Physics

[lagster]

Originally Posted by lagster

OK... would not a 100 lb. golfing machine(Iron Byron type device, Pingman, etc.) hit the ball further than a 6 ounce machine(that's more than twice the weight of the ball), with all other factors being equal? The momentum(mass in motion) is transferring from the machine, into the clubhead, into the ball. -hcw

if the 6 oz machine can swing the same club, with the same acceleration, with the same impact parameters (ie hits the exact same spot on the ball with exact same spot on the clubhead) as the 100 lb machine, then i think the ball will go the same distance, all other factors (eg wind, ball elasticity) being equal

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
hcw,

That would be an interesting experiment!

The point I was really making is... that I'm pretty sure there are players with slower clubhead speeds, that outdrive those with faster speeds, because they more efficiently transfer momentum(mass in motion) into the ball. The ball is like a little computer, and picks up all this information during the IMPACT INTERVAL. THIS OF COURSE, WITH HUMANS, WOULD BE HARD TO PROVE, BECAUSE OF ALL THE OTHER FACTORS INVOLVED.

[wally888]

We have two clubs, both have the same mass, both have a speed of 100 mph at impact, both are acceleating at the same rate, both are on the correct plane and correct path, both clubs are square at ball seperation, launch angle is perfect for max. distance (may have left something out but you get the idea).

But

One club has no golfer attached!

Difference?

[hcw]

The point I was really making is... that I'm pretty sure there are players with slower clubhead speeds, that outdrive those with faster speeds, because they more efficiently transfer momentum(mass in motion) into the ball. The ball is like a little computer, and picks up all this information during the IMPACT INTERVAL. THIS OF COURSE, WITH HUMANS, WOULD BE HARD TO PROVE, BECAUSE OF ALL THE OTHER FACTORS INVOLVED.

lagster,
the point i'm really trying to make is that if you found these golfers i think you would find that that the ones with slower clubhead speeds still had better accleration at impact...that's what happens when they "more efficiently transfer momentum"...example: if i get the clubhead 0->120 mph from TOS->impact in 2 seconds, i have 60 mph/s of acceleration...if i get the clubhead 0->100 mph from TOS->impact in 1.5 seconds, i have 66.7 mph/s of acceleration and i think that this ball will go farther (assuming the contact parameters and flight conditions being equal)...BUT, i have absolutely no data to back this up...does anybody know of such studies/measurements?

-hcw

[EdZ]

We have two clubs, both have the same mass, both have a speed of 100 mph at impact, both are acceleating at the same rate, both are on the correct plane and correct path, both clubs are square at ball seperation, launch angle is perfect for max. distance (may have left something out but you get the idea).

But

One club has no golfer attached!

Difference?

Absolutely.

That difference is 'support', which is indeed additional mass of the player. The difference is less slowdown due to impact and therefore faster separation speed.

[lagster]

Originally Posted by lagster

The point I was really making is... that I'm pretty sure there are players with slower clubhead speeds, that outdrive those with faster speeds, because they more efficiently transfer momentum(mass in motion) into the ball. The ball is like a little computer, and picks up all this information during the IMPACT INTERVAL. THIS OF COURSE, WITH HUMANS, WOULD BE HARD TO PROVE, BECAUSE OF ALL THE OTHER FACTORS INVOLVED.

lagster,
the point i'm really trying to make is that if you found these golfers i think you would find that that the ones with slower clubhead speeds still had better accleration at impact...that's what happens when they "more efficiently transfer momentum"...example: if i get the clubhead 0->120 mph from TOS->impact in 2 seconds, i have 60 mph/s of acceleration...if i get the clubhead 0->100 mph from TOS->impact in 1.5 seconds, i have 66.7 mph/s of acceleration and i think that this ball will go farther (assuming the contact parameters and flight conditions being equal)...BUT, i have absolutely no data to back this up...does anybody know of such studies/measurements?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Good question about studies/measurements! True Temper may have some data like that. Ping R&D department may also.
-hcw

[lagster]

Originally Posted by wally888

We have two clubs, both have the same mass, both have a speed of 100 mph at impact, both are acceleating at the same rate, both are on the correct plane and correct path, both clubs are square at ball seperation, launch angle is perfect for max. distance (may have left something out but you get the idea). But One club has no golfer attached! Difference?

