Ki in a Physical Sense

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[Upyu]

Many students who train in a way they regard as strictly physical, and never even mention ki, have it in abundance.

So what would you define as Ki? :D ( In a physical sense)

[Stefan Stenudd]

So what would you define as Ki? :D ( In a physical sense)
I am not sure if you expect an answer, but here it is:

The ether of intention.

[Ron Tisdale]

Hi Stefan,

You said Without claiming that it is the view of Christian Tissier, I would say that I sometimes find aikidoists using ki as sort of a shortcut, where they seem to think that focus on ki makes other aspects of aikido training unnecessary.

Please understand that is NOT what I am suggesting, and I don't believe any of the people I have been to see are suggesting either.

a) The exercises they recommend are no short cut. They involve a lot of HARD work over an EXTENDED period of time...consistently...if you really want to effect the changes they speak of.

b) Personally, I am CONSTANTLY looking at how this affects the "rest of" my aikido. It is an ongoing work.

c) I have the feeling that statements like this are a passive agressive way to "strike back" at the honest opinions given here. I may be wrong. I may just be getting too sensitive to this kind of statement.

I mean Tissier Sensei no disrespect...just trying to politely analysize what is before me.

Best,
Ron

[Stefan Stenudd]

c) I have the feeling that statements like this are a passive agressive way to "strike back" at the honest opinions given here. I may be wrong. I may just be getting too sensitive to this kind of statement.
That was not my intention. I can be aggressive, I have to admit, but when I am passive I am simply indifferent.

I have seen many aikidoists who sort of substitute keiko for ki, but of course I have no idea how you or others in this forum practice aikido, since I have not met you on a tatami.
So, I am not speaking about you.

[Ron Tisdale]

Ah, see? Just my imagination, running away with me... ;)

but of course I have no idea how you or others in this forum practice aikido, since I have not met you on a tatami.

That's why the statement before surprised me. No worries!

Best,
Ron

[Upyu]

I am not sure if you expect an answer, but here it is:

The ether of intention.

Stefan,

Erm no. I said "physical" not "ethreal."

You haven't really defined Ki from any one of three possible physical manifestations. (Which would be easy to do for someone with a conditioned body and who could manifest these skills)

Btw, nice website...saw your vids, and I'll be blunt: I didn't see anything that would tip me off to the fact that you have these skills.
Nice straight posture, a lot of shoulder usage from time to time going on and a compliant Uke. ;)

[Stefan Stenudd]

You haven't really defined Ki from any one of three possible physical manifestations.
How could I, when I do not regard ki as something physical? At least not within the definitions given by modern science.

saw your vids, and I'll be blunt: I didn't see anything that would tip me off to the fact that you have these skills.
Nice straight posture, a lot of shoulder usage from time to time going on and a compliant Uke. ;)
I don't know what skills you think I claim to have. Do you deny me of having intention?

Shoulder usage? Well, I'd have trouble without them ;)
You probably mean that I have tense shoulders. I'd be grateful if you give me some examples of videos where you see this.

Compliant uke? Well, well. I guess you're implying that my aikido would not work otherwise. Whatever :D

[Upyu]

How could I, when I do not regard ki as something physical? At least not within the definitions given by modern science.

Maybe you don't regard it as something physical, but anyone I've met that has genuine internal skills can typically explain it in physical terms. Generally they fall into one of three categories without exception. They've been covered in these forums before.


I don't know what skills you think I claim to have. Do you deny me of having intention?

Well, you started posting about "Ki" etc and how the dantien is important, so by that line it seemed you were positing that you have internal skill. If not, my bad :D Though I don't know why you'd go to the trouble of making a website etc if you thought you didn't have the skills.


Shoulder usage? Well, I'd have trouble without them ;)
You probably mean that I have tense shoulders. I'd be grateful if you give me some examples of videos where you see this.

Um no, not tense shoulders. They're disconnected from the legs/middle, and all sorts of (stealing a quote from Dan here) "power bleeding" going on in all the videos you posted.



Compliant uke? Well, well. I guess you're implying that my aikido would not work otherwise. Whatever :D
Never said it doesn't work, since I haven't seen you do it on someone resisting.
But even if it does, your basic body mechanics aren't using Ki/Kokyu power anyways, which was more my original point.

