to
accelerate a club that is moving faster than any movement you can
achieve yourself.

Good swing tempo will optimize the rotation of the club around the
hands/wrists and deliver the club head to the ball at or close to the
point where the club head speed is maximal.

Hogan did it just like any other good golfer. He just had a different
mental image of what he did. You might read

http://SportToday.org/

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Horvath1.. » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:36:16


wrote this crap:

Quote:



>> wrote this crap:

>> >> >> >Direction is not a vector. Direction is a part of what makes up a
>> >> >> >vector: direction and quantity.

>> >> >> A vector is a quantity having both magnitude and direction.  If the
>> >> >> velocity is a unit then the direction makes the vector.  I'm not
>> >> >> saying that you are wrong.

>> >> >I know what a vector is. You by your earlier statement showed you did
>> >> >not.

>> >> OK, we're going to go through this again.  I WAS WRONG. I made a
>> >> slight error.  velocity is a scalar and direction is a scalar.  You
>> >> need to add them together to get a vector.

>> >Velocity is not a scalar. Velocity IS a vector.

>> >Speed is a scalar. Take speed and direction and you get a vector...

>> >...called velocity.

>> I think you should check your notes.  Speed is a variable and velocity
>> is a constant.

>You are (and this is getting to be quite a habit with you).

>> Do you have a speedometer on your car or a velocitymeter?

>The device in your car isn't measuring direction, so it can't be
>providing you a velocity.

>"velocity
>noun ( pl. velocities )
>the speed of something in a given direction: the velocities of the
>emitted particles."

>See: this is where you should step up and simply say, "Sorry. I had that
>wrong."

>"In kinematics, velocity is the rate of change of the position of an
>object, equivalent to a specification of its speed and direction of
>motion. Speed describes only how fast an object is moving, whereas
>velocity gives both how fast and in what direction the object is moving."

><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity>

>And Wikipedia's source:

>"Vector analysis; a text-book for the use of students ... . Gibbs, J.
>Willard (Josiah Willard), 1839-1903."

><http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015000962285;seq=149;view=1u
>p;num=125>

Wikipedia is not always correct.  A book written in 1839 is not really
a good source.

I give a class at the local airport to student pilots on radio
procedure. I have to explain to them what Zulu time is.  I planned to
print out a list of all time zones in the world.  Wikipedia has 25
time zones listed.  Clearly a mistake.  BTW, you are in the Juliet
time zone.  I am also in the Juliet time zone.

Nevertheless, mathematicians consider speed to be a variable and
velocity to be a constant.  Because speed can change and velocity is a
constant.  And as I said before, everything is a vector.  Even if it
is standing still, it's a zero vector.

Don't drink and drive.  Unless you have a good cup holder.

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Horvath1.. » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:41:30


wrote this crap:

Quote:

>> >> >Which has absolutely nothing to do with centrifugal forces...

>> >> >And it's not "hyperbolic acceleration" at all. It's acceleration due to
>> >> >gravity which happens to create movement that is in the shape of a
>> >> >hyperbola.

>> >> You are correct.  But why are you nitpicking?  It's acceleration that
>> >> happens from gravity when an object increases velocity due to a
>> >> hyperbolic movement around a gravitional field.  Amatoors often call
>> >> it the, "slingshot effect."

>> >And it is yet another diversion by you.

>> >Gravity is a real force that can result in a real acceleration of an
>> >object.

>> >It has nothing to do with centrifugal force which cannot accelerate
>> >anything.

>> A collapsing star starts spinning faster accelerating it's rotation.

>Which still has nothing to do with anything we've been discussing.

>> A figure skater pulls in her arms accelerating her spin.  These are
>> two examples of how centrifugal force can accelerate something.

>Nope. They are examples of conservation of angular momentum.

You are correct that these are examples of conservation of force but
you can't deny the acceleration. You can clearly see the figure skater
spinning faster.

Don't drink and drive.  Unless you have a good cup holder.

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Howard Braze » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 22:15:28

Quote:

>I give a class at the local airport to student pilots on radio
>procedure. I have to explain to them what Zulu time is.  I planned to
>print out a list of all time zones in the world.  Wikipedia has 25
>time zones listed.  Clearly a mistake.

