I Problems with Blum's Karate Article

  • Thread starter Thread starter makamo66
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Concerns were raised about Haywood Blum's article "Physics and the art of kicking and punching," particularly regarding his use of a beam model instead of a mass impacting the center, and the choice of beam over a flat plate. Additionally, the article fails to account for wood's orthotropic properties, relying instead on isotropic material formulas. Access to the article has become difficult, as no free PDF is currently available online for review. A related article on the biomechanics of a knockout punch was mentioned, though it does not address striking a target. Overall, these issues highlight significant gaps in Blum's analysis of martial arts physics.
makamo66
Messages
41
Reaction score
10
I have a couple of concerns with Haywood Blum's article "Physics and the art of kicking and punching." First of all, Blum considers a beam with a couple applied to the ends of the bar when he should be considering some kind of mass impacting the bar in the center and second of all, why does he use a beam and not a flat plate? Also, he doesn't take into consideration that wood is orthotropic and simply uses the formulas for an isotropic material. Unfortunately I couldn't find a free PDF of this article online any more but I was able to download the PDF at some time before.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thread 'The rocket equation, one more time'
I already posted a similar thread a while ago, but this time I want to focus exclusively on one single point that is still not clear to me. I just came across this problem again in Modern Classical Mechanics by Helliwell and Sahakian. Their setup is exactly identical to the one that Taylor uses in Classical Mechanics: a rocket has mass m and velocity v at time t. At time ##t+\Delta t## it has (according to the textbooks) velocity ##v + \Delta v## and mass ##m+\Delta m##. Why not ##m -...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
957
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 66 ·
2
Replies
66
Views
6K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K