PDA

View Full Version : Tenkan and Centrifugal Force


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


Bill Danosky
03-21-2005, 03:00 PM
I think Tai Chi and Aikido have an apeal to new agers because there is a mystical element within them. That's to say that there appears to be a power at work that's beyond the exertion of normal human strength.

I'm intrigued by this, too, but I explain that there is at least a solid working theory of physics behind every technique. Tenkan exploits the power of centrifugal force, for instance.

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 03:55 PM
I think Tai Chi and Aikido have an apeal to new agers because there is a mystical element within them. That's to say that there appears to be a power at work that's beyond the exertion of normal human strength. "Appears" being the working term. ;) I'm intrigued by this, too, but I explain that there is at least a solid working theory of physics behind every technique. Tenkan exploits the power of centrifugal force, for instance. Ack! What "centrifugal force" is that? :) Besides, even if there were a centrifugal force (which there's not), I don't think that's the idea behind tenkan; tenkan still uses the opponent's force.

Regards,

Mike

Lorien Lowe
03-21-2005, 05:39 PM
...even if there were a centrifugal force (which there's not)...

Any time there is circular motion, there is a force that can be labeled centrifugal. It may not be fundamental, like gravity or electrostatic or Van Der Waals', but it has to be there if the circular motion isn't decaying.

-LK

mj
03-21-2005, 05:51 PM
Any time there is circular motion, there is a force that can be labeled centrifugal. It may not be fundamental, like gravity or electrostatic or Van Der Waals', but it has to be there if the circular motion isn't decaying.

-LK
Correct Lorien. Centrifugal and centripetal, basics of aikido.

The very essences of tenkan, extension, kokyu movement and...well..lots :)

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 05:56 PM
Any time there is circular motion, there is a force that can be labeled centrifugal. It also can be labeled as HonkiDonk Force or anything else you want. But properly speaking, it is inertial force due to rotational movement. ;)

Mike

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 05:58 PM
Who said anything about reputation? What relevance to reputation do my words bear? Priceless. :)

Mike

Lorien Lowe
03-21-2005, 06:09 PM
Centrifugal force is the inertial force specific to rotation. It's a subset, not an alternative.

-LK

Brion Toss
03-21-2005, 06:15 PM
It also can be labeled as HonkiDonk Force or anything else you want. But properly speaking, it is inertial force due to rotational movement. ;)

Mike
"Centrifugal force n. The component of apparent force on a body in curvilinear motion, as observed from that body, that is directed away from the center of curvature or axis of rotation."
American Heritage Dictionary, third edition
This may not be "properly speaking" but it is not incorrect, and it is a long way from HonkiDonk.
Yours,
Brion Toss

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 06:38 PM
"Centrifugal force n. The component of apparent force on a body in curvilinear motion, as observed from that body, that is directed away from the center of curvature or axis of rotation."
American Heritage Dictionary, third edition
This may not be "properly speaking" but it is not incorrect, and it is a long way from HonkiDonk. Hoisted by your own petard, Brion. Do you see the word "apparent"? I.e., centrifugal force is not a real force.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

mj
03-21-2005, 07:03 PM
:D

Bill Danosky
03-21-2005, 07:12 PM
Ack! What "centrifugal force" is that? :) Besides, even if there were a centrifugal force (which there's not), I don't think that's the idea behind tenkan; tenkan still uses the opponent's force.

Mike

I was thinking along the lines that velocity is increased as you shorten the radius of an arc, etc. I have heard that you are the tenkan expert, so I'd be interested in hearing your opinion.

mj
03-21-2005, 07:22 PM
I would be extremely interested in hearing the opinion of someone who said that centrifugal/petal 'force' (heh) didn't exist.

Unless it was a troll, of course...they would say just anything to argue.

Rupert Atkinson
03-21-2005, 07:40 PM
I firmly believe that centripetal and centrifugal forces can and should be developed. I have done it myself for ages and am constantly amazed at how weak at technique some people are, even after years of training.

Centripetal force is that what develops when you enter tenkan and draw uke in - sure you use his initial movement, and then add some, and the more you CAN add the more powerful your technique becomes. Centrifugal force is that which is used to spit uke off. Likewise, the more you CAN add, the more powerful your technique becomes.

You can, and should, develop this power.

L. Camejo
03-21-2005, 07:55 PM
You can, and should, develop this power.

Reminds me of the progression from Nanahon no Kuzushi to the Ura Waza of the Nage no Kata in Shodokan. It starts off as kuzushi training and then develops into application of kuzushi to throw using the weak lines and then turning while breaking balance along the weak lines.

This is not only the ability to utilise inertia in a circular fashion, but targeted application of force to manipulate the arcs, circles and spirals while keeping Uke off balance imho.
LC:ai::ki:

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 08:13 PM
I was thinking along the lines that velocity is increased as you shorten the radius of an arc, etc. I have heard that you are the tenkan expert, so I'd be interested in hearing your opinion. I'm no expert. Heck, I haven't been promoted to shoot-my-mouth-off, yet. ;) "Tenkan" is the turn to match the opponent's body direction, not the applied technique. You may lead the opponent into various directions using his inertia and "empty" spots at that time or you may apply a kokyunage, which has nothing to do with "centrifugal force" on the opponent. That's all I was saying.

FWIW

Mike

stuartjvnorton
03-21-2005, 08:18 PM
lol, the power of the internet.
couldn't find one with shite swinging uke around though...
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html

And here's one mentioning the "apparent" centrifugal force:
http://www.answers.com/topic/centripetal-force

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 08:27 PM
lol, the power of the internet.
couldn't find one with shite swinging uke around though...
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html

And here's one mentioning the "apparent" centrifugal force:
http://www.answers.com/topic/centripetal-force Here's the definition:

centrifugal force (sen-trif-yuh-guhl, sen-trif-uh-guhl)

A force that tends to move objects away from the center in a system undergoing circular motion. Centrifugal force keeps the water in a whirling bucket from spilling or throws a rider in a car against the door when the car goes around a sharp curve. Centrifugal force is actually a form of inertia.


Frankly, I can't see where it's worth my time to argue something that anyone with a basic physics background would just shrug and smile at. There is no "centrifugal force"... what you feel is an object attempting to maintain it's straight-line direction (Newton's First Law, I believe) while you try to contain it in rotational movement. That is not a force that requires a special name, as people mistakenly did for a while.... that is inertia at work. Should we rigorously derive the equations so there's no question?

Regards,

Mike Sigman

RonRagusa
03-21-2005, 08:49 PM
Not all tenkan is done just to match uke's body direction. There are numerous techniques that use tenkan as part of the take down or projection of uke during the application of the technique. The tight circular motion executed by nage forces part of uke's body to assume a path with a greater radius; the part of uke's body being held by nage will travel a path more in line with nage's vector. Uke is therefore forced to reconcile the conflict where his single body must assume more than one vector and velocity simultaneously. Since acceleration is a function of velocity and direction, uke's body is accelerated at different rates all at once. The result is he is taken off balance and thrown.

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 09:01 PM
Not all tenkan is done just to match uke's body direction. There are numerous techniques that use tenkan as part of the take down or projection of uke during the application of the technique. The tight circular motion executed by nage forces part of uke's body to assume a path with a greater radius; the part of uke's body being held by nage will travel a path more in line with nage's vector. Uke is therefore forced to reconcile the conflict where his single body must assume more than one vector and velocity simultaneously. Since acceleration is a function of velocity and direction, uke's body is accelerated at different rates all at once. The result is he is taken off balance and thrown. Y'know... all you've got to say is that I'm wrong about using "tenkan" for instance with Sayu Nage and try to support it. Right now, looking at your statement above, it appears that the best you can come up with is that Tenkan is "part of" a number of throws. It's "part of" some forms of Sayu Nage and other throws and it does not necessarily involve what some people are calling "centrifugal force". "Tenkan" means "turn"... it doesn't mean "application of centrifugal force". Actually, I'm a little stunned that this could come up. No wonder some people don't want to define Aikido.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 09:05 PM
I firmly believe that centripetal and centrifugal forces can and should be developed. I have done it myself for ages and am constantly amazed at how weak at technique some people are, even after years of training.

