No CF? No pure Swingers?
 

What do yall think of this statement:

"As I have said before, the whole swinging vs hitting concept loses credibility when you understand that centrifugal force doesn't exist. Certainly some golfers rely more on radial acceleration (hitting) than others, but every golfer must employ it to some degree. Therefore there is no such thing as a true swinger."

I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong right now.....I really don't know about this....very tough thing to discern.

I'd like to think Homer is right...but either way, I think such a bold statement requires that it be examined.

Anyhoo just want to get to figure this out.

BM…put down that drink.

Who said that CF doesn't exist?

How do you create radial acceleration if you are only pulling? Rope handle.

Exist?
 

///////////////////////////////////////////

I have heard this before about CENTRIFUGAL FORCE. Some Physics guys say that IT does not really exist.

There are some that do... gravity, inertia, maybe CENTRIPETAL FORCE, magnetic force...

PHYSICS... is a complex subject.

Cf
 

It's not that difficult to understand- but first- who are we quoting? And is this quote drawn from a broader context?
Thanks

"O! be some other name: What's in a name? that which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet" :)

The argument has been a rage in the Physics coffee rooms around the world for a long time because of the trickiness of the answer. Maybe the folks at NASA can help.

Here is what they have to say:

"Because the centrifugal force exists only in rotating reference frames, but not in inertial reference frames, it's sometimes called a "fictitious" or "pseudo" force.
We don't like this characterization because there is nothing fictitious or pseudo about it when your car goes off the road and crashes, or when your bicycle skids out from under you when cornering a slippery curve. The Earth's equatorial bulge is not a fiction, nor is the problem an engineer confronts when designing turbine blades of jet engines that have to stay together at rotation rates of up to 100,000 revolutions per minute."

http://observe.arc.nasa.gov/nasa/spa...trifugal5.html

Some dude on another forum.

No. That's all he said about the topic.....changed subject in the next paragraph. He likes TGM but that's one of the things he thinks is an error.

Centrifugal/centripetal....and whether or not anyone can be a "pure" swinger.

...

I've heard this stuff a few times. I want to get to the bottom of it regardless of who's right.

Here's some stuff I found:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_force
http://regentsprep.org/Regents/physi...if/centrif.htm
http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/sci/A0811114.html

...

If you go by these sites they seem to say it's a "false force"....or "reactive force." I think reactive force is more appropriate.

Although.....you prolly could also get into the definition of "force" and what it means exactly....

...

Makes sense though.....the centrifugal force is only there because there is something that is creating it....I guess that would be centripetal force...the actual rotation....which creates the centrifugal force.

...

Really though....

Even if this is the way it is.....is does little to devalidate TGM in a working sense......more of a semantics thing or w/e.....all it would change is the definition itself.....add centripetal into the mix.

Tempest in a Teapot
 

It seems to me that the only reason this non-issue is still alive is because some folks buy into the rants of the developer of Natural Golf and Lever Power Golf. :)

A silly debate IMO. One of symantics.

The circle, a wheel, is a lever and a rather efficient one.

Couldn't agree more.

Radial vs Longitudinal -- Mutually Exclusive
 

Lets move this thread to a slightly different direction and try to understand what exactly Homer meant by:

"Lag Loading (Clubhead Feel) is classified according to difference in the procedures for accelerating the Secondary Lever Assembly (the Club). That is – Radially or Longitudinally – which are mutually exclusive. That is – both cannot be applied at the same time."

Centrifugal Force
 

Wish I had more time to type a well thought out reply- but since I don't - I'm going to "Quickly, throw one up on the board", because from the previous posts and references - I think it is clear that it is very important to understand this issue.

I'm certainly know physics expert- so bear with me.

Forces or Force Vectors have a direction and a magnitude. Another words they only move in a straight line (that's the direction)- ANY angular motion is a result of more than one force- a resultant force. For example in the golf swing or any circular motion- imagine you start with "one" force that moves the club in a straight line direction- now it will continue to go in a straight line unless another force chimes in to alter the motion- that's the centripetal force- the force towards the center. Those are the two forces that produce the resultant force of angular motion. If you take away the centripetal force- then the club goes flying off in a straight line direction- on a tangent to the circle.

