Server, Gordy,
I think the approach of a technical paper
followed by a supplemental paper that has a target audience
of fly casting instructors whose background in
physics ranges from basic high school science to first
year physics makes great sense.
Server - you are probably in the best position to
determine if this is a good approach and, if so, what the
timing
for the technical paper and the supplement should
be. Gordy and I both agree you, along with the graduate student
you've told me about, are the brains behind
this and we want to make sure you get the
credit you deserve.
We could start thinking about where resistance is
likely to come from and what sort of responses
we should consider. Personally, I have two major
worries at this time.
The first is the paper by Kyte and Moran and
Bruce's response to that
paper.
The information is observational only but it
clearly advocates a hard stop and Bruce's observations
agree with it. "Conventional" wisdom is that
the hard stop is required for efficient energy transfer. I
understand
now that the hard stop is one method of
controlling the path of the rod tip and also to provide a firm base
for
the rod to unload against but I expect this
will be an area of controversy. I know that the work by
Jason
Borger and Grunde Lovoll is good experimental
evidence against a hard stop that we can
work with.
The second area of concern I have will be the
Sexyloops folks. They have been right all along in stating that
a hard stop isn't necessary but then they've come
to some strange conclusions after that and have almost
become an armed camp defending those conclusions.
My experience with situations of that nature is that
they will take any affirmation of any of their
conclusions (in this case the hard stop issue) and see it as
proof that they are right about everything. Going
to be a tough nut to crack...
Just my thoughts for now.
Cheers!
Walter
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 7:48
AM
Hi,
Server....
I have been studying
your former messages from "behind the scenes" and having messages of
discussion with Walter Simberski.
Walter has shared some
of his thoughts regarding the physics behind what we have loosely been
calling "the stop". He has helped me understand these
concepts.
Although I'm not a
physicist or engineer, I'm beginning to get a much clearer understanding of
what you have proposed to the point that I cannot find fault with your
reasoning.
The concept of
suspension of acceleration rather than a true
"stop" ( which would be cessation of all motion ) has generated a
spark in my brain.
At the same time, I
understand the acrimony produced by others venting their vehement
disagreements. I came to the conclusion that this occurred largely because
they couldn't understand what you were proposing. I also understand
that you "bristled" because you couldn't come to terms with their lack of
comprehension.
Walter and I feel that
your paper on this subject is needed and timely.
We must realize that
even casting instructors who are educated may not even have had a basic high
school course in physics. In deference to them, I think it would be a
good thing for you to try to distill the concepts down to try to fit it into
plain and simple terms ..... NOT easy, I realize !!!!!!!
Perhaps this could be
done as a supplement to your paper ????????? .... Walter and I will help in
any way we can.
Best,
Gordy
Gordon E. Hill,
M.D.
2175 Coral Way
Big Pine Key, FL
33043
TEL (305) 872-2106