Centripetal force is that what develops when you enter tenkan and draw uke in - sure you use his initial movement, and then add some, and the more you CAN add the more powerful your technique becomes. Centrifugal force is that which is used to spit uke off. Likewise, the more you CAN add, the more powerful your technique becomes.

You can, and should, develop this power. I don't have a problem with developing the skills you're talking about, Rupert. What I have a problem with is the assertion that "Tenkan" by definition means the application of these forces. It means "turn". It is a form of entering an attack. You can enter an attack with tenkan and apply a kokyu nage without ever applying "centrifugal" or "centripetal" force.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

bendo
03-21-2005, 09:12 PM
A person not trained in classical mechanics will not try to understand aikido via force vector...Perhaps you are both saying the same thing, just using different words???

RonRagusa
03-21-2005, 09:14 PM
Forces arise from the relative motions of bodies. Tenkan is not an application of force it is a contributing factor in the generation of force.

RonRagusa
03-21-2005, 09:15 PM
A person not trained in classical mechanics will not try to understand aikido via force vector...Perhaps you are both saying the same thing, just using different words???

In a way, the study of Aikido is training in classical mechanics; without all the math. :)

bendo
03-21-2005, 09:24 PM
There would be cause for a dojo to open up spruking mathematical martial arts! -> part technique, part applied physics... You would have people just lining up waiting for the doors to open!

It is interesting that although a lot of poeple here acknowledge the physics side of aikido, i dont think that anyone has ever tried to rigoursly define aikido from this perspective. Imagine if the Xtreme MA animators had specialised on aikido only? I beleive that alot of debate about aikido principles could be settled this way...

On a side note, this XMA documentary (?) made a interesting remark concerning energy derived from the earth (or something along those lines)... they show via modelling that as the guy goes to strike his balance shifts creating an energy wave travelling up his leg and out his arm to his fist... i suppose more bang for you buck. I found this point extremly interesting from an aikido perspective! Got me thinking anyway!

Moses
03-21-2005, 09:25 PM
quote" That's to say that there appears to be a power at work that's beyond the exertion of normal human strength." quote

I am still hung up on this, does this imply something extraordinary? Or just someone more talented than yourself? Can't it be stated, that those who possess talent beyond ourselves are are simply just talented? While being a lame analogy, wasn't Michael Jordan far beyond his peers, yet he possessed no special talents, i.e. no extraordinary talents? Rather as a basketball player, wasn't' he just gifted among his peers at that time?
Just a though, Moses Jenkins

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 09:26 PM
Forces arise from the relative motions of bodies. Tenkan is not an application of force it is a contributing factor in the generation of force. No, I'm not going to let you off so easily, Ron, since you deliberately inserted yourself.

Bill said:
Tenkan exploits the power of centrifugal force, for instance.

I then said:
Besides, even if there were a centrifugal force (which there's not), I don't think that's the idea behind tenkan; tenkan still uses the opponent's force.

You then contributed:
Not all tenkan is done just to match uke's body direction. There are numerous techniques that use tenkan as part of the take down or projection of uke during the application of the technique. The tight circular motion executed by nage forces part of uke's body to assume a path with a greater radius; the part of uke's body being held by nage will travel a path more in line with nage's vector.

Tenkan is a turn. It is an entry into an attack. "Relative motions" ain't going to cut it, Ron. Nor is your idea of not matching... that is what "ai ki" means. Nor is your "tight circular motion executed by nage forces uke's body..." stuff. You've just blown the basics of Aikido. You don't get off with the attemped escape of "Tenkan is not an application of force it is a contributing factor in the generation of force." You got some 'splainin' to do, Lucy. :)

Regards,

Mike Sigman

bendo
03-21-2005, 09:26 PM
MJ had some pretty nasty hang time, specially talented or not :)

Moses
03-21-2005, 09:34 PM
quote [MJ had some pretty nasty hang time, specially talented or not] quote

Very true indeed :). But I would argue his skills are not supra-human, rather they are the product of natural talent and dedicated work. Like I stated, this is a lame analogy, but I feel the idea is universal.
Moses Jenkins

RonRagusa
03-21-2005, 09:41 PM
No, I'm not going to let you off so easily, Ron, since you deliberately inserted yourself.

Bill said:
Tenkan exploits the power of centrifugal force, for instance.

I then said:
Besides, even if there were a centrifugal force (which there's not), I don't think that's the idea behind tenkan; tenkan still uses the opponent's force.

You then contributed:
Not all tenkan is done just to match uke's body direction. There are numerous techniques that use tenkan as part of the take down or projection of uke during the application of the technique. The tight circular motion executed by nage forces part of uke's body to assume a path with a greater radius; the part of uke's body being held by nage will travel a path more in line with nage's vector.

Tenkan is a turn. It is an entry into an attack. "Relative motions" ain't going to cut it, Ron. Nor is your idea of not matching... that is what "ai ki" means. Nor is your "tight circular motion executed by nage forces uke's body..." stuff. You've just blown the basics of Aikido. You don't get off with the attemped escape of "Tenkan is not an application of force it is a contributing factor in the generation of force." You got some 'splainin' to do, Lucy. :)

Regards,

Mike Sigman
Tenkan is not only an entry into an attack. It is any turning motion executed during the application of a technique. I never came up with an idea of not matching, I stated that it is not just executed to match uke's body direction.

Since you don't actually study Aikido, have from what I can see have no rank in Aikido and don't really know anything about the basics of Aikido perhaps you should put 20 or so years in on the mat before you set yourself up as an authority on the subject. ;)

stuartjvnorton
03-21-2005, 09:56 PM
There is no "centrifugal force"... what you feel is an object attempting to maintain it's straight-line direction (Newton's First Law, I believe) while you try to contain it in rotational movement.

Correctamundo!
Earn a gold star from most of my maths and science teachers. Except Mr Kugelman: he never gave them out. Just detentions. But anyway...

You seem awfully caught up on that one point (albeit amongst many others of similar importance...). Genuinely caught up? Or just more grist for the mill?

Should I call "Aikido" "that thing"?
Or everything else for that matter? Where, in the Gospel According to Mike, does one draw the line?
Might get confusing. How about I just call it Aikido?

IMNSHO...

Rupert Atkinson
03-21-2005, 09:57 PM
I don't have a problem with developing the skills you're talking about, Rupert. What I have a problem with is the assertion that "Tenkan" by definition means the application of these forces. It means "turn". It is a form of entering an attack. You can enter an attack with tenkan and apply a kokyu nage without ever applying "centrifugal" or "centripetal" force.
Mike Sigman

Tenkan is turning, yes, but if all you do is turn then you have nothing but avoidance. If, however, you start to control uke, as in say irimi-nage, you draw him in with centripetal force and afterwards spit him off with centrifugal force. Ikkyo is a little different - the centripetal force draws him in the whole way to the ground such that he goes down in a spiral. So, may the force be with you, for without it you can only run away (avoid).

It is also possible to avoid tenkan and throw in a straight line with no centripetal/centrifugal force.

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 10:15 PM
Tenkan is not only an entry into an attack. It is any turning motion executed during the application of a technique. I never came up with an idea of not matching, I stated that it is not just executed to match uke's body direction.

Since you don't actually study Aikido, have from what I can see have no rank in Aikido and don't really know anything about the basics of Aikido perhaps you should put 20 or so years in on the mat before you set yourself up as an authority on the subject. ;) Lame, Ron. Now we see what "universal love" is when it's scratched.

Mike

Mike Sigman
03-21-2005, 10:19 PM
Correctamundo!
Earn a gold star from most of my maths and science teachers. Except Mr Kugelman: he never gave them out. Just detentions. But anyway...

You seem awfully caught up on that one point
Pardon me, but if you look at who started this thread, it wasn't me. Or did you notice that?
Should I call "Aikido" "that thing"?
Or everything else for that matter? Where, in the Gospel According to Mike, does one draw the line?
Might get confusing. How about I just call it Aikido?IMNSHO... Why do I care what you call it? Shouldn't you be concerned what it is recognized as? As I've said a few times... are you trying to convince the beginners and your peers, or are you trying to convince the experts? :)

Regards,

Mike Sigman

RonRagusa
03-21-2005, 10:24 PM
Lame, Ron. Now we see what "universal love" is when it's scratched.