So you don't have a outward force in the opposite direction of the centripetal force- i.e you don't have a centrifugal force, you have one centripetal or inward force constantly preventing the "natural" effort of the clubhead to fly in a straight line. Together they produce angular motion.

You do have centrifugal force in the sense that if you eliminate the centripetal force- then the clubhead will fly out at a tangent to the circle- which is away from the center of the circle- but that force is at right angles to the radius of the circle- not anywhere close to the direction that the radius of the circle is pointing at that point in time.

Again, Homer Kelley understood the issue- but he knew the term Centrifugal Force was a commonly used term at the time and therefore used it.

Overall, I'd guess that the typical trait of academia in this generation is to make more and more finer differentiations among concepts/facts etc. You'll find far fewer who also have the ability to integrate those facts into wider and wider integrations i.e. think in principles. Homer Kelley understood on a very practical and conscious level, the basic nature of man's method of cognition- the Golfing Machine book is an example and product of a brilliant mind at work. He not only understood the nature of the conscious mind but that of the subconscious mind- and the relationship between the two (Chapter 14)- he understood that if his conscious mind wanted to understand something that the subconscious mind would do the work and that's what he termed incubation. He understood that sometimes things were clear and other times they were not clear- that that was the nature of the learning process, and hence his term Star System Press for that pulsating star that at times is clear and other times hardly visible. I don't really consider myself a out and out - TGM fanatic- and therefore I rarely "sell" the system or Mr. Kelley- and he always said "Don't sell the system"- He knew that in that environment at that time - that it would just create more critics, more walls- so he was always low key, unassuming, and complimentary of any PGA pro and what they knew. The same is probably still true today- but He was a brilliant guy with a brilliant mind- NO, DOUBT ABOUT IT! And don't take that wrong- I'm not saying that anyone here implied differently- just wanted to jump on my own soapbox for a moment

Every single time Mike O starts with "I don't have enough time." A homerun shot follows. Great post Mike. You got a lil' bit of that brilliant (and demented) mind in you too.

What are you so busy with by the way? Pulling wings off of butterflys or exploding seagulls by feedin' 'em alka-seltzer?

12 Piece
 

How are your weekly walks out in the courtyard going? When do we get out of here? Or is it true that you have no hope of being released?=;

When swinging, I'm still amazed at the acceleration of the club head without muscular effort. And the difference between sweep release and snap release is quite perceptible though the difference in ground speed may only be a few MPH. Only recently, I admit, I've come to understand that applying even the slightest muscular force to the club shaft will hamper the acceleration produced by CF. Specifically, the point at which I would begin to apply muscular effort is the point at which CF acceleration alone stops. What surprises me most is when the hands pass the line of sight to the ball the club head seems to pick up tremendous speed. All of this without perceived effort and without hand acceleration. Horizontal Hinging with CF is quite the combination.

This has eluded me for many years. A lot of components in my swing have had to change. Plane line tracing became easy and almost natural.

CF is a powerful force. I don't have the knowledge to debate CF, but I do have the knowledge to harness it. Call the force whatever you want. HK chose CF and I've come to understand what he meant. And, my Golfing is much the better for it.

They don't let me talk about my "walks" anymore since the cow incident.

:D Hi Mike, my name is Patrick, nice to meet you.

Great post! My favorite line, and I quote, "know physics expert"
....now that is funny.

But seriously, great post Mike!!!!!!


From my years and years of research (yeah right), and I am KNOW physics expert, I have garned that generally - while the scientic community recognizes centrifugal force - it is also known (as stated in the first 1 or 2 posts) as a pseudo force - that is, it does not exist without centripetal force.

But what the hell do they NO anyway?

room 104
 

Bucket,
Your in room 103- and Clark's right next to you in 104- would you go in tonight before the nurse tucks him in - and take care of the situation- the other patients in the ward have had enough- we just can't take it any longer!:clap: Wait I just saw him down the hall mumbling something to himself.

Consider it done . . . after I drink my water. Have to drink 8 glasses of water . . . I love water . . . . 8 glasses of water. Ice is frozen water. And it floats on water. 8 glasses. No more no less.

I'll take care of Clark . . .

AFTER MY WATER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11