Physics in dance explanations

[Ghost]

@ technical stuff
I expect matching tension has already been mentioned somewhere in amongst all the PhD stuff in this thread that has gone straight over my head.

I was thinking about this on the way home. On the one hand advanced physics is useful for examining dance concepts. On the other hand it's easy to fall into logic traps and I'm uncertain how pleasant reading it makes for everyone else.

So far I've deliberately avoided it. I figure anyone who can understand the physics of why pushing against a wall makes them fall over doesn't need me to explain it. Anyone who doesn't probably doesn't care (or can pm ESG or David Franklin if they really want to know )

So my question is what do people think about it? Is it annoying, confusing, a waste of time, interesting, helpful, or what?


Christopher

[LMC]

Physics stuff is always interesting - even when I don't understand it.

I often revisit threads that I didn't understand first time round - after mulling over things for a few days and experimenting, I sometimes "get" them on second reading.

I'm just off to bash my head against a few walls...

[David Franklin]

I was thinking about this on the way home. On the one hand advanced physics is useful for examining dance concepts. On the other hand it's easy to fall into logic traps and I'm uncertain how pleasant reading it makes for everyone else.

There are defintely two schools of thought on whether it makes sense to consider physics in dance. I think one important thing the "don't bother me with physics" crowd needs to understand is that it confuses the heck out of people with a physics background when you use terminology that has a definite meaning in physics, but doesn't have the same meaning in dance. Probably the canonical example is Skippy Blair's "Center Point of Balance" - there have been long debates about the differences and similarities with "Center of Balance" in physics (they are NOT the same thing).

The second thing is that because physics is much more black and white, you are much more likely to get someone giving a physical explanation that someone with a technical background can confidently say "is just plain wrong". If someone says "you should lead with the thumb", I can say "I think it's a bad idea for reasons X, Y, Z", but I can't really say "no, that's completely wrong".

Of course, just because I confidently say "X is physically impossible", it doesn't mean I'm right. An interesting example is "tilt-twisting": while in the air, a diver or gymnast can convert rotational movement about the waist (i.e. rotation in the direction you would somersault) into rotational movement about their long axis (rotation in the direction you spin when dancing) by altering their body position during the dive. And my immediate reaction was "That's impossible, it would violate conservation of angular momentum". But it is completely possible, in fact because of conservation of angular momentum. (Apparently over 50% of physics graduates make the same mistake!).

[Merovingian]

I prefer non technical information (a poll??), but then there's a lot of that going around the technical post anyway, on the other hand, I find technical posts more helpful, for all the wrong reasons; as spend more time on such a post trying to figure out what the heck it means. And as David Franklin said, it's black and white, so once it starts to makes sense, the rest is easy.

Also it can be annoying at times as disagreeing to something written in pure physics can take a while, mainly just to make sure that you've really understood the explaination correctly!

[Frankie_4711]

For me it's just plain confusing so basically as soon as I realize that it's getting technical, I tend to switch off and either don't read the rest coz I know I won't understand it or try and read a bit but it goes in one eye and out the other (reading version of 'in one ear and out the other'?)! But I'm sure someone out there will understand it, and it may be useful to them, so I'll just skip those bits and move on to the bits I do understand!

[Gadget]

I can understand the physics stuff, but IMHO it's a bit high-brow and intellectual to be applied to a dance that is billed for "everyone".

Personally I donit need to/want to know all the transfer of energy, momentum, balance point, motion, kinetics, (etc) laws are involved. Which do you relate to more?:

- the force applied in the connection should be approx 20 newtons, allowing for vector normalisation to compensate for any latent energy involved in the prior movement.

or

- Men: think of your testicals being subjected to the same force you apply in your lead.

[ducasi]

I think Thomas Dolby, with the help of Magnus Pyke, expressed the connection between science and dancing beautifully in their class early '80s hit "She Blinded me with Science"...