Mike

Universal love?????????????? :confused:

In any event, you still haven't presented your Aikido credentials. :)

Bill Danosky
03-21-2005, 10:29 PM
I am not a physics student or an engineer, so I'm not going to get too hung up on the semantics. Whether it's centrifugal or centripetal, etc. is not of primary interest to me.

Example: When I pivot (I'm Yoshinkan) and enter into Kote Gaeshi, I can feel some extra energy forming as my center of gravity nears uke's. I have been visualizing this energy concentrating and being released again as I bring uke around and I feel that this has improved my performance. To me, it now feels more like I am pulling uke back into the wrist return like a yo yo. It's a very subtle thing, but also it feels very powerful.

I'm interested in the physics involved, because if I can understand it and apply it more effectively, I think IT's the extra power (that appears to be present beyond the exertion of normal human strength).

IMHO, O-Sensei was equally as clever as Einstein and Hawking- He was able to perceive and utilize the forces of nature, but he explained it and applied it in a different way. If anything gave him 'his power', this was it.

My view is that all the major waza owe their effectiveness to their exploitation of the various natural forces. This seems to fit the definition of Ai Ki Do.

RonRagusa
03-21-2005, 10:44 PM
I am not a physics student or an engineer, so I'm not going to get too hung up on the semantics. Whether it's centrifugal or centripetal, etc. is not of primary interest to me.

Example: When I pivot (I'm Yoshinkan) and enter into Kote Gaeshi, I can feel some extra energy forming as my center of gravity nears uke's. I have been visualizing this energy concentrating and being released again as I bring uke around and I feel that this has improved my performance. To me, it now feels more like I am pulling uke back into the wrist return like a yo yo. It's a very subtle thing, but also it feels very powerful.

I'm interested in the physics involved, because if I can understand it and apply it more effectively, I think IT's the extra power (that appears to be present beyond the exertion of normal human strength).

IMHO, O-Sensei was equally as clever as Einstein and Hawking- He was able to perceive and utilize the forces of nature, but he explained it and applied it in a different way. If anything gave him 'his power', this was it.

My view is that all the major waza owe their effectiveness to their exploitation of the various natural forces. This seems to fit the definition of Ai Ki Do.

Excellent.

stuartjvnorton
03-21-2005, 11:19 PM
Pardon me, but if you look at who started this thread, it wasn't me. Or did you notice that?

Yep, noticed that. Thanks for the tip.
You were the one going on about how by God, it just shouldn't be called "centrifugal force", because it just wasn't. Noticed that too. Hence the comment. You seem to enjoy getting everyone caught up on minutae.


Why do I care what you call it? Shouldn't you be concerned what it is recognized as? As I've said a few times... are you trying to convince the beginners and your peers, or are you trying to convince the experts? :)

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Nah, I'm concerned what it is.
Nice try though. ;-)

eyrie
03-21-2005, 11:37 PM
Mike Sigman is correct. Tenkan is a turning entry into (actually alongside or behind) the line of attack, without interfering with the movement in an inertiaI frame of reference. This is "aiki"! It has nothing to do with centripetal or centifugal (which is a pseudo!) force.

The "tenkan takedown techniques" Ron refers to is more the result of gravity and Newton's 2nd Law of motion - NOT centripetal force.

Rupert Atkinson
03-22-2005, 12:14 AM
Reminds me of the progression from Nanahon no Kuzushi to the Ura Waza of the Nage no Kata in Shodokan. It starts off as kuzushi training and then develops into application of kuzushi to throw using the weak lines and then turning while breaking balance along the weak lines.

This is not only the ability to utilise inertia in a circular fashion, but targeted application of force to manipulate the arcs, circles and spirals while keeping Uke off balance imho.
LC:ai::ki:

I agree. That kata is a good example.

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 03:36 AM
Universal love?????????????? :confused:

In any event, you still haven't presented your Aikido credentials. :) This is sooooo trite and typical of New Agers.... when they screw up they look for some reason to attack personally. :) All you need to know, Ron, is that I have credentials but I don't claim to be an Aikido teacher. Now see if you can BS your way out of the fact that you don't seem to know what tenkan is and you just revealed it to all the world. Quit worrying about me and see if you can throw in enough hurried posts on topic that everyone forgets! ;) Back to tenkan.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 04:32 AM
I am not a physics student or an engineer, so I'm not going to get too hung up on the semantics. Whether it's centrifugal or centripetal, etc. is not of primary interest to me.

Example: When I pivot (I'm Yoshinkan) and enter into Kote Gaeshi, I can feel some extra energy forming as my center of gravity nears uke's. I have been visualizing this energy concentrating and being released again as I bring uke around and I feel that this has improved my performance. To me, it now feels more like I am pulling uke back into the wrist return like a yo yo. It's a very subtle thing, but also it feels very powerful.

I'm interested in the physics involved, because if I can understand it and apply it more effectively, I think IT's the extra power (that appears to be present beyond the exertion of normal human strength).

IMHO, O-Sensei was equally as clever as Einstein and Hawking- He was able to perceive and utilize the forces of nature, but he explained it and applied it in a different way. If anything gave him 'his power', this was it.

My view is that all the major waza owe their effectiveness to their exploitation of the various natural forces. This seems to fit the definition of Ai Ki Do. OK, I see where you're coming from, but I think you're missing the point. When you "pivot", that's the tenkan, which has the point of moving out of the line of attack and placing your body in a position to go somewhat with the attack ("aiki"). As you begin to "lead", in the technique you're mentioning, you are indeed making use of "centrifugal force".... that's what you're saying. I don't have a problem with that, but as you lead into a technique (the lead into kote gaeshi, in this example), you are already past the tenkan. That's why I pointed out that a tenkan can just as easily lead into a kokyu throw as into a throw that uses "centrifugal force". The tenkan is the turn that initially allows you to avoid the line of attack... all else is the lead and then the technique. Even if I choose to go into Sayu Nage at that point there is a slight lead/entry (not really involving centrifugal force) into an off-balance direction and then the consummation of technique. But the tenkan was the "pivot" that took me off the line of attack, Bill, not the lead or the actual technique.

Insofar as the physics goes, you can see that it's not the centrifugal force.... however, the physics is indeed interesting. Tohei actually does a pretty good job of trying to explain the application of forces through his Ki paradigm, but he's not clear enough so that it's obvious what he's saying. The essential "force" in Aikido that is always spoken of in relation to "Ki" is the force of "kokyu ryoku", or "jin" (sometimes spelled "jing") in Chinese. It's the resisting force that Tohei exhibits when he is standing on one leg (or both legs, or lying down, or from behind, etc.... you can manifest this one force in any direction, but it's too complicated for this post).

The main idea is that you can manifest this force at will in the direction you want it to be in. For example, if someone pushes against my chest, I may want to manifest this kokyu force at my chest so he can't push me over, thereby impressing onlookers. In real Aikido, of course, we would never deliberately resist the force, but would immediately move offline or go immediately with the force and begin a technique into a direction where the pusher has no power (there are a number of these). BTW, please forgive the pedantry... I actually have a point I'm working toward.

So when an opponent grabs my wrist, I enter while turning (that's the tenkan) and I must manifest this basic kokyu force of Aikido into a direction that suitably begins the lead-into-technique. The lead into the technique of kote gaeshi involves you forming the kokyu force into one direction, up, then over (every bit of the movement is powered by kokyu force). It often looks like a sudden, straight technique but if you analyze the directional changes the kokyu forces go through (if you did it correctly), those forces make a circle. You may have included another circle horizontally (here's your beloved centrifugal force ;) ), but the leading force you use to effect putting your partner into a centrifugal arc is also part of the kokyu power you must manifest throughout the technique.

In other words, the importance of entry and technique is just as much your ability to manifest kokyu power in relation to the opponent as it's important to do the technique. This is true of ALL techniques involving Ki/Kokyu as O-Sensei, Tohei, et al mean it, and it is considered quite different from the normal use of strength and just "technique" involving centrifugal force. Most people practicing Aikido use normal force and focus on "technique" while never developing useable kokyu force throughout all directions of movement. The Aiki Taiso at the beginnings of classes are originally meant to warm you up in the use of kokyu power throughout the entire range of various movements.