[HL1978]

I am not sure if you expect an answer, but here it is:

The ether of intention.

Lets assume for the sake of argument, that "ki" is a physical skill. If so, what mechanisms within your body power it.

If doing aikido without it, is still aikido, why would it be considered a shortcut?

[Chris Parkerson]

Robert John wrote:
Maybe you don't regard it as something physical, but anyone I've met that has genuine internal skills can typically explain it in physical terms.

Hi Robert,

I am thinking about how to quantify the effects of Ki on a physical level.

What I am hearing from you and Mike's posts is that it aids in two areas:

Stability (Postural integrity) and Strength/force (not musculature but grounded force that "goes through the bones and fascia).

If we look at "stability", I propose we are basically talking about geometry. A strong stance enhances the geometric posture you assume (both physically and with your intention). To be sure,if we form ourselves as a tall pyramid (9 square feet at the base and 6 feet tall), we must accept that the base is a potential base, i.e. we are really connected by our two feet to the ground and the "equilibrium" we maintain with our center of gravity. Thus, structural integrity must accept some method of keeping the joints from wobbling or otherwise breaking posture.

If we look at strength/force, we should measure it somehow. The Green Dragon folks, without using weights as their training method, used to "punch weights" and break unsupported bricks as a demonstration of strength/force.

Olympic Judo Coach Hal von Luebbert kept meticulous records of how he measured his progress. At age 56, for instance, he moved 47,500 pounds of weight on nautilus equipment (chain driven machines rather than cable driven ones) within a 30 minute timetable. His resting pulse was 52, his peak pulse was 192, his blood pressure was 120/80, serum cholesterol was 120. He weighed 170 pounds and could ride a stationary bike at level 10 for 1hour.

When I trained with him, we took these type of calibrations daily as well as pulse rate 3 times per half hour work-out.

Are you using any forms of metrics for your study??

[Mato-san]

For me, I never really respected Ki until I learnt to use it...I thought it was a mystical illusion...and made my physical attributes work... but Ki is so much more.. like a kid with a new toy when you work with Ki!

[Mato-san]

Ron says it perfect in post 3

[Stefan Stenudd]

Maybe you don't regard it as something physical, but anyone I've met that has genuine internal skills can typically explain it in physical terms.
Then I must by definition lack the skills :)

I believe that we are used to different ways of expressing these things. I am unable to adapt your way of describing it, so I have to stick to mine. Sorry.

To me, ki is something that can be described as mental, as opposed to physical - but of course it leads to physical expressions. For example, a tendency to extend one's arms instead of bending them, and an attention going beyond the reach of the bodies.
Maybe that was what you were asking for?

Well, you started posting about "Ki" etc and how the dantien is important, so by that line it seemed you were positing that you have internal skill. If not, my bad :D Though I don't know why you'd go to the trouble of making a website etc if you thought you didn't have the skills.
Oh, I do believe that I have some skills with what I write about - here and on my website. They may be different from what skills you have in mind - or I might be completely wrong even about what I believe myself to know.

I may even be wrong about this:
I strongly believe that there is not just one way to Rome.

[mickeygelum]

Olympic Judo Coach Hal von Luebbert

Respectfully, could you please advise when Mr. von Luebbert was employed in that capacity?

Mickey

[Chris Parkerson]

Hal was living at the National Judo Institute when I met him in the early 1990's.

He was a running buddy with Phil Porter. They would do seminars together.

I am sure there is a record of his activity somewhere at the NJI.

In fact, he was in the middle of the big blowout that ended in Phil's exit.

[Chris Parkerson]

Michael,
You might ask him directly. he is a pretty volumnous blogger. His webpage is www.judoknighterrant.com

On his Judo page he makes this statement. I know he is in training right now because he is comning out to Ohio to the Mojo to run a seminar for us.

I'm 71, but I just hit 19 chin-ups last night (24 is my all-time best), did 120 push-ups, and ran for half an hour. This morning, as I do every morning, I did 400 sit-ups. I'm strong, tough, and disciplined. But I'm more proud of one thing judo has made me than anything else; it’s made of me a gentleman.
All day. Every day. For me, THAT's something of which a man can be proud.