I suspect this is "clearly a mistake" because it is greater than 24.
If so, then your assumption is wrong.   There are more than 24 time
zones.   Time zones are political.   They all aren't full hour apart
from adjacent time zones.

--
Anybody who agrees with one side all of the time or disagrees with the
other side all of the time is equally guilty of letting others do
their thinking for them.

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Howard Braze » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 22:17:05



Quote:
>The discussion was whether the hands can effectively increase the speed
>of the latter rotation by applying force to the club to make it rotate
>faster or not.
>In able to do this the hands would have to be able to rotate faster on
>their own moving freely without a club than they are rotating as a
>result of being tied to the rotating club. And they can not. In fact the
>hands are in the way of the club holding it back. That is why swing
>robots get greater club head speed with a slower "arm" rotation: their
>attachment to the club forms a joint with much less resistance than our
>hands and wrists do.

>When you try to manipulate the club you have to tighten your grip to be
>able to apply force. Tightening the grip increases the join resistance
>and as a result you decrease the club head speed in an attempt to
>accelerate a club that is moving faster than any movement you can
>achieve yourself.

Swing robots aren't designed with tendons and joints that get in the
way of an optimal swing.

--
Anybody who agrees with one side all of the time or disagrees with the
other side all of the time is equally guilty of letting others do
their thinking for them.

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Horvath1.. » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 22:52:20


wrote this crap:

Quote:

>>I give a class at the local airport to student pilots on radio
>>procedure. I have to explain to them what Zulu time is.  I planned to
>>print out a list of all time zones in the world.  Wikipedia has 25
>>time zones listed.  Clearly a mistake.

>I suspect this is "clearly a mistake" because it is greater than 24.
>If so, then your assumption is wrong.   There are more than 24 time
>zones.   Time zones are political.   They all aren't full hour apart
>from adjacent time zones.

I understand what you are saying.  However the military has divided
the earth into 24 time zones and each is given a letter of the
phonetic alphabet, from Alpha to Zulu.  India and Juliet are not used.
This is important for military use as many countries have military all
over the world, especially the US and the UK.

As a military person, I always have to know the local time, Washington
time, and Zulu time.  I'm in DST and so is Washington.  Zulu is four
hours ahead of me.  From the computer:


I can see that you are six hours behind Zulu.  But both of us are in
the Juliet time zone.  :)

On the radio all time should be given in Zulu time.  You can see that
the computer always shows Zulu time.

The funny part is that during the summer the Limeys use BST, British
Summer Time, so London is an hour off from Zulu.

Anyways, Wikipedia shows two time zones that are offset by twelve
hours, which is clearly a mistake, and there is no India time zone.

Don't drink and drive.  Unless you have a good cup holder.

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Lloy » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 23:35:24


Quote:

> As a military person, I always have to know the local time, Washington
> time, and Zulu time.  I'm in DST and so is Washington.  Zulu is four
> hours ahead of me.  From the computer:

You don't have to know any such thing.  Knowing local time is surely
convenient, but it isn't something you have to know unless you need the
local time because of some event you want to attend/view.

The other times aren't required of anyone, military or otherwise, though
ZULU time might be important.

As to Washington DC's time, in over 20 years of military service and
beyond, I've never cared at all what time it is there, nor did I need to.

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Horvath1.. » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 23:48:34


this crap:

Quote:


>> As a military person, I always have to know the local time, Washington
>> time, and Zulu time.  I'm in DST and so is Washington.  Zulu is four
>> hours ahead of me.  From the computer:

>You don't have to know any such thing.  Knowing local time is surely
>convenient, but it isn't something you have to know unless you need the
>local time because of some event you want to attend/view.

Which is like, all the time.

Quote:
>The other times aren't required of anyone, military or otherwise, though
>ZULU time might be important.

>As to Washington DC's time, in over 20 years of military service and
>beyond, I've never cared at all what time it is there, nor did I need to.

Norman Schwarzkopf always wore two watches. One for Juliet time and
one for Washington time.  On most digital watches there is settings
for two time zones.

You should know that in the military, at 2400 Zulu every day, all
passwords, frequencies and call signs are changed.  All messages
whether on paper or radio are sent in Zulu time.

This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe