The magic of science

[mandrin]

Could it be something to do with the shortening of the cord attached to the one ball mass as the 100 ball mass pulls on it? Thus, creating a shortening of the radius on the one ball cord and increasing it's angular velocity, as well as wrapping around the pivot point?

libro,

Yes, you are on the right track. When the 1ball mass is being pulled increasingly faster closer to the pivot, whilst rotating, the centrifugal force increases extremely fast indeed. In the case of the magician's trick there is also a contribution by the friction force when the small mass rapidly wraps rapidly around the pivot point.

 

[mandrin]

David slaying Goliath

I realize that many have lost their sleep, tortured, not having been able to come up with an answer.

They are, I am sure, relieved to see their mental discomfort being taken care off by the present post.

It gives the answer with many pertinent details.

 

[Jon Hardesty]

Mandrin,

Can you explain how this information can be used, when trying to understand the forces that are generated in a golf swing?

 

[JonWil]

Mandrin,
If one assumed infinite values for the strength of the cord and the support pivot, is there a theoretical point of mass difference, between the 1ball and the (X) ball masses, that would render a different outcome? I can’t sleep until I know.

 

[mandrin]

Mandrin,

Can you explain how this information can be used, when trying to understand the forces that are generated in a golf swing?

libro,

I can assure you that it does not miraculously allows you to find the sweet spot on each and every shot but hopefully served to attract attention onto important subjects such as central forces, swing radius and interaction of linked masses. First of all those who are hypnotized by straight lines and planes better keep an eye open for the fact that everything in a golf swing is curvilinear. This implies immediately central forces such as centrifugal and centripetal forces. Given that we have a fixed support with the ground it is obvious that the only way to create efficiently adequate club head speed is to use rotary types of motion as linear motion is very restricted. Some basic understanding is hence rather useful.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdjhA2_AYpY[/media]The obvious upward vertical motion of Sadlowski, during impact is equivalent to shortening the swing radius. Swinging left instead of chasing the ball through impact is also directly related to maintaining or shortening swing radius. Release is a shortening of swing radius. I was going to delve into the matter of swing radius in my thread on release, similarly to Nesbit et al, but my interest dwindled, there being obviously no interest.

 

[Damon Lucas]

libro,

First of all those who are hypnotized by straight lines and planes better keep an eye open for the fact that everything in a golf swing is curvilinear. This implies immediately central forces such as centrifugal and centripetal forces. Given that we have a fixed support with the ground it is obvious that the only way to create efficiently adequate club head speed is to use rotary types of motion as linear motion is very restricted. Some basic understanding is hence rather useful.

This may be one of the more important statements ever made!
Kudos mandrin!

 

[Jon Hardesty]

Fantastic post Mandrin! In what ways can we use rotary motion in a linear way to shorten the radius, thus injecting some energy into the swing? I know you have listed swinging left, standing up (Laura Davies). Any other ways? I couldn't be more interested. Also, could you please explain how the release is a shortening of swing radius?

Thanks so much for all of the hard work that you contribute to this forum!

 

[mandrin]

Mandrin,

If one assumed infinite values for the strength of the cord and the support pivot, is there a theoretical point of mass difference, between the 1ball and the (X) ball masses, that would render a different outcome? I can’t sleep until I know.

JonWil,

Even if it is purely an exercise in academics it remains nevertheless an interesting question. I hope you did not lose too much sleep worrying about this problem.

There seems to be no limit as such but we both understand this to be in the mathematical domain, for real one runs quickly into limitations.

 

[mandrin]

Fantastic post Mandrin!

In what ways can we use rotary motion in a linear way to shorten the radius, thus injecting some energy into the swing?

I know you have listed swinging left, standing up (Laura Davies). Any other ways? I couldn't be more interested.

Also, could you please explain how the release is a shortening of swing radius?

Thanks so much for all of the hard work that you contribute to this forum!

libro,

To be precise shortening the swing radius should not be taken as injecting fresh energy/momentum into the swing but rather as obtaining a redistribution of available energy/momentum towards the periphery. The many bits of instruction such as, 'plantinging the trail elbow into hips‘, ‘squatting‘, ‘swinging towards the trail heel‘, ‘compressing the trail side‘, ‘drop and catch‘, have all a taste of first swinging down with a large radius hence obtaining a greater differential in radius when releasing.

Very small changes in trajectory of the hands, hardly showing up on video, have a significant effect on the dynamics of the swing. This is where Nesbit et al are active. I am intuitively convinced that the pure circular motion is not the most efficient. In general, kinetic chain, swing radius, hand’s trajectory seem to be very different concepts but really when translated into mathematics are not that far apart. But it allows different views just as there are different ways to teach golf.

Yet another way to view the down swing is with the concept of transition of direction. Whenever there is one there is acceleration at the periphery. Example: mental concept - swing down vertically behind you as much as you can and than swing the club from behind the knees vigorously towards the ball.

From the top, usually, the swing radius, associated with the clubhead, is equal to the distance from clubhead to some point between the shoulders. During release it approaches, in a descent swing, the distance from wrists to club head. Hence in every normal down swing there is a shortening of swing radius.

All in all it is not so much about how to produce more kinetic energy but rather how to get more of the available kinetic energy towards the club head, hence maximizing efficiency and approaching that for ever ephemeral and tantalizing effortless swing. Anyhow it is more fun and useful to experiment with one’s swing based on solid scientific ideas rather than using the latest golf tips in the golf magazines or the latest fashionable golf instruction available around the corner.

 

[Jon Hardesty]

Mandrin,

I will do my best to boil this information down. Please let me know if I am incorrect in my translation of it. Also, I have a few questions about it.

When you talk about the swing radius in the swing, are you saying that as you progress into the downswing the center of rotation that the clubhead rotates around is constantly changing as segments are decelerating (kinematic sequence) giving up their energy to the next?

When you speak of the trajectory of the hands, based on this information, would you say that the hands path for a "snap release" would be more efficient in transfering energy into the clubhead versus a "sweep release" hands path?

Also, I don't understand how the upward vertical motion of Jamie Sadlowski's swing is equivalent to shortening the radius. Could you help me understand that please?

Would it be correct to say that the gist of your last post speaks on behalf of the efficiency of motion as it translates into not losing (leaking) the power you have created so that it can finally be transmitted into the clubhead?

 

[mandrin]

libro,

First of all those who are hypnotized by straight lines and planes better keep an eye open for the fact that everything in a golf swing is curvilinear. This implies immediately central forces such as centrifugal and centripetal forces. Given that we have a fixed support with the ground it is obvious that the only way to create efficiently adequate club head speed is to use rotary types of motion as linear motion is very restricted. Some basic understanding is hence rather useful.

This may be one of the more important statements ever made!

Kudos mandrin!

Damon,

Thanks. I am deftly preparing a speech for my forthcoming enthronement in the hall of fame.

 

[mandrin]

When you talk about the swing radius in the swing, are you saying that as you progress into the downswing the center of rotation that the clubhead rotates around is constantly changing as segments are decelerating (kinematic sequence) giving up their energy to the next?

Only if the club head follows a circular path will there be a constant center of rotation for the club head. In general the typical locus for the instantaneous swing center of the club head is a very individual feat for each golfer. Two almost identical looking swings can have quite different loci for the instantaneous swing centers.

When you speak of the trajectory of the hands, based on this information, would you say that the hands path for a "snap release" would be more efficient in transfering energy into the clubhead versus a "sweep release" hands path?

Two golfers expending the same amount of work, hence generating the same amount of kinetic energy, can have both quite different trajectories for the hands and different kinematic sequencing. The two are not independent. I have no easy off the cuff answer to your question.

Also, I don't understand how the upward vertical motion of Jamie Sadlowski's swing is equivalent to shortening the radius. Could you help me understand that please?

I have posted on this before comparing the shortening of swing radius to the motion of a child’s swing to fit with the desire of many to get explanations in child like terms. This vertical motion is only efficient just before and during impact, when centripetal force is maximum, and hence has to be rather snappy indeed.

Would it be correct to say that the gist of your last post speaks on behalf of the efficiency of motion as it translates into not losing (leaking) the power you have created so that it can finally be transmitted into the clubhead?

The typical young aspiring male golfer on the driving range, showing his prowess to his girl friend, is typically an example of how not. He possibly generates lots of energy and yet his ball does not go very far. A slender lady pro golfer with her seemingly effortless smooth action does not seem to exert much action in comparison yet get way past our muscle man. One big leaky swing versus smooth optimum kinetic linking.

 

[Jon Hardesty]

Thanks Mandrin!

 

[dashfan87]

The typical young aspiring male golfer on the driving range, showing his prowess to his girl friend, is typically an example of how not. He possibly generates lots of energy and yet his ball does not go very far. A slender lady pro golfer with her seemingly effortless smooth action does not seem to exert much action in comparison yet get way past our muscle man. One big leaky swing versus smooth optimum kinetic linking.

So this pretty much sounds like me... Now how do i figure out how to optimumly kinetic link my swing? and dont tell my to see brian! I would have by now if I could afford it.

 

[mandrin]

The typical young aspiring male golfer on the driving range, showing his prowess to his girl friend, is typically an example of how not. He possibly generates lots of energy and yet his ball does not go very far. A slender lady pro golfer with her seemingly effortless smooth action does not seem to exert much action in comparison yet get way past our muscle man. One big leaky swing versus smooth optimum kinetic linking.

So this pretty much sounds like me... Now how do i figure out how to optimumly kinetic link my swing? and dont tell my to see brian! I would have by now if I could afford it.

dashfan87,

You just got married recently. Congratulations.

In various ways this will take care of the abundance of energy enticing you so far to use too much effort swinging the golf club.

Once this happens your brain will instinctively look for ways to optimize the little energy that is left.

Only then you will become ripe for optimizing your kinetic chain.

So just hang for a little while and time will take care of your problem.

 

[dashfan87]

dashfan87,

You just got married recently. Congratulations.

In various ways this will take care of the abundance of energy enticing you so far to use too much effort swinging the golf club.

Once this happens your brain will instinctively look for ways to optimize the little energy that is left.

Only then you will become ripe for optimizing your kinetic chain.

So just hang for a little while and time will take care of your problem.

Bahaha, I didn't even think that THAT would help the golf swing... but seeing as how intelligent you are, I trust your advice...

 

[birdie_man]

You will be hammering, drilling, nailing it in no time, dash.

(is this a family site??)

 

[dashfan87]

You will be hammering, drilling, nailing it in no time, dash.

(is this a family site??)

not anymore...