[Mike Sigman]

Robert John wrote:

Hi Robert,

I am thinking about how to quantify the effects of Ki on a physical level.

What I am hearing from you and Mike's posts is that it aids in two areas:

Stability (Postural integrity) and Strength/force (not musculature but grounded force that "goes through the bones and fascia).

If we look at "stability", I propose we are basically talking about geometry. A strong stance enhances the geometric posture ...Chris, you have told a number of anecdotes about yourself and ki, etc., but in my personal opinion you simply need someone to show you these things. Your theories and understanding simply miss the point. What you're saying generally only confuses the issue for people who are trying to get some actual facts.... and that's not a good thing, for beginners.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[Chris Parkerson]

Perhaps you could be more explanatory for us.
most THI he these days can be explained with terms from the physical sciences.

Even "intentionality" has been isolated in water and identified if I understand Professor William Tiller correctly.

[Chris Parkerson]

correction: most of these things can be explained in terms of physical sciences.

[Erick Mead]

Maybe you don't regard it as something physical, but anyone I've met that has genuine internal skills can typically explain it in physical terms.You haven't. In fairness, for that matter neither has Mike S. or Dan or anyone else from your point of view. You give recipes of movement exercises and subjective impressions to try to duplicate and similes of physical description (It's like (springs/vectors etc.) ... ) to aid in reaching a level of performance. By all accounts people that have visited and tried them are pleased with the suggestions. I take no issue with any of that,

But you do not explain, physically, what is the principle of action involved -- and moreover, you disagree with my suggestion as to the mode of action/perception that is the physical basis for Ki -- without providing any counter proposal.

So. Hold forth, please.

I maintain that Ki is the perception/manipulation of angular momentum|moment as a fundamental synthetic action|potential quantity. The analytic categories of energy, force, acceleration or velocity (which are equally valid as analytic tools) do not map onto to the synthetic action|potential concept of Ki. Angular momentum|moment does. For ease of use I will combine them into a single plural term "momenta," except where I distinguish them functionally.

Fire and water have Ki (Said Lao-tse:"everything is embedded in yin and embraces yang; through chong qi it reaches he 合[harmony]".

Not only gross motion can be described purely in terms of momenta so can forces, heat and other radiation or anything with waves or vibrations (angular momentum quantities), so is sound (as in kiai). "Straight-line" motion and acceleration (which the human body cannot inherently generate without rotations, i.e -- angular momentum inputs) can be considered as the radial change of aspect from any arbitrary point of observation, and acceleration as the realization of more angular momentum from a potential moment. Thus, motion described with angular momentum was the first relativistic concept of physics (hence it's more "Eastern" quality), and by which Berkeley falsified Newton's assumption of absolute space or motion in his "bucket" experiment.

Mencius was asked to describe Ki/Qi . He said "'It is difficult to describe it. This is Qi:-- It is exceedingly great, and exceedingly strong. Being nourished by rectitude (Yi), and sustaining no injury, it fills up all between heaven and earth. This is Qi:-- It is the mate and assistant of righteousness (Yi) and reason (Li)."

Unlike the more limited concept of force, momenta do not care where the hinge of rotation lies, or when it changes or if it is continually changing and moving (a wave). The rotation potential easily shifts from center to center and remains constant until the rotation is realized, and even then may happily allow the center to continue to change. Changing the center of the potential or realized rotations utterly alters the perceived action or path of motion but with precisely the same momenta components -- which as a synthetic quantity, are together always conserved. (As Mencius says, "sustaining no injury.") And since the relative movement problem is obvious wiht a changing center, the only way to see both sides of the problem is to have a framework that encompasses heaven and earth as points of view.

Bishop Berkeley in De Motu, dealt with the problem of angular momentum in similar terms to Mencius referencing the point of view of the heavens as a fixed reference. He also explicitly drew out a common Eastern reference (unknown to him) of stillness in motion: ... according to the difference of relative place, the motion of the same body may be various, and indeed a body may be said to be moved in one respect, and motionless in another; for determining true motion and true rest, ... it will be sufficient, instead of absolute space, to regard relative space as marked out by the heavens of the fixed stars considered as at rest. ... For howsowever forces may be impressed, whatever tendencies there may be, let us admit that motion is distinguished by means of action on bodies, it will however, never follow from thence, that there are absolute space and place, and that its change is the true place.

