Was Homer Wrong?

[golf_sceptic]

The question was also genuine -and I assume your answer was somwhat tongue in cheek.Do you understand the book?

Words can be slippery suckers.

Yes, I knew your question was genuine and in no way did I see it as antagonistic.

My answer was a little bit tongue in cheek, but not entirely. I did have a copy of the book at one stage, but don't now. I rely on quotes from others at ISG. The biggest problem I had (past tense) was that as a physics and applied mathematics teacher of many years I kept reading things that my training and experience told me were gobbledegook. People would try to explain (there's quite an enthusiastic TGM following on ISG), and that would be fine for a while, but then I'd see something else that didn't make sense.

When birdie_man quoted a video posted here I followed, and lo and behold there were my words, so I jumped in. After the exchanges I mentioned with yoda and ThinkingPlus I looked at the frame of reference issue again and a light went on.

As a result, so many of the things that looked like gobbledegook didn't look like gobbledegook any more. Rather than explaining how the throw out effect works in inertial physics (which was my intention), it hit me that Mr Kelley was describing things in very particular frames of reference.

So to answer your question directly, no I don't understand the book, but I'm miles further down the path than I was when I arrived here.

[neil]

Words can be slippery suckers.

Yes, I knew your question was genuine and in no way did I see it as antagonistic.

My answer was a little bit tongue in cheek, but not entirely. I did have a copy of the book at one stage, but don't now. I rely on quotes from others at ISG. The biggest problem I had (past tense) was that as a physics and applied mathematics teacher of many years I kept reading things that my training and experience told me were gobbledegook. People would try to explain (there's quite an enthusiastic TGM following on ISG), and that would be fine for a while, but then I'd see something else that didn't make sense.

When birdie_man quoted a video posted here I followed, and lo and behold there were my words, so I jumped in. After the exchanges I mentioned with yoda and ThinkingPlus I looked at the frame of reference issue again and a light went on.

As a result, so many of the things that looked like gobbledegook didn't look like gobbledegook any more. Rather than explaining how the throw out effect works in inertial physics (which was my intention), it hit me that Mr Kelley was describing things in very particular frames of reference.

So to answer your question directly, no I don't understand the book, but I'm miles further down the path than I was when I arrived here.

Good to hear it!thanks

[efnef]

Words can be slippery suckers.

Yes, I knew your question was genuine and in no way did I see it as antagonistic.

My answer was a little bit tongue in cheek, but not entirely. I did have a copy of the book at one stage, but don't now. I rely on quotes from others at ISG. The biggest problem I had (past tense) was that as a physics and applied mathematics teacher of many years I kept reading things that my training and experience told me were gobbledegook. People would try to explain (there's quite an enthusiastic TGM following on ISG), and that would be fine for a while, but then I'd see something else that didn't make sense.

When birdie_man quoted a video posted here I followed, and lo and behold there were my words, so I jumped in. After the exchanges I mentioned with yoda and ThinkingPlus I looked at the frame of reference issue again and a light went on.

As a result, so many of the things that looked like gobbledegook didn't look like gobbledegook any more. Rather than explaining how the throw out effect works in inertial physics (which was my intention), it hit me that Mr Kelley was describing things in very particular frames of reference.

So to answer your question directly, no I don't understand the book, but I'm miles further down the path than I was when I arrived here.

That's great.

[Yoda]

...After the exchanges I mentioned with yoda and ThinkingPlus I looked at the frame of reference issue again and a light went on.

As a result, so many of the things that looked like gobbledegook didn't look like gobbledegook any more. Rather than explaining how the throw out effect works in inertial physics (which was my intention), it hit me that Mr Kelley was describing things in very particular frames of reference.

So to answer your question directly, no I don't understand the book, but I'm miles further down the path than I was when I arrived here.

Early on at LBG, we realized the need for a special 'meeting place' for those kindred souls interested in exploring the Game's more esoteric concepts (such as those in this thread). Hence was born The Lab.

Part of The Lab's unwritten charter -- and, in its own way, its charm -- is that the concepts discussed need have little or no practical application on the golf course. As such, they typically are of little interest to the great majority of members. That fact does not -- and should not -- diminish in the least the enthusiastic pursuit of such ideas by Lab folk. Undaunted, they continue to explore brave new worlds and reap their own rewards along the way.

At LBG, we honor that spirit and encourage those so inclined to view The Lab as a safe haven. There, discussions should be conducted with the decorum appropriate in such a collegial atmosphere. As always, the purpose of those posting should be to provoke thinking...not people.

We thank all who have contributed to these threads and look forward to more of the same in the future.

[12 piece bucket]

Early on at LBG, we realized the need for a special 'meeting place' for those kindred souls interested in exploring the Game's more esoteric concepts (such as those in this thread). Hence was born The Lab.

Part of The Lab's unwritten charter -- and, in its own way, its charm -- is that the concepts discussed need have little or no practical application on the golf course. As such, they typically are of little interest to the great majority of members. That fact does not -- and should not -- diminish in the least the enthusiastic pursuit of such ideas by Lab folk. Undaunted, they continue to explore brave new worlds and reap their own rewards along the way.

At LBG, we honor that spirit and encourage those so inclined to view The Lab as a safe haven. There, discussions should be conducted with the decorum appropriate in such a collegial atmosphere. As always, the purpose of those posting should be to provoke thinking...not people.

We thank all who have contributed to these threads and look forward to more of the same in the future.

Aw man!!!! Does this mean I can't goof on Mike O anymore?

[Yoda]

Aw man!!!! Does this mean I can't goof on Mike O anymore?

Not in The Lab, bucket. But if he stumbles into your playpen -- deliberately or accidentally -- then he's fair game!