Year end musings

[mandrin]

On a TGM forum there is presently a thread on ’heavy hit’. With Christmas on its way it sort of naturally led me leaning a bit towards religion viewing this thread. The Bible first was taken as is, then various interpretations/schisms, and subsequently science came along and clearly said no. As a consequence followed a period with plenty of confusion, many not knowing where to find a basket to put their eggs, with some deftly clinging to either extreme.

The latter attitude is exactly where this particular TGM forum is presently, led diligently by a 900 year old guru, who knows the yellow bible by heart and defends every scrap of idea in it as is, doggedly, tooth and nail. Yet there are now also those who are shaken up by the scientific arguments and try to marry there TGM beliefs with the cold reality of true science. There is even a false prophet, no_mind_golfer, in their midst, which has kept his cool so far, but will inevitably reveal his true character before long.

In contrast, Brian, by his own admission, has spent many, many hours during several years, studying diligently TGM, trying to muster and unravel the very complex and intricate web of HK’s ideas but finally quickly evolved beyond and has gone to a very pragmatic “whatever works” approach. That must have been somewhat of a painful process since there is definitely some strange attraction inherent in the TGM belief system, appearing to be the alpha and omega of golf.

So, since on this forum we are now all a bunch of very pragmatic fellows, I have a question for all the members, who are definitely more concerned with practical results than with dogmatic ideas and theories. Considering Fig1 - an extremely heavy mass directly behind the shaft - does it have a large, reasonable, small, or perhaps simply a negligible effect on the departure velocity of the ball, when compared to the departure velocity for the situation depicted in Fig2, without the heavy mass?

To make the situation as extreme as possible the shaft is not aligned sidewise, as occurs when hitting in a real golf swing during impact, but rather length wise. Hence all of the weight of our imaginary ‘heavy golfer’, weighing only 100000 kg, - equivalent to the weight of 2,174,000 golf balls - is directly bearing onto the ball, at impact.

I am sure that Brian with his magnanimous character might even consider putting some brand new golf balls under the Christmas tree for those coming up with a correct response.

[thefuture37]

how often do you play Mandarin?

[mandrin]

Originally Posted by thefuture37

how often do you play Mandarin?

thefuture37,

Intrigued, I checked the members list.

No Mandarin.

[pecky987]

i'l be first to say it.

i'd think the one wit the hevy mas would prouce more power. you need considerable mass behind a battering ram!

[Brian Manzella]

There is NO DOUBT that the end in near for ANY FOLKS who don't subscribe to REAL SCIENCE in their Golf Instruction.

It might take a year, it might take ten, but, it WILL happen.

It doesn't help that The Golfing Machine has been promoted as THE "Physics and Geometry" Manual for the golf swing and has more holes in it then swiss cheese.

To Joe Daniels' credit, he has Dr. Aaron Zick as the science police at TGM Summits.

I heard that Dr. Robert Grober, another brilliant Physicist-Golf Researcher, is working on a big time multi-segment math model for the golf swing.

At the end of the day, the future may look back at goofy concepts and giggle.

As far as Mandrin's question?

I guess that the ball would go NEAR EXACTLY the same distance.

[mandrin]

Originally Posted by Brian Manzella

There is NO DOUBT that the end in near for ANY FOLKS who don't subscribe to REAL SCIENCE in their Golf Instruction.

It might take a year, it might take ten, but, it WILL happen.

It doesn't help that The Golfing Machine has been promoted as THE "Physics and Geometry" Manual for the golf swing and has more holes in it then swiss cheese.

To Joe Daniels' credit, he has Dr. Aaron Zick as the science police at TGM Summits.

I heard that Dr. Robert Grober, another brilliant Physicist-Golf Researcher, is working on a big time multi-segment math model for the golf swing.

At the end of the day, the future may look back at goofy concepts and giggle.

As far as Mandrin's question?

I guess that the ball would go NEAR EXACTLY the same distance.

Brian,

If eventually it just so happens that it is you having come up with the correct answer, who is putting the golf balls under your Christmas tree?

[mandrin]

Originally Posted by pecky987

i'l be first to say it.

i'd think the one wit the hevy mas would prouce more power. you need considerable mass behind a battering ram!

pecky,

Kudos for being the first one courageously stepping forward, the question however is not about power but about departure velocity of the golf ball. Give it another try just to show all those many carefully remaining seated on the fence that it really does not hurt to participate for a change by simply answering the question.

[Jon Hardesty]

There will be no change in velocity from one to the next. I thought we already went over this topic in another post in the past?

[spider]

Like many I am sure on this board....I hesitate to answer. Obviously for fear of feeling...well... stupid! But, here goes none the less.

My first inclination was to say each of the balls would depart at the same velocity no matter the weight behind the strike.

However, I am going to GUESS that the larger mass will not absorb (possible wrong term used) as much of the strike against the ball or absorb more efficiently the strike. Thus imparting more energy or transfer of it to the ball and a greater initial velocity.

Just a guess.

[cmartingolf]

Zero, no difference.