Absolutely.

That difference is 'support', which is indeed additional mass of the player. The difference is less slowdown due to impact and therefore faster separation speed.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

I think EdZ is correct on this one. I think Pivot Lag is also related to this momentum(mass in motion) transfer. Pivot Lag..."operates like a "gear train" to extend the Swing Radius of the Primary Lever to any point from the Shoulder turn on down to the Feet(Zone #1)."

Now... maybe Mr. Yoda can go on with his Rocky Thompson story... relating to ARC size.

[lagster]

Wedgy Winchester won a national Long Drive championship with a very, very long driver. Rocky Thompson was one of the longest drivers on the Senior Tour with his Killer Bee.

These clubs obviously work. When(in inches and weight) do they become TOO LONG?

Why don't more players use them? I once played with Peter Croker while he was using a very long driver. He is a very small guy... but with this, he was long and straight!

[Martee]

Maintaining the acceleration rate at impact, through impact is the question, will it without mass behind it?

Given the scenario above, all things being equal minus the mass behind the generation of the acceleration, you will find no difference.

The reason is simple, you can not assume that the one without mass will slow down, there was no reason at the start for it to slow down, cause somehow it is accelerating the same as the one with mass.

Applying Newton's laws would as I understand it, have the "For an unbalanced force acting on a body, the acceleration produced is proportional to the force impressed; the constant of proportionality is the inertial mass of the body. " Because of impact both clubhead are affected in the same manner. Since Mass exist behind one which must be inpart responsible for the acceleration and the second has no mass behind it but yet an equal amount of acceleration it is therefore consistent to state they would both be effected the same.

Granted it seems that logically the impact would cause the one with no mass to slow down or be effected whereas the one with mass could offer resistance to this reduce, minimize and maybe overcome this effect, BUT since the one without the mass behind it was able to achieve the same acceleration rate, there is no logical explanation how or why it would not continue to act the same. Of course I am trying to figure out how something like this could achieve this acceleration rate.

Even the 1 lb vs the 100 lb comes up with the same answer. The golf ball only knows what the clubhead has told it or done to it. It has no idea why the clubhead has the properties it exhibits.

The difference between golfers and this scenario is the Human factor and the Techniques applied.

The key could be said, 'Sustain the Line of Compression'.......

[wally888]

Maintaining the acceleration rate at impact, through impact is the question, will it without mass behind it?

Given the scenario above, all things being equal minus the mass behind the generation of the acceleration, you will find no difference.

The reason is simple, you can not assume that the one without mass will slow down, there was no reason at the start for it to slow down, cause somehow it is accelerating the same as the one with mass.

Applying Newton's laws would as I understand it, have the "For an unbalanced force acting on a body, the acceleration produced is proportional to the force impressed; the constant of proportionality is the inertial mass of the body. " Because of impact both clubhead are affected in the same manner. Since Mass exist behind one which must be inpart responsible for the acceleration and the second has no mass behind it but yet an equal amount of acceleration it is therefore consistent to state they would both be effected the same.

Granted it seems that logically the impact would cause the one with no mass to slow down or be effected whereas the one with mass could offer resistance to this reduce, minimize and maybe overcome this effect, BUT since the one without the mass behind it was able to achieve the same acceleration rate, there is no logical explanation how or why it would not continue to act the same. Of course I am trying to figure out how something like this could achieve this acceleration rate.

Even the 1 lb vs the 100 lb comes up with the same answer. The golf ball only knows what the clubhead has told it or done to it. It has no idea why the clubhead has the properties it exhibits.

The difference between golfers and this scenario is the Human factor and the Techniques applied.

The key could be said, 'Sustain the Line of Compression'.......

I knew that! Only kidding but the question arose in my head after thinking about V.J. , Freddy C., others and their apparent let go somewhere near impact/seperation. Another clue, especially with a teed ball (no or little divot), was that I always knew the feel of a good strike of the ball always felt as if I had hit the ball (impact and seperation) long after the club made contact. But, before TGM, never knew why! Wonder what % of those attempting to play have ever felt this? stloc.

[lagster]

What about TRANSFER OF MOMENTUM(mass in motion)? It takes longer for a freight train to slow down than it does an ant. If the momentum of the train could be transferred into the ball....well.

Also... what about the 3rd law of motion(action/reaction)?