Was Homer Wrong?

[neil]

Mate, that was so funny

OZZY,nice to hear you mate -how are you doing in the WORLD CUP!

[Ozgolfer]

OZZY,nice to hear you mate -how are you doing in the WORLD CUP!

We wuz robbed

Greg Louganis had been giving diving lessons to the Italians

They knew all about Centrifugal force

[brianmanzella]

This yahoo tried this same thread on my site.

He made a comment about Lag not being real.

I STOPPED HIM COLD WITH THIS ONE:

"At Address, take your right thumb off of the club, point it at the target, UN-hook your right forefinger and let it DANGLE—slightly off of the club, then hit a full driver at 100+mph.

(if you can)

Why doesn't the driver FLY out of the right hand for a decent player?

Don't hurt yourself, the answer isn't in any book (except the yellow one...implied)."

BTW, dude, Mathew can knock this one out of the park!

You'll get called out on strikes without swinging.

[comdpa]

...(if you can)...

I really enjoyed this quote from Brian haha...

I am worried however, will the realisation that lag not being real cause my drives to dribble off the tee???

Can somebody help me on this one?

[golf_sceptic]

This yahoo tried this same thread on my site. He made a comment about Lag not being real. I STOPPED HIM COLD WITH THIS ONE:

With the greatest of respect Brian I think you have a case of mistaken identity. I logged back in your site just now. Your system said that my previous logon was 01-28-2005. That's nearly 18 months ago. Your site tells me I made a total of 8 posts. Three were in a discussion called "Inside aft quadrant ??!!!". Four were in a discussion called "Golfing Machine Science.". One was in a discussion called "Ball and low point". The last words you wrote to me were "Yes, I do have those numbers....Will post them tommorrow."

You never did! Then you come here and boast about how you "STOPPED HIM COLD".

Wrong Brian. Not impressive at all.

As to the other ranting and mockery. That's your choice, and the natural consequences will follow. The discussion will deteriorate and die and anybody's chance of learning anything on the subject of frames of reference will die with it until one of your own explains it to you. An excellent opportunity to reconcile TGM theories with mainstream physics concepts will be missed.

If anybody is still reading, the laws of physics are different in non-inertial frames. The concepts, calculations and discussions become much more complicated because you have to apply so many corrections to deal with the motion of the frame itself. The results (after all the hard work) will be the same. Unfortunately the concepts are not immediately accessible to the man in the street. That does not mean they are wrong or invalid Mike.

Why is the difference important? As ThinkingPlus pointed out it is convenient for many purposes to use non-inertial frames of reference. For any physicist who wants to take the little yellow book at face value, the knowledge of the possibility of Mr Kelley using different frames of reference will eliminate a lot of head scratching.

[neil]

Is it just possible that Homer thought about this very discussion and decided to use the reference to centrifugal force because the average golf pro is not a physicist. Is it possible that he felt that 99.9999% of us use that term whether we mean centripetal or not. Is it possible that he used it because it does exist in the golf swing -and it can be felt ....through the hands!. In 2K Homer uses the words Centripetal force, Centrifugal force (centrifugal reaction)-and the phrase "This throw out action is termed herein"-herein being the key word,could he have said "i'll try and keep this understandable because most of you out there arn't going to get it if i go into the detailed physics of inertial/non-inertial frames ,oh,by the way centrifugal force doesn't really exist, sometimes". Now i don't have a problem with people getting passionate about a subject-if physics is your thing thats fine. If TGM is not your thing ,that's fine too.But, Golf Sceptic, tell me you don't understand the book.

[golf_sceptic]

Thanks for that perspective neil. I think there is a strong chance you are right. Further, as ThinkingPlus pointed out there are so many benefits to using local frames of reference when discussing the golf swing that I have changed my mind and believe it was the right decision.

But, Golf Sceptic, tell me you don't understand the book.

Ok. I don't understand the book

As I said in an email to yoda just now, I came to the site to try to understand why so much of Mr Kelley's book read like gobbledegook. I now have a different perspective thanks to yoda and ThinkingPlus (indirectly). The book now makes a whole lot more sense in many ways.

I won't miss the feeble minded populism of some of the contributors here, but I thank one contributor who took the time to find a reference to Encyclopaedia Brittanica which supports my position.

BBFN

[brianmanzella]

Just like I thought,

stoped him cold again.

I'll bet dinner at Outback that he won't answer the question.

[golf_sceptic]

Brian,
sorry but you are just plain wrong. I don't multiple screen names. Go to iSeekGolf and talk to a few people there. They will tell you who I am. Talk to an IT person who can help you to track which user is coming from which computer.