Aiki and the Eastern concept of Ki fits within this Western framework, which while less common in such broad use than the more analytic tools of force, acceleration etc. is nonetheless a valid, accurate and falsifiable physical basis for description of action of the type we associate with Ki.

The human body is constantly falling over, converting the gravitational moment potential into degrees of realized toppling (angular momentum). With various conscious and unconscious cyclic ( i.e.-- wave-like) components of angular momentum we use our several body sections as counter pendulums to damp the gravitational momenta and to counter that moment from being further realized. Or to project and intensify those momenta into our opponent. To give Mike credit, it is a type of restorative action, hence the image of springs is not so far off, but springs do not work like pendula. It is not simple 3d space vectors, because vectors do not work in a cyclic, segmented balance system, where the reference points are all moving relatively.

Extending Ki is literally extending that process past the structure of our bodies into the structure of our opponents, and training so as to make that process less conscious but more expressive.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Chris,

For me the issue is not that they cannot be explained by physical science...of course.

The problem is, we tend to want to use reductionism to explain it. Of recent, I have come to the conclusion that this is the big problem.

Here is a wiki definition of reductionsim

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionism

contrast that with Holism or emergentism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holism

Anyway, I think we spend too much time trying to quantify what is going on instead of looking at it as a complex system in which there are things going on that simply cannot be explained necessarily in terms of quantifiable physics.

Think neural networks and chaos theory for good examples.

[Mike Sigman]

You give recipes of movement exercises and subjective impressions to try to duplicate and similes of physical description (It's like (springs/vectors etc.) ... ) to aid in reaching a level of performance. By all accounts people that have visited and tried them are pleased with the suggestions. I take no issue with any of that,

But you do not explain, physically, what is the principle of action involved -- Erick, I've said this before and I'll say it again. When I did an in-service for the Physical Therapy school of the University of Colorado, we touched on some of these things and no one had any great problem grasping the concepts, even though they are pretty odd. If your suggestion is that those professors of kinesiology, etc., must talk in terms of angular momentum, you're way off base. The only person who seems to be requiring and mandating a certain form of description for these things is you. And you can't seem to get off the position that it's you who sets the criteria for the discussion. In light of the many efforts people have made to describe things for you, I've pretty much quit even trying, after seeing your continued insistences.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[Erick Mead]

Erick, I've said this before and I'll say it again. And miss my point again and again....

When I did an in-service for the Physical Therapy school of the University of Colorado, we touched on some of these things and no one had any great problem grasping the concepts, even though they are pretty odd. If your suggestion is that those professors of kinesiology, etc., must talk in terms of angular momentum, you're way off base. The only person who seems to be requiring and mandating a certain form of description for these things is you. You either cannot or will not see what I am trying to accomplish. Of course, kinesiologists do not have to get what you are talking about -- in hands-on terms -- in the terms I am discussing. I never said that, and I don't train that way, either. I think that way, but thinking and training are complements -- not substitutes.

Nor do they have to address it in terms of angular momentum for their purposes, which are far more limited and much more practical in nature. They can leave it to simplistic analogies like vectors, springs or whatever other learning model you present them with to imagine the dynamic. Fine. That's pedagogy -- not physics.

But the concept of Ki aspires (and has done since before the time of Christ) to address physical phenomena in terms that are beyond what kinesiologists deal with, including things that we call heat radiation, sound, force, friction, among many others in our reductive analytical pantheon.

If Ki is a real observation about the universe (and three thousand years of successfuly APPLIED Chinese empirical observation strongly suggests that it is) then it necessarily maps onto our scheme of understanding in a coherent manner -- even if that mapping is a little different that the more common analytical conventions we more typically use to describe the different subsets of the same things. There are many allowable conventions within umbrella of physical description. I am just trying to find the correct or closest convention that fits the shape of Ki as it is used, perceived and described. And in finding that mapping we may be able to end a lot of these POINTLESS rathole debates so as at least agree on the ACTUAL thing we are actually talking about -- in terms that do not depend on how one reads the hanzi, assuming one can.