The lead into Sayu Nage (as another example) from tenkan is the same universal idea... you move off-line, immediately match your "ki" to the opponent's grab as you begin the "lead" of up and over (another circle!!!) with your kokyu power, driven by your hips and hara (the hara actually controls the direction of the kokyu force).

That's more the intriguing part of the physics, IMO, Bill.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

creinig
03-22-2005, 04:45 AM
This is sooooo trite and typical of New Agers.... when they screw up they look for some reason to attack personally. :) All you need to know, Ron, is that I have credentials but I don't claim to be an Aikido teacher.

Well, if you correct others and present your opinion, it's just that -- some opinion. Just the same as some opinion from Joe Random I just met on the street. If you want people to actually respect your opinion, you have to give it a certain "weight" or foundation. That means either making it clear that you indeed do know something about the topic (e.g. by presenting your credentials or at least telling where and how long you've trained) or by quoting someone who is known as knowledgeable on the subject.

As to the "centrifugal force not being a real force" -- that's of course correct. And pretty much irrelevant. The term is a good and well-known shorthand and it is a nice term for something that's clearly observable. Physics people use it all the time. But if you prefer to say "the pseudoforce (caused by the object's inertia and perpendicular to its direction of movement) counter-acting the effects of the centripetal force in a bound circular motion" you're of course free to do so :D. Just don't force that on others.

No comment on tenkan, because we usually don't use that term...

Update: The "centrifugal force" comment was based on your earlier insisting on the term not being used. Which I found pretty annoying. But it seems my above comment was unnecessary after all...

RonRagusa
03-22-2005, 05:04 AM
You're still flat out wrong about tenkan Mike. In your own words, 'It means "turn".' ; when the turn occurs during the application of technique isn't part of the definition of the word. Maruyama sensei uses tenkan to describe any turn during the execution of a technique not just the initial move.

mj
03-22-2005, 06:44 AM
I think Tai Chi and Aikido have an apeal to new agers because there is a mystical element within them. That's to say that there appears to be a power at work that's beyond the exertion of normal human strength.

I'm intrigued by this, too, but I explain that there is at least a solid working theory of physics behind every technique. Tenkan exploits the power of centrifugal force, for instance.
Surely tenkan uses centripetal force?

They are drawn into the centre, not thrown out from it.

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 08:26 AM
[snip]If you want people to actually respect your opinion, you have to give it a certain "weight" or foundation. That means either making it clear that you indeed do know something about the topic (e.g. by presenting your credentials or at least telling where and how long you've trained) or by quoting someone who is known as knowledgeable on the subject. Christian, Ron was not trying to ascertain my credentials to verify any information... he was obviously trying to turn toward a pissing contest. What you're saying wide of the mark. As to the "centrifugal force not being a real force" -- that's of course correct. And pretty much irrelevant. For something irrelevant and which I said only light-heartedly to distract from having to say that that force was not part of tenkan, it seems to be a big topic. Why not accept that yes, what I said was true, and then grow up enough to realize I only said it to take the sting out of the remainder of the sentence?

Regards,

Mike Sigman

jester
03-22-2005, 09:24 AM
To say there are not Centripetal Force in Aikido is ridiculous. Whether it happens with a Tenkan movement is debatable depending on the speed, attack reaction and technique.

p.s. I'm not a new ager.

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 09:31 AM
To say there are not Centripetal Force in Aikido is ridiculous. Whether it happens with a Tenkan movement is debatable depending on the speed, attack reaction and technique.

p.s. I'm not a new ager. :p Who said "there are not Centripetal Force in Aikido"? If you'll go back and read, you're mixing your comments, Tex. And no, I doubt I'd think of you as a New Ager.

Mike Sigman

rob_liberti
03-22-2005, 09:37 AM
When I tenkan, I think that the initial movement (kai ten maybe) is going have some forces acting inside my body acting towards center, and as I complete that rotational movement (stepping back so to speak) that movement is going to have some forces acting inside my body going away from center (my foot resulting in stepping back away from my center for one).

I totally agree that semantics are important if they are actually causing a misunderstanding as opposed to using them to put someone down just to try to establish/assert dominance. Everyone makes mistakes. I wouldn't consider the usage of that term a mistake since everyone knew what was meant - which is the purpose of having a common language. Some people consistantly make the mistake of trying to put themselves on pedastols at the expense of others. The bottomline is that no one has rank in a forum.

Rob

SeiserL
03-22-2005, 09:40 AM
IMHO, I accept that all theories are simply cognitive models to explain what is observed in nature. I also accept that those theories are useful no matter what label you put on them.

Entering and blending without resisting or interfering with the inertia and momentum of an approach or attack is useful. Redirect by utilizing the centrifugal force to pull the head into the center of the circular motion while using centripetal force to let the feet try to keep up on the circumference of the circular motion is useful to take balance (kuzushi). In a downward spiral motion it become a useful take down.

While this may not make sense or appear useful to some, it sure helped me get my head around it. And, wherever the head goes, the body tends to follow.

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 10:32 AM
When I tenkan, I think that the initial movement (kai ten maybe) is going have some forces acting inside my body acting towards center, and as I complete that rotational movement (stepping back so to speak) that movement is going to have some forces acting inside my body going away from center (my foot resulting in stepping back away from my center for one). So in the example of a same-side wrist grab to kote gaeshi, how about giving us some idea of your forces, Rob?

Mike

Bill Danosky
03-22-2005, 11:00 AM
Where is Rev. Sensei Kensho Furuya when we need him? :(

jester
03-22-2005, 11:30 AM
Tex.
Hey Granola, I'm actually from Jersey. :eek:

Casey Martinson
03-22-2005, 11:44 AM
Mike,
Following your mode of reduction, I could also say that there is no such thing as the color green; it's really just a specific frequency of visible electromagnetic radiation. And for that matter, it's not even that specific, because where do you draw the line between green and blue? I could call it the color HonkiDonk if I wanted to. Or you could just say, there are only three primary colors, yellow, green, and magenta, and anything else is just a variation on those three. Imagine, we could look through a clothing catalogue, and instead of "Mulberry" and "Sunset Orange", the colors could just be listed as different proportions of the primary three: "Magenta 23%, Green 37%, Yellow, 40%"

However, "green," "orange," and "centrifugal force" are terms representing loosely defined phenomenon that commonly occur, and as such, they may have some value as signifiers understood by a general population.

Now, what was the original question? I don't know if there even was one. Bill just observed that there was a physical explanation for things that some people think of as "mystical." Yeah...so? I'm guessing this is a continuation of the Equitable thread, which I didn't read. But the resulting debate here was fun.

-casey

Alfonso
03-22-2005, 11:57 AM
So when an opponent grabs my wrist, I enter while turning (that's the tenkan) and I must manifest this basic kokyu force of Aikido into a direction that suitably begins the lead-into-technique. The lead into the technique of kote gaeshi involves you forming the kokyu force into one direction, up, then over (every bit of the movement is powered by kokyu force). It often looks like a sudden, straight technique but if you analyze the directional changes the kokyu forces go through (if you did it correctly), those forces make a circle. You may have included another circle horizontally (here's your beloved centrifugal force ), but the leading force you use to effect putting your partner into a centrifugal arc is also part of the kokyu power you must manifest throughout the technique.

I can follow this much. What you seem to call kokyu here is what I feel as a mix of Alignment, weight, balance, er.. the "apparent power" from Uke pushing against the ground through me and back through .. How does this relate to breath and intention is what I'd like to ask you, because that is what kokyu implies to me as well.

I guess I can understand Tenkan as being indepent of the application of force; since sometimes you can enter and turn behind and drop uke without the "apparent power" but by "removing the structural support" . I just wish I could get the labels right so I understood what other people are talking about.

rob_liberti
03-22-2005, 12:05 PM
So in the example of a same-side wrist grab to kote gaeshi, how about giving us some idea of your forces, Rob?

Why?

Dominic Toupin
03-22-2005, 12:08 PM
From the Yoseikan perspective... huh! What is "Tenkan" ??? Just kidding :)

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 12:11 PM
Where is Rev. Sensei Kensho Furuya when we need him? :( So you're going to turn to him, are you? ;)

Mike

djalley
03-22-2005, 12:27 PM
I am not a physics student or an engineer, so I'm not going to get too hung up on the semantics. Whether it's centrifugal or centripetal, etc. is not of primary interest to me.

