[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
  • Thread Index
  • Date Index
  • Subject Index
  • Re: THE TERM, "WORK"



    Walter....

    My comments in BOLD CAPS in your text.

                                                           Gordy




     


    From: WALTER/SUE SIMBIRSKI <simbirsw@xxxxxxx>
    To: Gordon Hill <hillshead@xxxxxxx>
    Subject: Re: THE TERM, "WORK"
    Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:17:48 -0700
    Gordy -

    I'm afraid to see what Webster has to say abou the term "load". :)

    The other argument on the brick moving thing is that I may move one brick per
    minute or I may move one per day. I'm still doing the same amount of work by
    the time I move 10 bricks.    I MUST AGREE.

    Jeff and Paul's discussion on quick vs slow (and even non-existent) stops has
    been really interesting.

    Have we fallen into a preconceived notion regarding the stop? Is the speed of
    the stop important for energy transfer or is it more important to getting the
    maximum stroke length with a smooth application of power?   THE STOP IS JUST THAT......IT MEANS MOTION HAS CEASED.  THEREFORE THE STOP CAN HAVE NO, "SPEED".   SPEED TO THE STOP AS THE RESULT OF SMOOTH ACCELERATION IS IMPORTANT FOR EFFICIENT TRANSFER OF MAXIMUM ENERGY, AS I SEE IT.  SUFFICIENT TIP TRAVEL AS PRODUCED BY A COMBINATION OF STROKE LENGTH AND CASTING (ROD) ARC TO HANDLE THE LENGTH OF LINE CARRIED SPREADS OUT THE ENERGY INPUT SO AS TO HELP CREATE SMOOTHNESS BY MINIMIZING THE TENDENCY FOR ERRATIC APPLICATION OF POWER.

    SHORT ANSWER:  BOTH ARE IMPORTANT.

    We know that if a caster shortens his normal stroke length significantly he
    is very likely to tail his loop. But some casters have very long strokes and
    others have a very short stroke. This is a result of timing and hand path and
    how they affect the path of the rod tip. When shortening the stroke the tendency
    is to use an abrupt start in order to generate enough power to throw the line but
    this results in a tip path that the caster is not used to and he/she is likely
    to end up with a concave path of the tip. A caster who is accustomed to
    using a short stroke to begin with will have developed the timing and tracking
    to compensate for the different tip path. The swoosh is a good example of how
    the idividual's hand path affects the tip path for their particular style.

    BY, "SWOOSH" DO YOU REFER TO THE SWOOP MOVE ?  IF SO, I AGREE.

    ONE CAN USUALLY GET AWAY WITH A STROKE LENGTH A BIT TOO LONG FOR THE AMOUNT OF LINE CARRIED BY CHANGING THE PATH TAKEN BY THE HAND TO AVOID, "DOMING".  IT'S MUCH HARDER TO CAST WELL WITH A STROKE LENGTH TOO SHORT FOR THE AMOUNT OF LINE CARRIED.  TO AVOID A CONCAVE ROD TIP PATH AND THE DANGER OF A TAIL, CHANGES SUCH AS INCREASE IN CASTING ARC TO COMPENSATE FOR THE SHORTER STROKE, AND A STOP FARTHER BELOW THE ONCOMING LINE ARE TWO WAYS, "OUT OF THE SOUP".  THIS IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW YOUR COMMENT ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL HAND PATH CAN WORK.

    Walter


    From: Gordon Hill <hillshead@xxxxxxx>
    To: simbirsw@xxxxxxx, flysoup@xxxxxxxxxx, sobbobfish@xxxxxxx, rtab@xxxxxxx, CAPTPERMIT@xxxxxxx, creangler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dwright@xxxxxxxxxxxx, daver@xxxxxxxxxx, dennisg@xxxxxxxxxxxx, captdoug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dsprague01@xxxxxxxxxxx, ephemera@xxxxxxx, brushycreekfc@xxxxxxxxx, barefootj@xxxxxxx, bradyir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, flyfishar@xxxxxxxxxxx, ken.cole@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, captkirk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, glbaggett@xxxxxxxxx, mkreider1@xxxxxxx, martyt@xxxxxxxxxx, niallogan@xxxxxxxxxx, pminnick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, bigfly@xxxxxxxxx, whorwood@xxxxxxxxx, flycasts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, sheila@xxxxxxxxxx, scjacobs@xxxxxxxxxxxx, cooper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tharper@xxxxxxxxxxx, tomwhite@xxxxxxxxxxxx
    CC: mildbill@xxxxxxxxxxxx, caddis@xxxxxxx, Brydnlnims@xxxxxxxxxxx, cezannealexander@xxxxxxxxxxx, crazycharlie@xxxxxxx, croberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, blacksalmon@xxxxxxxxxxx, DermSox@xxxxxxx, gladesflybum@xxxxxxxxx, gavin@xxxxxxxxxxx, hillshead@xxxxxxx, iverson@xxxxxxxxx, jfs523@xxxxxxxxxxx, jerry_puckett2001@xxxxxxxxx, kathleen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, thedamselfly@xxxxxxxxxxx, plami@xxxxxxxxxxx, ray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kerrrc@xxxxxxxxx, bobbeanblossomFFF@xxxxxxxxxxx, hillcathy@xxxxxxx, dnewpher@xxxxxxxxxxxx, donjack@xxxxxxxxxxx, douglas.swift@xxxxxxxxxxxx, erniemaynard@xxxxxxxxxxx, flyfsfrank@xxxxxxx, hlhpc@xxxxxxx, jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jhara.carter@xxxxxxxxxxx, harveyjl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, t.maltese@xxxxxxxxx, skifishvail@xxxxxxxx, jfv@xxxxxxxxxxxx, trallag@xxxxxxx, captflyrod@xxxxxxx, mollysemenik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, fraudflies@xxxxxxx, shane@xxxxxxxxx, snowmonkey29@xxxxxxx
    Subject: THE TERM, "WORK"
    Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 07:26:32 -0500

    Walter....

    You may be right.  In using the, definition of "WORK" to mean application of energy over time, my thought process went this way:

    If I apply X amount of energy to move one brick one foot, I've accomplished Y amount of work.

    If I apply that same amount of energy per brick to move 10 bricks the same distance, then I figure I've done 10 times that amount of work.....but it took me 10 times the amount of time to do that.

    Problem with that line of thinking is that I might have elected to move all 10 bricks at the same time, which makes your argument and defeats mine.

    Webster's unabridged dictionary has 45 different definitions for the word, "WORK", with numerous subdefinitions !

                                                                                                          Gordy