That is all. Please enjoy the rest of the kinesiology seminar, now in progress.

[Robert Cowham]

I've found plenty of material for study in terms of acute alignment and relaxation. I am currently mainly using the ideas of Peter Ralston (eg his book "The Art of Effortless Power").

Also recently had some Amatsu therapy done on me which I was impressed by - and through a web search came across the ideas of tensegrity which is one way of seeking to understand what is going on.

Anyway, here's another thread with plenty of food for thought:

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-32288.html

[Aran Bright]

So what would you define as Ki? :D ( In a physical sense)

Oh Robert, what have you done? ;)

Hasn't this one been mashed out a thousand times before?

Still the question you are getting at is a good one but maybe needs to be framed a little differently, but still I would like to have a crack.

I would define ki as the basic substance of everything, what ever that is, whether it be sub-atomic particles or energy waves.

In a physical sense though I think what is more important is how to generate (?) ki. I guess there can be two answers, one is the brain or mind (if you can assume they are the same thing) the other would be the connective tissue.

What does using ki mean in the martial sense? I think that is someone's intent but also the ability to make use of the function of connective tissue.

In a really simple sense if you use muscle this is not really ki, if you can incorporate the use of the connective tissue or fascia then one can be said to using ki, perhaps.

This is so difficult to define because the way I understand ki is that it is everything, it is the basic building block of everything.

I'll have to stop there, brain freeze.

Aran

p.s. Oh and Kevin, after that last post of yours, I'm a fan a big fan. Breaking this stuff down is doing my head in.:freaky:

[mickeygelum]

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-32288.html

My belief is that there is no such "thing" as Ki/Chi/Qi/Prana.
Rather, I believe that through training our bodies become strong and flexible, and we learn techniques for moving our own bodies and controlling our opponents' bodies in the most efficient manner.

What we perceive as a mysterious force is just a combination of focused intention and good kinesthetics.


There you have it...I agree with this completely.

Everyone is entitled to follow their own path. When unreasonable and outlandish claims of bridling the power of the universe are stated, the originator should be held accountable.

It is of great distress to me that when an individual post links to prove their point, the video shows that they do not accomplish what they are stating. On-the-other-hand, it is even more distressing that when an individual links a video, and proves that they do exactly what they are stating, the other(s) will not accept it.

The most disturbing, in my opinion, outright incompetence and deception. We all, for the most part, are intelligent and educated individuals. We have years of experience in our own individual fields. We all share a passion for the martial arts. We know who is trying to convince us that the world is flat. There are statements and examples that I know not to be true...why argue? The individual(s) has no experience or expertise in support of their claim, by their own admission, either by credentials, reply or video.

Why further their self-validation. An unwaterred plant will die.

Peace, love and and all that ya-da ya-da.

Mickey

[gdandscompserv]

When unreasonable and outlandish claims of bridling the power of the universe are stated, the originator should be held accountable.
Blasphemy! Stone him!:p
...I felt the universe suddenly quake, and that a golden spirit sprang up from the ground, veiled my body, and changed my body into a golden one. At the same time my body became light. I was able to understand the whispering of the birds, and was clearly aware of the mind of God, the creator of the universe.

[Stefan Stenudd]

Lets assume for the sake of argument, that "ki" is a physical skill. If so, what mechanisms within your body power it.
If doing aikido without it, is still aikido, why would it be considered a shortcut?
I discovered that I missed answering your questions, which I guess were for me.

I don't really understand what it means to assume that "ki" is a physical skill. If you refer to how the use of ki influences how you use your body, I must say it is to me almost too complex to describe.
Actually, I find the use of the idea of ki excellent because it simplifies what would otherwise be a number of things to have in mind when you do an aikido technique. Things like timing, finding optimal angles, keeping one's balance, and so on, are easier to learn by thinking of ki flows, than by thinking of what muscles to use et cetera.

