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