Example: When I pivot (I'm Yoshinkan) and enter into Kote Gaeshi, I can feel some extra energy forming as my center of gravity nears uke's. I have been visualizing this energy concentrating and being released again as I bring uke around and I feel that this has improved my performance. To me, it now feels more like I am pulling uke back into the wrist return like a yo yo. It's a very subtle thing, but also it feels very powerful.

I'm interested in the physics involved, because if I can understand it and apply it more effectively, I think IT's the extra power (that appears to be present beyond the exertion of normal human strength).

IMHO, O-Sensei was equally as clever as Einstein and Hawking- He was able to perceive and utilize the forces of nature, but he explained it and applied it in a different way. If anything gave him 'his power', this was it.

My view is that all the major waza owe their effectiveness to their exploitation of the various natural forces. This seems to fit the definition of Ai Ki Do.

Hi all, I don't post on here much but what Bill said struck a chord and I hope I can explain my viewpoint on it. I'm an engineering technician by day, so have some Physics and Math knowledge.

I think the "thing we feel" in Aikido that we call ki or energy resides in the redirection of uke's force, and us putting a force on uke he cannot resist. For instance, you can put a thousand pounds of weight on a table and it will hold. That table is made to hold weight placed on it, yet it takes only 20 pounds of force or so to move it sideways. I believe what we do in aikido is similar. We don't hold the weight up (directly resist uke), but we move the table (redirect his energy). If someone is running in a straight line and you give them a major shove into their side as they go by, odds are they'll have to move sideways. Similarly, if they run at you and you give them the same shove, odds are you'll be trampled.

Yes, these are grossly oversimplified examples, but for this instance they illustrate the point I'm hoping to make. I think we are inherently aware of how much force it takes to move things, whether it be knocking uke to the ground, punching, etc., and aikido teaches us to redirect uke's momentum and apply force perpendicularly to his "force vector". Because he has no force to resist along this vector, it takes just a little of shite's force to control a lot of uke's force. I think the mysticism comes from the realization you're doing a LOT of perceived work with just a little effort.

Thank you for reading, I hope I made a valuable contribution for someone. :ai:

Don

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 12:47 PM
I can follow this much. What you seem to call kokyu here is what I feel as a mix of Alignment, weight, balance, er.. the "apparent power" from Uke pushing against the ground through me and back through .. How does this relate to breath and intention is what I'd like to ask you, because that is what kokyu implies to me as well. Literally kokyu is "breath" power and there is a sense of timing, but idiomatically it implies an innate power. Your idea of kokyu as a mix of alignment, weight, balance, and other things is sort of where I imagine the split may be between what Tohei is saying and what Shioda is saying and which Aikikai seems to have varying takes on. It reminds me of some of the discussions about "rooting" that goes on in the Chinese martial arts community... although a lot of people use the word, their varying takes on it can be stunningly different when you meet them in person; yet they can usually use their take on it to resist a push, to some degree, so they argue they are correct.

The power I'm talking about is something that I can manifest anywhere on my body and even move it around my body or use it to power my movements... all while standing still and not changing alignment, weight, balance, etc. Yet, someone can go through the alignment, weight, balance, etc., door and arrive there after a while, if they focus on relaxing and think about every movement. That's roughly how I see the difference between what Shioda says in his books and what Tohei says in his books, if it makes sense to you.

I'd recommend Tohei's old book, "This is Aikido" with his pretty clear pictures of the Aiki Taiso, although he calls them "Aikido Calisthenics". :) Tohei's "tests" that he shows are really all about doing what I mentioned above. It could be described as "bringing the one point to any point you want it" or it could be described as "bringing paths of power to where you want them" or "using paths of power to effect your movements or tasks". One of the Taiso that Tohei shows is actually what I would call "Tenkan Undo", but he calls it "kokyu-ho undo", which is technically exactly what I described it as in my lengthier post, earlier, when I was talking about keeping kokyu power through every bit of the motion. What I should have made clearer, I think, is that I bring the power to the wrist/hand which uke grabs.... i.e., my seika no tanden is at that point when I want it there.

The idea of moving these forces is the core of Aikido techniques, as I mentioned. It's like you're controlling a little mini-universe inside yourself and you use this power to "kokyu ho" or to "harmonize" with an opponent. The idea of using these mind-manipulated powers to control engagement with others is widespread in martial and philosophical arts in Asia and is considered sort of a universal or "natural" truth of some magnitude. Shioda's way, the way I sort of imagine you may be using also, is one way in the door. Tohei's way is another way in the door, but Shioda's has more surety to it... although it's not guaranteed by any means. But... it's something to think about when you slowly examine movement. I guess I can understand Tenkan as being indepent of the application of force; since sometimes you can enter and turn behind and drop uke without the "apparent power" but by "removing the structural support" . I just wish I could get the labels right so I understood what other people are talking about. This thing about what Tenkan is sort of boggles my mind. I used to read every book I could get my hand on and go to every seminar that was within range... the idea that tenkan is a method of entry and getting off the line of attack was, I thought, pretty basic and universally understood. Just the fact that "tenkan" is used not only for "centrifugal force" throws and for reversal/kokyu throws that have no centrifugal force is enough to tell most people, I thought, what the definition of "tenkan" was. ;)

Again, thanks for posting that translation. It made me feel like my research into Aikido roots was worthwhile.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Alfonso
03-22-2005, 01:31 PM
De nada :-) maybe someone is upset about that, but I do believe in the open exchange of ideas.
There are other of these conditioning exercises that we used to do more of until some time ago. My teacher told me once she was not comfortable doing them anymore since she didn't felt she "owned" them (That after she caught me teaching them to the beginners class :-) ) I understand those exercises are part of Hikitsuchi sensei's tradition, out of Shingu. I would guess that the rev. Koichi Barrish in Washington would probably know more details on the subject.

On Tenkan, it's always been about entering and turning as far as I've been taught. The only strange thing about tenkan in my school is that it's always stressed to be a forward motion even when going back...

PS - thanks for very interesting discussions on these forums.

aikidoc
03-22-2005, 02:52 PM
Sayu Nage? I know there is an exercise in Tohei's book called sayu undo, but I have never seen it listed as sayu nage (kokyu nage yes).

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 02:55 PM
(snip) I understand those exercises are part of Hikitsuchi sensei's tradition, out of Shingu. I would guess that the rev. Koichi Barrish in Washington would probably know more details on the subject. Great! Thanks for the pointer. I'll try to get in touch with Barrish Sensei or visit him. I know some friends of his. thanks for very interesting discussions on these forums. My pleasure. I like the nuts and bolts things.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Bill Danosky
03-22-2005, 03:00 PM
So you're going to turn to [Rev. Sensei Kensho Furuya], are you? ;)


Yep! If only I could :( He doesn't hang around here any more.

Other than valuing his spiritual counsel, He has some of the most beautiful and effortless redirection I've seen. Whether he perfectly understands the physics and conciously formulates his randori moves, I don't know. But he has a marvelous knack of manipulating the force and (I don't know exactly, either) gravity affecting uke's direction and stability.

As another interesting exercise, I wouldn't mind hearing the actual physics experts opinions what they feel the dominant or central force of physics is at work in each of the various waza.

Example: Irimi Nage's power relies on such and such. Shiho Nage, maybe leverage?

Also, how close does anyone feel science is to explaining Ki/Chi/Kokyu power, etc?

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 03:00 PM
Sayu Nage? I know there is an exercise in Tohei's book called sayu undo, but I have never seen it listed as sayu nage (kokyu nage yes). Hmmmmm.... doing a quick Google on "Sayu Nage" I get 22 hits, John. I agree that you don't hear the term all that much, but it's legitimate. Different dojo's will call a certain throw different names, many times. It is a kokyu throw, I'd concur, but it's a difficult one for a lot of people because they can't bring their full weight to their arms without a lot of practice.

Regards,

Mike

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 03:04 PM
As another interesting exercise, I wouldn't mind hearing the actual physics experts opinions what they feel the dominant or central force of physics is at work in each of the various waza.

Example: Irimi Nage's power relies on such and such. Shiho Nage, maybe leverage?

