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