As for the shortcut thing, I agree with you: why, indeed?
What I referred to was the attitude among some aikidoists that if you use ki you don't have to work on physical aspects of the techniques, such as balance and steady positions, and the pure mechanics of it all.

[Mike Sigman]

And miss my point again and again....

Of course... everyone seems to "miss your point". It's as predictable as you never being wrong. ;)

Mike Sigman

[Mike Sigman]

I don't really understand what it means to assume that "ki" is a physical skill. If you refer to how the use of ki influences how you use your body, I must say it is to me almost too complex to describe.
Actually, I find the use of the idea of ki excellent because it simplifies what would otherwise be a number of things to have in mind when you do an aikido technique. Things like timing, finding optimal angles, keeping one's balance, and so on, are easier to learn by thinking of ki flows, than by thinking of what muscles to use et cetera.

As for the shortcut thing, I agree with you: why, indeed?
What I referred to was the attitude among some aikidoists that if you use ki you don't have to work on physical aspects of the techniques, such as balance and steady positions, and the pure mechanics of it all.Using ki and how one does a technique are two very different things. The ideas of "not resisting" and "blending with an attack" are not unique ideas to Aikido. But the usage of ki is pretty much Asia-wide in the martial arts, so the implication that ki is uniquely related to Aikido is simply far, far off.

You train the physical ki with motion using intent, usually in Aiki Taiso, with conditioning doing breathing/stretching/moving, and with learning to move so that the body is powered from the legs/hara and not the shoulders. Some of these ideas about "flowing", etc., don't do much but highlight the questions about the teaching ranks in Aikido, in my personal opinion.

Again, I think it's best to set some minimal threshold before someone can even talk about what is and what isn't ki. If someone has/understands ki, they should at a minimum be able to replicate Tohei's fairly simple static "ki tests". All else is just talk. And if someone can really do those things well, I think people will suddenly find that there will be a great common dialogue and a lot less of the "here's my theory" stuff. (shudder) ;)

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[Erick Mead]

... replicate Tohei's fairly simple static "ki tests". All else is just talk. And if someone can really do those things well, I think people will suddenly find that there will be a great common dialogue and a lot less of the "here's my theory" stuff. Dialogue is two people speaking together using their own words. You will not admit of anyone else speaking unless they use YOUR words, hence that is NOT a dialogue.

Believe it or not there are more than a few ways to accurately describe the same things in different terms. Heck, there are two mutually exclusive and irreconclilable terms of reference for magnetic fields, and yet the power comapnies seem to manage them alright.

You are free to dislike other terms of reference, but unless you want to take them apart or engage them, your criticisms, in that regard, have as much validity as your judgment of one's physical performance by choice of terms.

I do not need to validate your perspective to be assured of what I can see and do from my own. You say we need to broaden our horizons. Back at you. You have not tried to see what I see from my perspective -- you just say it cannot be worth the climb across to where I am perched, simply because what I describe seems so different from what you describe see from your perch. And yet in the situation reversed, you say that our perspective is necessarily deficient and we need to come to where you are sitting.

It is silly, really.

[Upyu]

Dialogue is two people speaking together using their own words. You will not admit of anyone else speaking unless they use YOUR words, hence that is NOT a dialogue.

Er, I dunno, I had no problem understanding what Mike said, nor him I, if you care to dig back into the archives of Aikiweb ;)
And I'd never even heard of him.

[dps]

My apologies to Jun, Mike Sigman and Eric Mead for my inappropriate thread.

David

[Chris Parkerson]

Hey Mike,

I love a good challenge. Name the Tohei feats you want me to try and accomplish. I will keep it real and do it on video. Success or failure, I am up for it.

[Mike Sigman]

I love a good challenge. Name the Tohei feats you want me to try and accomplish. I will keep it real and do it on video. Success or failure, I am up for it.I don't think engaging you any further on the ki/kokyu skills is going to be any more productive than it has already, Chris. We've seen your videos and at least one of your tall-tales about who you studied with has come back to bite you in the butt. You need to go see someone and start learning this stuff, rather than offering to show/tell on a "teacher" level.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[Chris Parkerson]

please tell me who on or off line.
I have told no lies.

[akiy]

Another thread which has degenerated into personal discussions. Thread closed.

-- Jun