[quote=Mike Sigman]The problem with this approach, in my opinion, is that you are not making any distinction related to "sinking the qi". If the force origins, which you neglect to mention, are the same for all movements in your mechanical schema, then I think you're missing the essence of what is actually happening. I guess what I'm saying is that this is a fairly complex and radically different system of movement and you're not saying anything that meaningfully differentiates it from normal movement.
Generally speaking, someone lifting their arm uses mechanical attachment and forces based from the shoulder joint. Of course, it goes without saying that the shoulder is not totally isolated from the hara, so there are pulleys and levers, etc., working in conjunction with the muscles of the middle and lower back, etc., etc. However using exactly the same setup of connections, pulleys, and levers, but sourcing the arm-lift as an upward push from the locus of the "hara" gives radically different values in the operation of the connections, pulleys, and levers... if you see what I mean. Then, and worse yet, if you introduce a "connection" that works to connect the apparatus in a way it was not connected before (i.e., an extraneous variable), it's simply a different way of movement entirely, regardless of any discussion about gyro-dynamics, joints around an axis, etc.
And actually, what I just said is basically what happens. Your point about gyrodynamics is an attempt to explain a phenomenon of strategy and it's not a bad attempt, but I think it misses something essential by not taking into account the factors that I mentioned.
[quote= Mike Sigman) Let me know when you measure a zero-force vector or a non-electron-flow emf so that we know in reality, not in theory, what the direction/orientation is.
In reality, there is no such thing a "stillness in motion" that doesn't use forces, Erick. [/quote] I was actually trying to keep this at a more basic level without distinguishing between potential vector fields, electrical current, magnetic flux and photons and electrons in electromagnetic interaction. But your challenge presents a further opportunity to demonstrate analogies of axis and energy conversion principles at issue. I will attempt to meet it head on, but only for those interested -- so find it here on the AikiWEBLOG: "But Why?" that I started just for this-here purpose:
Electric current and magnetic flux are mutually dependent, orthogonal in relationship, and the result of collapse of a vector potential field (virtual) into current or flux (actual). The point I am making about axis and energy conversion and virtual work as a model to see the action of takemusu aiki, holds as true for the given analogue as does the right hand rule hold true for both gyros and field/currents.
In aikido, the analogue is the connection (ki musubi), which harmonizes tori/nage to uke's state at contact and allows the creation at that moment (takemusu aiki) of appropriate technique based on the detected orientation. The connection does not disturb the attack, but joins with it in order to establish orientation, which then leads to a technique appropriate to that flow, and out of phase with the plane of attack.
Only at this moment of connection is anything like "strategy" in existence, much less "tactic." And even then, the only "strategy" is to let the state of forces at play define the action to be accomplished. Chinese would describe this as following "li" 理 the principle of the grain of wood, which shaped itself to the forces under which it grew.
For students who do not yet grasp it from the inside at a cerebellar (balance center) level we have to "set up" defined interactions in bite-size quantities. This allows students to feel aspects of the right interaction in a regular manner.
We train to show aspects of ki musubi and takemusu aiki to our students. However, letting ki musubi and takemusu aiki show themselves is what we are really training for.
The more I look for it, the more I find applications of the concept of "juji" in this interaction between attack and technique. The more I see it, the more the examples that I see conform to my understanding of axis and energy conversison demonstrated by field laws and gyrodynamics.
Try thinking about the right hand rule when working through some techniques. That is my most practical result for useful training from this exploration so far. Maybe it will reveal more as I go on.