Re: Ki does not exclude the other stuff
Quote:
|
Re: Ki does not exclude the other stuff
Quote:
The ether of intention. |
Re: New interview with Christian Tissier Shihan (in English!)
Hi Stefan,
You said Quote:
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 |
Re: New interview with Christian Tissier Shihan (in English!)
Quote:
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. |
Re: New interview with Christian Tissier Shihan (in English!)
Ah, see? Just my imagination, running away with me... ;)
Quote:
Best, Ron |
Re: Ki does not exclude the other stuff
Quote:
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. ;) |
Nature of ki
Quote:
Quote:
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 |
Re: Nature of ki
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But even if it does, your basic body mechanics aren't using Ki/Kokyu power anyways, which was more my original point. |
Re: Ki does not exclude the other stuff
Quote:
If doing aikido without it, is still aikido, why would it be considered a shortcut? |
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
Robert John wrote:
Quote:
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?? |
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
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!
|
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
Ron says it perfect in post 3
|
Re: Nature of ki
Quote:
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? Quote:
I may even be wrong about this: I strongly believe that there is not just one way to Rome. |
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
Quote:
Mickey |
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
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. |
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
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. |
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
Quote:
Regards, Mike Sigman |
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
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. |
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
correction: most of these things can be explained in terms of physical sciences.
|
Re: Nature of ki
Quote:
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: Quote:
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. |
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
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. |
Re: Nature of ki
Quote:
Regards, Mike Sigman |
Re: Nature of ki
Quote:
Quote:
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. |
Re: Ki in a Physical Sense
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/...p/t-32288.html |
Re: Ki does not exclude the other stuff
Quote:
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: |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:31 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.