Also, how close does anyone feel science is to explaining Ki/Chi/Kokyu power, etc? One of the best books for discussing the forces involved in a lot of throws is "Total Aikido" by Gozo Shioda, translated by David Rubens. If I could only have 3 Aikido books, it would be maybe my first choice.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Brion Toss
03-22-2005, 03:22 PM
Hoisted by your own petard, Brion. Do you see the word "apparent"? I.e., centrifugal force is not a real force.

Regards,

Mike Sigman
Let me get this straight: you are saying that the word "apparent" disqualifies centrifugal force as "real"? So an apparent diameter (The angle subtended by the diameter of a celestial body as seen from the center of the earth, expressed in angular units) is a mere chimera, an apparent easement (An easement which involves in its nature, or as a means of its enjoyment, or the like, some permanent visible sign of its existence...) is a useless fiction, and apparent wind ((The wind as observed aboard a moving vessel, being the vectorial combination of the true wind and the wind due to the ship's motion) is a fantasy of no concern to sailors. And so on.
There are other ways to express what is commonly called "centrifugal force" (you have done so), ways that can be more precise, and more useful in calculations. I am not contesting this. What I would like is for adequately precise (perhaps as determined by some agreed-upon source; the above are from Merriam-Webster's 2nd Unabridged, for instance) terms to be accepted for the sake of having a conversation, without suffering pointless cavils that derail said conversation.
Although, in the spirit of pointless cavils, I would like to point out that the expression is "Hoist with your own petard", not "Hoisted by."
Yours,
Brion Toss

Brion Toss
03-22-2005, 03:33 PM
OK, I see where you're coming from, but I think you're missing the point. When you "pivot", that's the tenkan, which has the point of moving out of the line of attack and placing your body in a position to go somewhat with the attack ("aiki"). As you begin to "lead", in the technique you're mentioning, you are indeed making use of "centrifugal force".... that's what you're saying. I don't have a problem with that, but as you lead into a technique (the lead into kote gaeshi, in this example), you are already past the tenkan. That's why I pointed out that a tenkan can just as easily lead into a kokyu throw as into a throw that uses "centrifugal force". The tenkan is the turn that initially allows you to avoid the line of attack... all else is the lead and then the technique. Even if I choose to go into Sayu Nage at that point there is a slight lead/entry (not really involving centrifugal force) into an off-balance direction and then the consummation of technique. But the tenkan was the "pivot" that took me off the line of attack, Bill, not the lead or the actual technique.

Insofar as the physics goes, you can see that it's not the centrifugal force.... however, the physics is indeed interesting. Tohei actually does a pretty good job of trying to explain the application of forces through his Ki paradigm, but he's not clear enough so that it's obvious what he's saying. The essential "force" in Aikido that is always spoken of in relation to "Ki" is the force of "kokyu ryoku", or "jin" (sometimes spelled "jing") in Chinese. It's the resisting force that Tohei exhibits when he is standing on one leg (or both legs, or lying down, or from behind, etc.... you can manifest this one force in any direction, but it's too complicated for this post).

The main idea is that you can manifest this force at will in the direction you want it to be in. For example, if someone pushes against my chest, I may want to manifest this kokyu force at my chest so he can't push me over, thereby impressing onlookers. In real Aikido, of course, we would never deliberately resist the force, but would immediately move offline or go immediately with the force and begin a technique into a direction where the pusher has no power (there are a number of these). BTW, please forgive the pedantry... I actually have a point I'm working toward.

So when an opponent grabs my wrist, I enter while turning (that's the tenkan) and I must manifest this basic kokyu force of Aikido into a direction that suitably begins the lead-into-technique. The lead into the technique of kote gaeshi involves you forming the kokyu force into one direction, up, then over (every bit of the movement is powered by kokyu force). It often looks like a sudden, straight technique but if you analyze the directional changes the kokyu forces go through (if you did it correctly), those forces make a circle. You may have included another circle horizontally (here's your beloved centrifugal force ;) ), but the leading force you use to effect putting your partner into a centrifugal arc is also part of the kokyu power you must manifest throughout the technique.

In other words, the importance of entry and technique is just as much your ability to manifest kokyu power in relation to the opponent as it's important to do the technique. This is true of ALL techniques involving Ki/Kokyu as O-Sensei, Tohei, et al mean it, and it is considered quite different from the normal use of strength and just "technique" involving centrifugal force. Most people practicing Aikido use normal force and focus on "technique" while never developing useable kokyu force throughout all directions of movement. The Aiki Taiso at the beginnings of classes are originally meant to warm you up in the use of kokyu power throughout the entire range of various movements.

The lead into Sayu Nage (as another example) from tenkan is the same universal idea... you move off-line, immediately match your "ki" to the opponent's grab as you begin the "lead" of up and over (another circle!!!) with your kokyu power, driven by your hips and hara (the hara actually controls the direction of the kokyu force).

That's more the intriguing part of the physics, IMO, Bill.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Hi,
I like that. I really like that. Thank you for an information-rich posting, Mike.
Yours,
Brion Toss

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 03:38 PM
Although, in the spirit of pointless cavils, I would like to point out that the expression is "Hoist with your own petard", not "Hoisted by. I actually debated with myself which version to use, so I did a quick Google and found out that it appears to be more stylish to say "hoisted" nowadays, though you're right about the original word. I can't win. ;)

Mike

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 03:39 PM
I like that. I really like that. Thank you for an information-rich posting, My pleasure, if it's at all helpful.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

eyrie
03-22-2005, 07:41 PM
Literally kokyu is "breath" power and there is a sense of timing, but idiomatically it implies an innate power. ...The power I'm talking about is something that I can manifest anywhere on my body and even move it around my body or use it to power my movements... all while standing still and not changing alignment, weight, balance, etc. Yet, someone can go through the alignment, weight, balance, etc., door and arrive there after a while, if they focus on relaxing and think about every movement....
The idea of moving these forces is the core of Aikido techniques, as I mentioned. It's like you're controlling a little mini-universe inside yourself and you use this power to "kokyu ho" or to "harmonize" with an opponent....

The idea of using these mind-manipulated powers to control engagement with others is widespread in martial and philosophical arts in Asia and is considered sort of a universal or "natural" truth of some magnitude....

I remember reading about this IMA guy called Mike Sigman in BlackBelt Magazine and Inside Kungfu back in the late 80's... I'm hoping it is the same Mike Sigman.... :)

For someone who claims to have "no credentials" in Aikido, sure knows a lot more about the fundamental principles of Aikido than a lot of people who actually do aikido.

Glad to have you around Mike!

Mike Sigman
03-22-2005, 08:10 PM
I remember reading about this IMA guy called Mike Sigman in BlackBelt Magazine and Inside Kungfu back in the late 80's. I admit nothing and I'll try to pay back the money. ;)

Mike

Lorien Lowe
03-23-2005, 02:44 PM
Hi all-
this is turning out to be a most interesting thread. Thanks to all of you for contributing good images, info, and feedback without (for the most part) grandstanding.

-LK

Bill Danosky
03-24-2005, 08:19 AM
One thing I noticed that's very different between Japanese and Chinese martial arts, is that in Kung Fu (at least Shao Lama KF) you disengage contact between many attacks and defenses in rapid series, where in Aikido, you maintain contact with uke throughout a technique.

Interestingly, when disengaged from your opponent in KF, you don't lose as much feedback as you'd think. Somehow you maintain some spatial awareness or something as a result of being "in the personal space" of your partner. As usual, I'm not quite able to articulate this, but I know Mike S. is going to come along and do it for me if I get him started. ;)

I miss Chi Sao!

Mike Sigman
03-24-2005, 08:28 AM
One thing I noticed that's very different between Japanese and Chinese martial arts, is that in Kung Fu (at least Shao Lama KF) you disengage contact between many attacks and defenses in rapid series, where in Aikido, you maintain contact with uke until the very end of the tech. You can mentally substitute the words "martial arts" for "kung fu", Bill... it's a generic term, at best. "Wu Shu" is what the Chinese say, but if you want to be specific, the "martial arts forms competitions" are "contemporary wu shu" and the actual martial arts are "traditional wu shu". There are a large number of different martial arts in China, each with different strategies and techniques, so there is no way to group what all Chinese martial arts do in one phrase like you did. It's like saying "In Japanese martial arts they wear black culottes. :)

Mike

Bill Danosky
03-24-2005, 08:53 AM
Yes, rather than giving Shao Lama as an example, I'm sure I should've said "in my personal experience", or some other caveat. But what I was meaning to bring up is how virtual contact and awareness is maintained even when actual contact is broken between movements. Chi sao practice was prescibed for me to enhance my ability to know where my opponent's arms, legs, hands, feet and point of balance are.

