View Single Post
waynexk8
#188
Mar1-12, 08:53 PM
P: 399
Quote Quote by sophiecentaur View Post
I have read the paper an I think I can see your problem. I find little to disagree with what is written.

They are not considering the whole cycle (lift/lower) when they refer to mean force.
Right could we get to this point, as D. would not explain, could you explain on what you think they are leaving out ??? as I do not get it.

Quote Quote by sophiecentaur View Post
They are not only discussing free lifts but machines that present RESISISTIVE loads. Everything changes in that case because you are not just changing gravitational potential energy in that case but work is being done in overcoming friction.
Please forget the machines, this at this moment is just about free weights.

Quote Quote by sophiecentaur View Post
If you had read what they say then you would not think they are disagreeing with established physics at all. You did not understand what you were arguing about because you insisted on giving details instead of condensing your questions into something meaningful.
I did not think they are disagreeing, or never said they were disagreeing with established physics.

What I said, was what forces do you think you have that can make up of balance out the higher propulsive forces of the fast in the studies ???

Letís take the mean propulsive forces, slow 6.2mean in 10.9 seconds. Fast 45.3mean 2.8 seconds, now letís divided the mean slow of 10.9 seconds by the fast 2.8 = 3.8, so now letís divide the slow mean by 3.8 = 1.6.

Fast mean for 2.8 seconds = 45.3.

Slow mean for 2.8 seconds = 1.6.


Please what forces have I left out that the slow has to make up or balance out these ???

http://www.jssm.org/vol7/n2/16/v7n2-16pdf.pdf

Wayne