ABT swing anybody?

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Lloy » Sat, 30 Mar 2013 23:52:28



Quote:


> this crap:



> >> 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.

Bullshit.  While I have some events that are of interest, the vast
majority of the day/night is doing things where time is not of the
essence at all.

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 ain't no Norman Schwarzkopf!  :)

You wouldn't need those since 'O club officers' aren't really all that
important.

I suppose you would need to know the time to ensure you were at the
Officer's club bar doors at opening.

Quote:
> 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.

I know that, so what?
 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Horvath1.. » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 00:07:38


this crap:

Quote:

>> >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.

>Bullshit.  While I have some events that are of interest, the vast
>majority of the day/night is doing things where time is not of the
>essence at all.

Are you joking?  Time is the most important thing we have.

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 ain't no Norman Schwarzkopf!  :)

Of course not.  He's dead.

Quote:
>You wouldn't need those since 'O club officers' aren't really all that
>important.

>I suppose you would need to know the time to ensure you were at the
>Officer's club bar doors at opening.

Happy Hour only comes once a day.  :)

Quote:
>> 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.

>I know that, so what?

So what?  it's very important.

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

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Alan Bake » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 00:44:27



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.

And have roughly 32 times the power of a human being to get the job
done...

--
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 » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 00:50:44


Quote:


> wrote this crap:

> >> >> >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.

They aren't examples of conservation of force.

They are example of you evading the subject under discussion:

centrifugal force can't accelerate anything.

Quote:

> 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 Horvath1.. » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 00:57:06


wrote this crap:

Quote:

>> >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.

>They aren't examples of conservation of force.

You just claimed they were.

Quote:
>They are example of you evading the subject under discussion:

>centrifugal force can't accelerate anything.

I just showed you two examples.  Here's another one.  An old time
slingshot that you swing in circles over your head.  You are certainly
accelerating the stone.

This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Horvath1.. » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 01:12:22


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.

I have a GPS in my car.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:
>"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>

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Alan Bake » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 01:15:24


Quote:


> wrote this crap:

> >> >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.

> >They aren't examples of conservation of force.

> You just claimed they were.

No... ...I didn't.

Momentum is not force.

Quote:

> >They are example of you evading the subject under discussion:

> >centrifugal force can't accelerate anything.

> I just showed you two examples.  Here's another one.  An old time
> slingshot that you swing in circles over your head.  You are certainly
> accelerating the stone.

Not with centrifugal force, you're not.

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.. » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 01:33:43


wrote this crap:

Quote:
>> You just claimed they were.

>No... ...I didn't.

>Momentum is not force.

There's a few people that would disagree, like Einstein, or Sir Isaac
Newton, Galileo, just to name some.

Quote:

>> >They are example of you evading the subject under discussion:

>> >centrifugal force can't accelerate anything.

>> I just showed you two examples.  Here's another one.  An old time
>> slingshot that you swing in circles over your head.  You are certainly
>> accelerating the stone.

>Not with centrifugal force, you're not.

So, you are *** something around in circles to accelerate it hard
enough to kill Goliath and it's not centrifugal force?
What would you call it?

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

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Howard Braze » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 04:23:34

Quote:

>>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.

I'd love it if the world went to Zulu time.   It would remove lots of
confusion.   (I was a USAF pilot, so I may be biased).

We may be moving to ESPN time though...

--
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 » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 04:26:32



Quote:

>They aren't examples of conservation of force.

>They are example of you evading the subject under discussion:

>centrifugal force can't accelerate anything.

It depends on what the subject under discussion is.    The word
started off being used as an aid to figuring out a good golf swing. It
is my contention, that in that context, the word worked.

It branched off into a discussion of vectors, showing that the term
doesn't work with physics.   Which is an interesting discussion -
unless we are trying to come up with a better golf 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 syntax erro » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:01:18

Quote:

> > Really?  Can you calculate the determinate of a 7 by 7 matrix?

> ***Bath Matrix Determinant

> public static int ***Bath_Determinant(int[][] ***Bath_Matrix){ //method sig. takes a ***Bath_Matrix (two dimensional array), returns ***Bath_Determinant.

>     int sum=0;

>     int s;

>     if(***Bath_Matrix.length==1){  //bottom case of recursion. size 1 ***Bath_Matrix ***Bath_Determinant is itself.

