Gyroscopic Action

Status
Not open for further replies.
mandrin

mandrin

New
GYROSCOPIC ACTION Example - whirling weight on a string

Mechanical - A spinning flywheel resists any effort to change its plane of rotation.

Golf - A golfclub swinging either On Plane or Off Plane, resists any attempt to change its Plane.


Above reproduced the entry in the glossary on gyroscopic action.

I am curious to know why HK included gyroscopic action in the glossary?

There are also errors.

A gyroscope does not resist any effort to change its plane of rotation, but actually responds by rotating its spin axis forcefully in the precession plane. Monorail trains are kept straight up and down in curves, using this feature.

A golfclub does not resist any attempt to change its plane due to a gyroscopic effect but rather due to restoring torque generated by the centrifugal force.
 
mandrin

mandrin

New
Erik, let’s assume I am right. Would you than rather prefer not knowing and continue believing everything as is in TGM?

I remember reading on Lynn’s forum a post mentioning that TGM was actually stimulating youngster’s to aspire for a scientific career.

If this is true than perhaps one is justified to have a careful look. What do you think?
 
Erik_K

Erik_K

New
quote:Originally posted by Erik_K

here we go again...
Click to expand...

I don't take ANYTHING verbatim. Yeah, with my engineering background(3 degrees and counting) I am sure I could find something wrong with the way HK defined his terms.

That said, I just don't see the point. I mean, in this forum, you can probably count on 2 fingers the number of people who post regularly here who believe in everything HK wrote.

So why bring up all these subtle points that get debated ad nauseum? It's the MESSAGE that is important, i.e. following, as best you can, the three imperatives. I'm sure Brian, or any decent AI, can take the weekend hacker show him/her the importance of a flat left wrist, straight plane line, twist away, etc and this person is hitting the ball like never before.

Do we really need to engage in some long-winded debate as to HK's 'incorrect' usage of the term gyroscope?
 
Burner

Burner

New
quote::Wikipedia
A gyroscope is a device for measuring or maintaining orientation, based on the principle of conservation of angular momentum. In physics this is also known as gyroscopic inertia or rigidity in space.

The essence of the device is a spinning wheel on an axle. The device, once spinning, tends to resist changes to its orientation due to the angular momentum of the wheel.
Click to expand...

In the context of his subject matter I am sure that this is what Homer had in mind.
 
birdie_man

birdie_man

New
Oh good god....

So far (in this topic) I like him...i.e. if this is the first time I ever saw a mandrin post....

Nothing "extra" there to peave me off....
 
mandrin

mandrin

New
quote:Originally posted by Burner

quote::Wikipedia
A gyroscope is a device for measuring or maintaining orientation, based on the principle of conservation of angular momentum. In physics this is also known as gyroscopic inertia or rigidity in space.

The essence of the device is a spinning wheel on an axle. The device, once spinning, tends to resist changes to its orientation due to the angular momentum of the wheel.
Click to expand...
In the context of his subject matter I am sure that this is what Homer had in mind.
Click to expand...
Burner, one hand there is Erik K, who believes that there are just barely two posters who believe all of HK and simply discards any critical information. Then there is you, on the other end of the spectrum, who will use any argument to convince that all of HK is correct. Just copy-pasting a phrase is not putting much light on the subject. You should have included a few more phrases to avoid your subtle misinformation. ;)

A gyroscope will resists any change in orientation only when there is no torque exerted on the spinning rotor. This is accomplished suspending the spinning flywheel inside gimbals and using very high quality bearings. A golf swing however, for your information, is not performed inside gimbals but accomplished exerting forces/torques. Hence the only valid comparison is to compare to a gyroscope assembly which is also subjected to torques. Just simple, fair logic, no tricks or misinformation.

A gyroscope, when torque allowed, exhibits precession and now definitely the gyroscope does not resist efforts to change its orientation. On the contrary, it exhibits this very specific change in its orientation in space, known as gyroscopic precession. I gave already the vertical stabilizing of monorail trains as example. Another practical application is the counter-steering used by motorcyclists to turn corners.

Burner, to simplify the argument, one should compare apples with apples. Using science and its vocabulary should be done with the rigor inherent in science. Any other attitude is as useful as discussing the characteristics of a deafening silence. :)
 
vandal

vandal

New
I don't know about most people here, but I'm here to learn about the golf swing. These posts do me absolutely no good whatsoever and mean diddly squat.
 
B

Brian Manzella

Administrator
Homer's statement simply MEANS—in the REAL WORLD—this:

Get the club STARTED on a plane of rotation, and UNLESS you exert torque on the spinning rotor, it will resist change.

Got it?

That's where the "Force Vector" thing comes in.

That's where the "Right Shoulder Down Plane and Axis Tilt" comes in.

Got it?

You are right and Homer is right, and you STILL need to come take a lesson or two from me to see The REAL DEAL. Then I promise, the posts will change.
 
mandrin

mandrin

New
quote:Originally posted by Erik_K

quote:Originally posted by Erik_K

here we go again...
Click to expand...

