Hi, Firstly, I'm primarily a musician with an interest in science. I'm particularly keen on using proper scientific methods to discredit a quasi-religious tendency for pianists to radically overhype the role of gravity in pianism. Here's one article I've written on the subject (which also debunks a load of nonsense from Jack Dempsey about gravity in boxing). http://pianoscience.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/piano-technique-weight-in-motion-boxing.html Currently, I'm particularly interested in how theory could be used to take an approximate measure of how quickly literal use of falling weight could depress multiple keys one by one. I'm already certain that it's hogwash to try to explain any significant speeds through falling weight. I give a demonstration in the post of how dropping a small object by a cm or so and picking it up as fast as possible is incredibly limited. Three drops or so per second already seems rather ambitious to me. While it gives some degree of practical illustration of the limits of falling weight, obviously it's not terribly precise or scientific. Any thoughts on how to get an approximate theoretical measure of a reasonable estimate for the fastest reasonable speed of repetition that could be expected through free fall? I want to go further with an incontrovertible proof about quite how relatively slow repetition of free fall actually is, compared to actively instigated movements. All thoughts are welcome, but in a sense I'm more interested in views of complete non-pianists than of musicians. I've encountered very high level pianists who also studied physics at upper levels and, suprisingly, I've often found them among the least productive to discuss such issues with. It's as if they simply can't bring themselves to reference the two things fully. I got a sense that they weren't prepared to deal with the cognitive dissonance of having to reconcile what they were taught at the piano with what they know about mechanics. They seemed to prefer having a cast iron partition in their minds, and were surprisingly closed minded about applying objectivity to analysis of pianistic mechanics. I want my ideas on both to match up, so I'm looking to go further still in debunking gravity ideas that cannot add up. In many ways the colder and more abstract the scientific viewpoint, on this, the more interested I would be.