>       return(***Bath_Matrix[0][0]);

>     }

>     for(int i=0;i<***Bath_Matrix.length;i++){ //finds ***Bath_Determinant using row-by-row expansion

>       int[][]smaller= new int[***Bath_Matrix.length-1][***Bath_Matrix.length-1]; //creates smaller ***Bath_Matrix- values not in same row, column

>       for(int a=1;a<***Bath_Matrix.length;a++){

>         for(int b=0;b<***Bath_Matrix.length;b++){

>           if(b<i){

>             smaller[a-1][b]=***Bath_Matrix[a][b];

>           }

>           else if(b>i){

>             smaller[a-1][b-1]=***Bath_Matrix[a][b];

>           }

>         }

>       }

>       if(i%2==0){ //sign changes based on i

>         s=1;

>       }

>       else{

>         s=-1;

>       }

>       sum+=s****Bath_Matrix[0][i]*(***Bath_Determinant(smaller)); recursive step: ***Bath_Determinant of larger determined by smaller.

>     }

>     return(sum); //returns ***Bath_Determinant value. once stack is finished, returns final ***Bath_Determinant.

>   }

  sum+=s****Bath_Matrix[0][i]*(***Bath_Determinant(smaller)); recursive step: ***Bath_Determinant of larger determined by smaller.

should be:

  sum+=s****Bath_Matrix[0][i]*(***Bath_Determinant(smaller)); // recursive step: ***Bath_Determinant of larger determined by smaller.

But this is unfair to Horvath, since I'd guess if he ever did write any
code it would have been in Fortran G or Fortran IV where recursion isn't
supported.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> .



> > wrote this crap:

> > >It still works quite well as a concept for such things as golf.   (My

> > >B.S. was in physics).

> > Really?  Can you calculate the determinate of a 7 by 7 matrix?

> > This signature is now the ultimate

> > power in the universe

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Mr. Jo » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:21:00



Quote:
> Tutelman talks about "centrifugal force" as if it actually exists...

> It doesn't.

> That pretty much puts paid to any claims he might make about his
> "scientific" and "physics-based" analysis of the golf swing.

Your double digit handicap tells us about your scientific and physics
based understanding of the golf swing.

--
People died, Obama lied

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Howard Braze » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 06:02:29

Quote:



>> Tutelman talks about "centrifugal force" as if it actually exists...

>> It doesn't.

>> That pretty much puts paid to any claims he might make about his
>> "scientific" and "physics-based" analysis of the golf swing.

>Your double digit handicap tells us about your scientific and physics
>based understanding of the golf swing.

So are you saying Albert Einstein should have been a better golfer
than Moe Norman?

--
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.. » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 06:46:56


wrote this crap:

Quote:

>>>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.

>I'd love it if the world went to Zulu time.   It would remove lots of
>confusion.   (I was a USAF pilot, so I may be biased).

Then you understand why all flight plans are filed in Zulu time.
You probably know that all branches of the service use the same radio
procedure.  The Army, Navy, Air Farce, Marines, Coasties, all use the
same radio procedure.  My golf partner is an engineer on the railroad
and they use the same radio procedure.  All ATCs, air traffic
controllers, all over the world use the same radio procedure.

Quote:
>We may be moving to ESPN time though...

I don't think that's going to happen.

This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

 
 
 

ABT swing anybody?

Post by Howard Braze » Sun, 31 Mar 2013 07:25:39

Quote:

>>I'd love it if the world went to Zulu time.   It would remove lots of
>>confusion.   (I was a USAF pilot, so I may be biased).

>Then you understand why all flight plans are filed in Zulu time.
>You probably know that all branches of the service use the same radio
>procedure.  The Army, Navy, Air Farce, Marines, Coasties, all use the
>same radio procedure.  My golf partner is an engineer on the railroad
>and they use the same radio procedure.  All ATCs, air traffic
>controllers, all over the world use the same radio procedure.

I've heard that the Air Traffic Controllers in Montreal don't use
English though.

Quote:
>>We may be moving to ESPN time though...

>I don't think that's going to happen.

My statement was tongue in cheek, but people are learning to translate
times with ESPN broadcasts.

--
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.