I understand that internal energy is also something that is developed this way, but I think that was at a higher level than I was training at. The Sifu, Terry Wright-Lee, was only in our area for about two years.

Bill Danosky
03-24-2005, 09:55 AM
How do you like this posit?

The tenkan or pivot at the beginning of Kote Gaeshi exploits the power of leverage because it's easier to turn uke from their center than from the outside of their arc.

Mike Sigman
03-24-2005, 10:26 AM
How do you like this posit?

The tenkan or pivot at the beginning of Kote Gaeshi exploits the power of leverage because it's easier to turn uke from their center than from the outside of their arc. How about the idea that the real problem with this discussion may be that there is a distinction between "tenkan" and "kaiten"?

Regards,

Mike

rob_liberti
03-24-2005, 01:26 PM
Well, I'll take a shot at adding clarity.

I think "ten" kind of means transform, and "kan" kind of means change. Any good explanation for "kai" out there? (or better translations than I gave would be welcome as well!)

When I say kaiten in aikido, I usually mean that I step forward and rotate my body toward my back leg.
When I say tenkan in aikido, I usually mean the same start as above, but then I step back with other leg (that I didn't start stepping with).

Rob

James Young
03-24-2005, 02:05 PM
I think Rob is on the right path here. To me in Japanese kaiten generally has the meaning to rotate or go around. It's most often used in a "mechanical" or more tangible sense like kaiten doa (rotating door) or something like that. However, tenkan on the other hand has an additional connotation of change due to use of the "kan" character meaning change. It can also be used in more intangible situations. Such as a turning point in time or a changing turn in feelings. Because of this additional connotation of change I think this is why the term tai no henko (change of body) is used by people who practice Iwama style aikido to substitue which is called tai no tenkan or simply tenkan by the majority of aikido people.

I guess the major difficulty comes because like others I've heard the terms tenkan and kaiten used interchangeably to describe the same movements. For instance what Rob described as kaiten above I've heard to referred to as tenkan as well, sometimes han-tenkan (half-tenkan). I don't know if there is a right or wrong usage.

Mike Sigman
03-24-2005, 05:22 PM
Well, the apparent friction at the beginning of the discussion was the picture of tenkan as a turning entry prior to a technique versus some people viewing tenkan as a spinning envelopment, more or less. I've looked around on the internet and Kisshomaru Ueshiba's book and I think tenkan is sustainably argued as simply the turning, off-line entry. However, Gozo Shioda describes (page 19, "Total Aikido") kaiten as the enveloping spin, etc., as some people viewed tenkan.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

James Young
03-24-2005, 05:59 PM
I think I agree with your line of thinking Mike. In my opinion and approach to practice of the initial tenkan movement as an entry prior to technique should be about getting off the line-of-attack and moving into a safer position while simulatneously making connection with your partner. Once you've turned your body and accomplished that, whether I throw them forward or lead them around in a circular path (which you can also call tenkan or kaiten at your discretion) is really beside the point because I should have made connection at that point and should be able to do whatever technique I want and/or comes naturally based on the dynamics of the situation. I have seen some people practice that initial tenkan movement with more of a focus on spinning their partner around them instead. However, my observation is they are depending on timing or upper-body strength and it doesn't seem like a particularly valuable practice approach to me, but to each his own.

Regarding using inertial force or centrifugal "force" to me I think that has some place in aikido practice but it may be overstated a bit. If you have a partner of some significant mass you have to have some pretty good angular velocity for the effect of that inertia to be significant on that mass which is at some given radius from the center of the rotational axis. I guess if the attack and the response is dynamic enough it may create enough inertial force or centrifugal "force" for the person to feel they are being thrown out of the rotational sphere by that momentum, but I don't think that happens all too oftern. Usually what I see is that the tenkan, or kaiten movement if you prefer, I think is used to put the uke in momentum that the nage controls (because he has connection with him) and then to put the uke in a kuzushi situation where he loses his balance at which point the nage can change direction (whether it be reversal like for irimi nage or towards the outside of that rotational sphere like kaiten nage) and then throw the uke with ease. To me that interaction is much more common in aikido but then again others may practice differently, so I don't put any absolutes on any of these observations.

Bill Danosky
03-24-2005, 09:54 PM
the tenkan, or kaiten movement if you prefer, I think is used to put the uke in momentum that the nage controls (because he has connection with him) and then to put the uke in a kuzushi situation where he loses his balance at which point the nage can change direction (whether it be reversal like for irimi nage or towards the outside of that rotational sphere like kaiten nage) and then throw the uke with ease.

Yeah. That's what I was thinking. More in the instance of moving uke in a circular orbit. Closer to your body as you move them around, then wider as the momentum is built, whether you are letting go or reversing the direction of the orbit. I think the elliptical levers in a compound bow work the same way?

RonRagusa
03-25-2005, 05:06 AM
Tenkan is a turn. It is an entry into an attack.

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/blog.php?do=showjournal&j=6990

rob_liberti
03-25-2005, 07:50 AM
It seems just a silly and useless to argue the semantics of an imprecise language as it does to argue over someone's usage of words which are well known like "centrifugal force" and "green". Heck, say "musubi" to a Japanese person who doesn't train aikido (and many who do) and they will probably look to see if their shoelace is tied. A lot of the descriptions are more poetry than science.

Rob

Mike Sigman
03-25-2005, 09:13 AM
It seems just a silly and useless to argue the semantics of an imprecise language as it does to argue over someone's usage of words which are well known like "centrifugal force" and "green". Heck, say "musubi" to a Japanese person who doesn't train aikido (and many who do) and they will probably look to see if their shoelace is tied. A lot of the descriptions are more poetry than science. I don't think the argument is semantics, although it appears to be going that way. There are a few "initial" moves in Aikido and "tenkan" is one of them. Since tenkan can be shown by the existence of tenkan-in-combination-with-kokyu-throws not to require enveloping uke in "centrifugal force", then "tenkan" as an initiating move isn't defined by the presence of "centrifugal force". The use of the word tenkan at times other than as the initiating technique isn't germane anymore than is the fact that we can "irimi" later in an attack, too.

Instead of semantics, maybe we should focus on logic. ;) Whoa.... what am I saying????

Mike

rob_liberti
03-25-2005, 09:21 AM
Well, I thought we started talking about the problems at the beginning of the thread, and I guess I was lead to my opinion about silly semantics by this:

Ack! What "centrifugal force" is that? :) Besides, even if there were a centrifugal force (which there's not), I don't think that's the idea behind tenkan; tenkan still uses the opponent's force.

I do agree that you can turn without that having much to do with enveloping people - unless the context of that is that someone is clinging on to you while you are turning. It is just that what one school calls tenkan can be completely different from what another school calls tenkan and they are probably just as correct as each other. Maybe we can say the term we mean, and if it is really unclear, ask politely if the person means whatever we are guessing. Whoa, manners...

Rob

Mike Sigman
03-25-2005, 09:28 AM
It is just that what one school calls tenkan can be completely different from what another school calls tenkan and they are probably just as correct as each other. Any word can be "tenkan" and "tenkan" can be defined as anything people want it to be. There.... that should make me as knowledgeable as you are about Aikido, then, since we "are probably just as correct as each other." There are indeed positive sides to moral relativism. My credentials are just as good as... nay, even better than, since my opinions even on that are that are valid... yours in Aikido since there is no real way of defining what your credentials are in relation to mine. Therefore, I trump you until you reply.

Mike

rob_liberti
03-25-2005, 10:04 AM
Right, there is no rank in a forum.

Mike Sigman
03-25-2005, 11:18 AM
Right, there is no rank in a forum. "Rank" is meaningless in an open-ended practice called "Aikido", too. This is the same thing that goes on in a lot of Chinese martial arts. At the upper levels, it's considered that most people doing an art are not serious, so "rank" is meaningless, no matter what rank they claim.

