LynnBlakeGolf Forums - On Forces active in the Golf Swing....

LynnBlakeGolf Forums (http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/index.php)

- The Lab (http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=31)

- - On Forces active in the Golf Swing.... (http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6469)

A book named "The science of Golf" published in Feb, 2009 not only mentioned CF but also with calculation...Dr John Wesson....who are you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by no_mind_golfer (Post 61979)

How can golfers ever expect to get better if they don't understand root cause and are being misled by those who claim to understand .... but don't?

Muscle contractions cause forces on the levers of the human body. These forces, being unreacted, result in movement in accordance with Newtons F=MA where A is acceleration or first derivative of velocity. Changing velocity is acceleration and when there is a mass involved creates a force (or vice-versa). When there is no apposing force as in the golf swing we get MOVEMENT.

In dynamics, forces do not always come in pairs... Statics (no motion yes)... Dynamics (motion) NO. For example: there is no force apposing the thrust (FORCE) of a jet or rocket engine. Mass is expelled at velocity causing MOTION... F = (dM/dt * V) = MA.

Only pseudoscientists confuse internal loads with external loads aka the forces that cause movement.

Our bodies having mass are constantly subjected to a force (gravity)... What's the opposite of gravity? Anti-gravity? Only on Star Trek people. Without gravity our muscles atrophy and our bones leach calcium (which BTW creates a problem for long term space travel). Gravity causes a beneficial INTERNAL load (but its not called anti-gravity) on our bones and Muscles... BUT GRAVITY DOESN'T (necessarily) MAKE US MOVE! Get it? On to Golf.

In order for any object to move on a curvilinear path, it must be subjected to an acceleration. There is a name for that acceleration that causes a change in direction: centripetal. When that object on a curvilinear path has mass, a force is involved: CENTRIPETAL FORCE. Only uneducated individuals refer to the internals loads imposed on a structure by centripetal force as CENTRIFUGAL FORCES.....

Educated individuals know that the CENTRIFUGAL force is an imaginary one (a fudge factor) that is only used when non-inertial coordinate systems are being analyzed. Any pseudo-golf scientist that tries to tell you that centrifugal force causes motion or is in any way involved in the golf swing ... is blowing smoke up your .... backside. It takes a lot of gaul for said psuedo-scientist to claim Cambridge University's physicists know not what they speak.... absolutely ludicrous when you think about it....

Centrifugal force is not operant in the golf swing. When you hear mention of centrifugal force with respect to the golf swing know that you're dealing with a posuer and move on. Humor him if his ego demands it but move on for there can be no reasoning with the ignorant.

I hope Mandrin reads this one cause this post was aimed at him. Boom Boom
Mandarin/Orange

I'm beggin ya Danny

That match would be better than watching Ultimate Fighting. Please I'm beggin' ya to have it. I'll skip going to Augusta for that one............maybe not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoda (Post 61991)

I'll take the equally deluded Ted Fort, Jeff Hull and 12 Piece Bucket -- :shock: -- against the best ball of you and any three of your referenced Cambridge physicists.

:happy3:

Yoda - You really need to pick three completely deluded CF (or whatever its called) swingers. Ted is disqualified, Jeff admits he probably pushes through impact, and Bucket uses 72 different patterns during a single round.

I suggest EdZ, MikeO, and Collin Neeman. :golf:

Quote:

Originally Posted by KOC (Post 61995)

A book named "The science of Golf" published in Feb, 2009 not only mentioned CF but also with calculation...Dr John Wesson....who are you?

Yes that guy.... Just because a book gets published does not mean the author knows what he/shes talking about. At least in his physics of soccer book... Wesson doesn't know what he's talking about (with respect to the physics of release). In figure 2.3 of that book he's got one of those (wrong) imaginary arrows I refer above.

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/7340/wesson.gif

There is no force out there... CF or otherwise! The only force the lower leg (in this case) or golf club (in our case) experiences is the force applied at the at the knee or at the hands (disregarding the minor contribution due to gravity)!

Try thinking about it this way.... Forces are vector quantities, they have both direction and magnitude. If you draw an infinite line in the direction of the force and if that line does not happen to go through the center of gravity of that object then when that force is applied it will cause the object to not only translate but also rotate. Grab the periphery of almost any object and pull... does it rotate? Its inertia that causes the object to not only translate but also rotate when the "line of action" of the force does not go through the CG. In essence... THIS not CF is what causes release.

http://books.google.com/books?id=dGc... =0_0#PPA21,M1

Have at it I've got to catch a flight now...

PS LynnB we will see... on second thought no way... pissing matches are for school yards :)

The Great Pretenders

Quote:

Originally Posted by no_mind_golfer (Post 62002)

PS LynnB we will see... on second thought no way... pissing matches are for school yards :)

Actually, having been exposed in your opening post as "ignorant" and a "posuer" -- BTW, the correct spelling is poseur -- with regard to scientific principles, I proposed a golf match, not a "pissing" match. And not in a "school yard", but on a championship layout. Guess you weren't feeling lucky. :shifty:

The truth is, no_mind, that despite your condescending and incorrect labeling, we here at LBG have learned to make the golf ball behave. And, despite your counsel to our readers that they "humor" us and "move on", we have demonstrated our ability to help our students do the same.

:salut:

Just in from Cambridge

Just if your interested:

Where Vfict (r) is the potential responsible for the
centrifugal force: fc = −ω×(ω×r) = (ω2−ω ωT)r
.
Vfict (r) = −1
2 rT(ω2 − ω ωT)r
Now, Rs and RJ are parallel and MsRs+MJRJ =
0.
[Note that if a particle is moving then addi-
tional Coriolis forces act that are not mentioned
in @
@rVeff (r), so we can’t determine stability from
Veff .

Any questions?

Quote:

Originally Posted by no_mind_golfer (Post 62002)

Have at it I've got to catch a flight now...

PS LynnB we will see... on second thought no way... pissing matches are for school yards :)

If the pilot don't understand the physics of lift and drag . . . are you gonna get on the plane?

If Lynn don't first write a dissertation on fluid dynamics . . . . should he tie a knot in it and hope not to piss down his leg?

When all is said and done, who cares about what the physics of the golf swing are?

If my club head is moving at 100+ mph, but not on plane and aligned correctly at impact, what good were all the formulas when you have to look for ball in the next county?

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBax (Post 62011)

Yes Rob, are you sure that your calculation 2 rT(ω2 − ω ωT)r should not be 1.8 rT(ω2 − ω ωT)r ? Just wondering.