She Blinded Me With Science

It's poetry in motion
She turned her tender eyes to me
As deep as any ocean
As sweet as any harmony
Mm - but she blinded me with science
"She blinded me with science!"
And failed me in biology

When I'm dancing close to her
"Blinding me with science - science!"
I can smell the chemicals
"Blinding me with science - science!"
"Science!"
"Science!"

Mm - but it's poetry in motion
And when she turned her eyes to me
As deep as any ocean
As sweet as any harmony
Mm - but she blinded me with science
And failed me in geometry

When she's dancing next to me
"Blinding me with science - science!"
"Science!"
I can hear machinery
"Blinding me with science - science!"
"Science!"

It's poetry in motion
And now she's making love to me
The spheres are in commotion
The elements in harmony
She blinded me with science
"She blinded me with science!"
And hit me with technology

"Good heavens Miss Sakamoto - you're beautiful!"
I -
I don't believe it!
There she goes again!
She’s tidied up, and I can't find anything!
All my tubes and wires
And careful notes
And antiquated notions

But! - it's poetry in motion
And when she turned her eyes to me
As deep as any ocean
As sweet as any harmony
Mm - but she blinded me with science
"She blinded me with - with science!"
She blinded me with...

[bigdjiver]

I reckoned I had just enough room to do a simple lift and spin around. The move is my arms under her arms from behind, and lift her and spin in a circle. I had the bright idea of stepping back half way around to give a bit extra clearance. We gently clipped somebody with her toes. Afterwards I worked out the physics, and my step back had the effect of lifting her toes further out.

Physics matters.

[MartinHarper]

advanced physics

Force, momentum, acceleration, etc, are hardly advanced physics. I agree, not wildly accessible. But then, a lot of discussion on the forum is inaccessible to the average MJ dancer.

[DavidB]

But then, a lot of discussion on the forum is inaccessible to the average MJ dancer.

First you have to decypher the hieroglyphics. Where else does being sick imply lust

[David Franklin]

I reckoned I had just enough room to do a simple lift and spin around.

Idiot.

Sorry to be blunt, but anyone who does even the simplest lift because they thought they had "just enough room" doesn't deserve anything less. And it's even sillier to do a spinning aerial under those circumstances. Personally, I've had enough "interesting" moments when I thought I had "lots and lots of room".

[To go back on topic, you might want to consider the physics of how you're going to stop your "simple lift and spin around" if someone steps in the way].

[Dreadful Scathe]

You do need to understand physics to be able to do the "first move moonwalk".

[MartinHarper]

You do need to understand physics to be able to do the "first move moonwalk".

Yeah. I was taught a style point for that. Apparently the man should take one small step.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Yeah. I was taught a style point for that. Apparently the man should take one small step.

..must...not....laugh........pffft

[bigdjiver]

Idiot.

Sorry to be blunt, but anyone who does even the simplest lift because they thought they had "just enough room" doesn't deserve anything less. And it's even sillier to do a spinning aerial under those circumstances. Personally, I've had enough "interesting" moments when I thought I had "lots and lots of room".

[To go back on topic, you might want to consider the physics of how you're going to stop your "simple lift and spin around" if someone steps in the way].

I am not that much of an idiot. The only danger point was where the move started and finished. At the start it was clear, at the end she would be at near zero velocity. The only danger was that one particular pair would invade our space. They would have collided with us whatever move we were doing, and would not have made even the slight contact that thet did if I had not stepped away.

[Ghost]

I am not that much of an idiot. The only danger point was where the move started and finished. At the start it was clear, at the end she would be at near zero velocity. The only danger was that one particular pair would invade our space. They would have collided with us whatever move we were doing, and would not have made even the slight contact that thet did if I had not stepped away.

Ok peace please guys. You've both made your points. The exact physics of this can only be properly considered outside where there's lots of room to repeat the experiment and I get hayfever so would rather stay indoors.


Christopher