The killer to Aikido rank is that in an effort to too-rapidly expand the Aikido organizations, the real meaning of "rank" was lost many years ago. Most of us who have been around for many years know that. To their credit, a number of people in Aikido refuse to test for rank because it's too obvious that "rank" has lost its meaning.

The second danger to Aikido is that it is only a 2-generation (maybe 3) art without a large pool of strong core practitioners in a single setting (like Hombu Dojo or a native village or whatever). Hence we get these "anything goes" definitions. If anything is Aikido, then by definition Aikido is also nothing. It's whatever role-playing game you want it to be and you can entice victims to become your "students" ("call me privately and I'll let you in on the 'secrets'").

Instead of looking for a list of definitions for Aikido, as you've been feeling around for on various threads, you need to start with one definition and build from it, step-by-step. The first definition of Aikido must be that it is a martial art. Since many people that have slipped into Aikido will now dissent over even that basic definition, then you should know that "Aikido" is becoming meaningless and therefore "rank" in Aikido certainly means almost nothing. Instead of a list of core factors, you need to first see if there are even enough people who would agree that Aikido is a martial art and that it should be useable in the parking lot at some reasonable time in their practice. If you can't get a consensus on that, then we're in a pickle even bringing up the word "rank". But, like Ellis Amdur, I realize these kinds of comments will only bring out the attempts to discredit, the personal attacks, etc..... and it only reinforces my points as it did his.

Mike

Aristeia
03-25-2005, 04:39 PM
Any word can be "tenkan" and "tenkan" can be defined as anything people want it to be. There.... that should make me as knowledgeable as you are about Aikido, then, since we "are probably just as correct as each other." There are indeed positive sides to moral relativism. My credentials are just as good as... nay, even better than, since my opinions even on that are that are valid... yours in Aikido since there is no real way of defining what your credentials are in relation to mine. Therefore, I trump you until you reply.

Mike

Thre's a large and unfounded jump to be made from "hey thre's differnet usage of various words so lets make sure we have the same understanding of the terms before arguing about them" to complete moral relativism. As I'm sure you know.

Ellis Amdur
03-25-2005, 10:52 PM
I'm coming in on this thread late, and may have missed something, but unfortunately, there've been so many side-tracks that it's been hard to follow. So if I'm reiterating something already pointed out, my apologies.

To the best of my knowledge, Ueshiba Morihei did not use the word "tenkan" in isolation. Used that way, it means blending and spinning - the common fantasy that our aikido is so superior to other martial arts that we just sweep them up in our circle and they can't recover.

Ueshiba, in his writings referred to irimi ("entering,") which really means taking the opponent's territory - occuping the space he is just moving into. In other words, an aikido atemi is irimi - placing your fist just where his face, for example, is trying to be. The second term Ueshiba used is "irimi-denkan." (The "D" is an alteration for ease of pronounciation, like a contraction.) This means that you enter, as before, with atemi, foot/hip placement, whatever, taking the opponent's territory (I know, "there's no opponent in aikido," but let's save that for another discussion). The opponent, however, is not crushed, defeated, what-have-you, and reoccupies the space or simply takes it himself, and the entering move then flows into the turning move (tenkan). I can't think of a good image right now, but it's like what happens to a wave when it hits the shoreline, and then it "tenkans" around/up/out. The opponent, unlike the immovable shore, and still on the attack, however, "flows with the go," to use Rickson Gracie's phrase. (If they don't continue with an attack, a follow up with further irimi rather than tenkan will naturally be the proper move).

In short, there is no tenkan without irimi. Any attempt to execute tenkan without effectively taking their territory (the meaning of atemi) will result in them countering you - unless they, too, are merely playing the aikido dojo game.

Best

Ellis Amdur

Rupert Atkinson
03-26-2005, 03:36 AM
Yes - that is spot on. Tenkan is preceeded by irimi, or an attempt at irimi. Tenkan is not just avoidance (although many do it as such). When I was a student I asked many teachers about it and never got a straight answer.

Mike Sigman
03-26-2005, 10:01 AM
I agree with what you're saying, Ellis. The "tenkan" we all talk about as a beginning move is just a variation of irimi. If my memory serves me correctly it was originally called "irimi-tenka", in fact (could have been "denka"... you know how the "t" and "d" get mixed up).

Mike

Rupert Atkinson
03-26-2005, 05:22 PM
I'm coming in on this thread late, and may have missed something,
Ueshiba, in his writings referred to irimi ("entering,") which really means taking the opponent's territory - occuping the space he is just moving into. In other words, an aikido atemi is irimi - placing your fist just where his face, for example, is trying to be. The second term Ueshiba used is "irimi-denkan." (The "D" is an alteration for ease of pronounciation, like a contraction.)

Ellis Amdur

It is tenkan with a 't' not a 'd' - maybe you got out of the wrong side of bed this morning :)

Ellis Amdur
03-26-2005, 05:42 PM
Rupert -

You read what I wrote. It is correct. Many words in Japanese shift from a "t" to a "d" when coupled with another word. Irimi-denkan is once.

Now I'm up on the wrong side of the bed.

Ellis

rob_liberti
03-26-2005, 06:26 PM
An example of "t"s that become "d"s would be how koto tama becomes kotodama. ("k"s become "g"s which is how the "k"imono turns into do"g"i.)

I agree that you are going to do irimi before tenkan assuming someone is attacking you. Now, whether a particular movement is called, "tenkan" or "kaiten" or even "han-tenkan" doesn't matter to me - as long as we define what we mean when we write (and it matters) then that's pretty much all you can expect.

As far as rank being meaningless in aikido - I say it is up to each teacher. And yes, some should be ashamed of themselves, but not all.

As far as there being no rank what-so-ever in a forum, like it or lump it.

Rob

Rupert Atkinson
03-27-2005, 11:14 PM
In Korean, the sound changes between words follow a highly regular and predictable pattern. In Japanese, while some have tried to make rules regarding sound changes, the fact remains that there is no discernable hard and fast rule. It is easy to say that /t/ changes to /d/ and /k/ changes to /g/ etc. when in a secondary position; this is the simple thing often said to learners of the language. However, it is a little like the /i/ before /e/ except after /c/ rule -- except when … - and there you have it -- except when. In Japanese there are lots of exceptions, so many in fact that whole theses have been written on this very topic.

Suffice it to say, I am no wiser than the next man but I do realise it is far simpler to just learn the idiomatic irregularities that appear in everyday expressions. In this case, for the average linguist bod like myself, the rule is not worth bothering with as it is just not so readily apparent or well established. Ask a Japanese and they will not have a clue -- just as much as the average Englishman will not be able to explain his utterly confusing spelling system. The smarter guy will explain about voiced and voiceless consonants but that is not perfect either.

Back to the point -- tenkan is of Chinese origin, and of what few sensible rules there are, one is that words of Chinese origin are not subject to this sound change (except when …well, ask Mr. 中田 -- see below).

Someone above mentioned -- kotodama. Well, consider furitama. They also have medama (eyeball), and mizutama (water droplet). Then consider the case of Mr. 中田. Now is that Nakata or Nakada? Well, the only way to find out is to ask him.

Now let's think, should it be sumo-tori or sumo-dori …

Conc: irimi-tenkan rules OK :)

Ellis Amdur
03-28-2005, 12:58 AM
Rupert -

The only reason I posted re "d" and "t" is you corrected me. You stated that my usage of the word irimi-denkan was incorrect. In fact, it is not. All the irregularities of Japanese regarding other composite words are irrelevant.

I have never heard irimi-tenkan in spoken Japanese, when the two words are used as a single concept. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I didn't even say it was incorrect. I simply wrote it the way every Japanese whom I met in my thirteen years in Japan has used the composite word, and then explained why I didn't use "t" for tenkan, under the assumption that someone would correct me. Evidently my explanation wasn't enough and you corrected me anyway. This is tedious.

Ron Tisdale
03-28-2005, 09:06 AM
Hi Ellis,

There is a thread on aikido journal that is speaking to the atemi=irimi concept...would you mind if I quoted your post here and provided a link back to this topic?

Thanks, and Best Wishes,
Ron

Ellis Amdur
03-28-2005, 10:27 AM
I assume you mean my first post, not the semantic quibbles. Sure.

Best