I don't take ANYTHING verbatim. Yeah, with my engineering background(3 degrees and counting) I am sure I could find something wrong with the way HK defined his terms.

That said, I just don't see the point. I mean, in this forum, you can probably count on 2 fingers the number of people who post regularly here who believe in everything HK wrote.

So why bring up all these subtle points that get debated ad nauseum? It's the MESSAGE that is important, i.e. following, as best you can, the three imperatives. I'm sure Brian, or any decent AI, can take the weekend hacker show him/her the importance of a flat left wrist, straight plane line, twist away, etc and this person is hitting the ball like never before.

Do we really need to engage in some long-winded debate as to HK's 'incorrect' usage of the term gyroscope?
Click to expand...
Erik_K, I respect your opinion but let me just remind you of a few things.

Yoda:
Yoda - I would imagine to be considered by you as an expert in TGM - believes the book exactly as written. He can cite it forwards and backwards and I have seen a post where he encourages people to learn the book by heart. This seems to indicate strongly that Yoda would totally disagree with your point of view since Yoda considers everything in TGM important, not just a few selected items and concepts.

Sally Kelley:
“With our Christian Science faith so strongly based on science, it isn’t any wonder that Homer – a man who was a scientist and inventor at heart – applied his faith into his written work as The Golfing Machine. Christian Science teaches us that pure science is built upon self-evident truths. Exact science is knowledge, so arranged that prediction and verification by experiment are possible. Application Science is a knowledge of phenomena as explained, accounted for or produced by means of powers, causes or laws. Christian Science fulfils every demand of these definitions – it is a provable, definitive and demonstrable truth.” And, when the same approach was applied by Homer to the golf swing, the result was the same – a scientific system based on verifiable truths that are proven, definitive and demonstrable.” (emphasis is mine)

Homer Kelley:
GENERAL
It is a difficult game, in that total perfection is virtually unattainable because the Golf Stroke is fantastically complex and implacably demanding of mechanical precision - wether consciously or subconsciously applied - and ruthlessly deviates with every slightest stretching of tolerances during application.
LAW
All the laws operating in a Golf Stroke - Force ans Motion, Geometry and Trigonometry, Materials and Structures, etc., have been known since the last days of Isaac Newton. No instructor, player or congressman put these laws into anything. Nor can they or anyone else be exempted from compliance with them. Laws are the Modus Operandi of their Principle.

Erik K, with your multiple engineering degrees with still more to come, it should be crystal clear for you from reading above that I am the one true to the spirit of Sally and Homer. I am trying to obey to LAW and submit my ideas to the rigor of science. You....., well you are showing indeed a very personal interpretation of Homer’s serious scientific approach to golf, considering some of his basic ideas as simply subtle points not even worth to be debated. [:p]
 
birdie_man

birdie_man

New
It's true....in a book that is so precision-oriented you would hope all the i's are dotted....(t's crossed).....

......But I think the good still outweighs the bad (IF you are right....and no, I'm not good enough in physics to really debate over this).....no? ;)
 
mandrin

mandrin

New
quote:Originally posted by brianman

Homer's statement simply MEANS—in the REAL WORLD—this:

Get the club STARTED on a plane of rotation, and UNLESS you exert torque on the spinning rotor, it will resist change.

Got it?

That's where the "Force Vector" thing comes in.

That's where the "Right Shoulder Down Plane and Axis Tilt" comes in.

Got it?

You are right and Homer is right, and you STILL need to come take a lesson or two from me to see The REAL DEAL. Then I promise, the posts will change.
Click to expand...
Concepts in science are not flexible and if one uses science to support one’s ideas one should be ready for scrutiny from scientists. Why are people so scared to a fair scrutiny?

One believes firmly having the truth so there should be no problem whatsoever. Or is it perhaps that a little doubt lingers somewhere hidden in the recesses of the mind? ;)

Why are so many on TGM forums so doggedly and collectively resisting any deviating opinion, even on details? Forums are for discussions and this way all can learn and progress. [^]

Brian your posts are strong and quite opinionated but you remain very civilized and rather fun to read, but I am curious to know your opinion re to diggerdog’s post? Do you consider it to add any value to anything? [}:)]
 
J

jap4s

New
Congrats to mandrin! Original Thought!

There is right and wrong. Lots of great ideas in TGM but lots of mistakes. Great research paper with no sources.
 
M

MizunoJoe

New
mandrin, you remind me of "Iron" Mike Tyson - no matter that you've been knocked out 5 or 6 times in a row, you come back for more! I give you an A+ for perserverance, but your glass chin gets a D-.

Now when are you going to quit jabbing, and get around to unloading the biggie on us - The mathematical proof that shaft loading doesn't exist?
 
R

rundmc

Banned
quote:Originally posted by MizunoJoe

mandrin, you remind me of "Iron" Mike Tyson - no matter that you've been knocked out 5 or 6 times in a row, you come back for more! I give you an A+ for perserverance, but your glass chin gets a D-.

Now when are you going to quit jabbing, and get around to unloading the biggie on us - The mathematical proof that shaft loading doesn't exist?
Click to expand...

Better watch out before your ear gets bit off or even worse you get you get "violated."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top