Quote:
Robert John wrote:
Maybe you don't regard it as something physical, but anyone I've met that has genuine internal skills can typically explain it in physical terms.
|
You haven't. In fairness, for that matter neither has Mike S. or Dan or anyone else from your point of view. You give recipes of movement exercises and subjective impressions to try to duplicate and similes of physical description (It's like (springs/vectors etc.) ... ) to aid in reaching a level of performance. By all accounts people that have visited and tried them are pleased with the suggestions. I take no issue with any of that,
But you do not explain, physically, what is the principle of action involved -- and moreover, you disagree with my suggestion as to the mode of action/perception that is the physical basis for Ki -- without providing any counter proposal.
So. Hold forth, please.
I maintain that Ki is the perception/manipulation of angular momentum|moment as a fundamental synthetic action|potential quantity. The analytic categories of energy, force, acceleration or velocity (which are equally valid as analytic tools) do not map onto to the synthetic action|potential concept of Ki. Angular momentum|moment does. For ease of use I will combine them into a single plural term "momenta," except where I distinguish them functionally.
Fire and water have Ki (Said Lao-tse:"everything is embedded in yin and embraces yang; through chong qi it reaches he 合[harmony]".
Not only gross motion can be described purely in terms of momenta so can forces, heat and other radiation or anything with waves or vibrations (angular momentum quantities), so is sound (as in kiai). "Straight-line" motion and acceleration (which the human body cannot inherently generate without rotations, i.e -- angular momentum inputs) can be considered as the radial change of aspect from any arbitrary point of observation, and acceleration as the realization of more angular momentum from a potential moment. Thus, motion described with angular momentum was the first relativistic concept of physics (hence it's more "Eastern" quality), and by which Berkeley falsified Newton's assumption of absolute space or motion in his "bucket" experiment.
Mencius was asked to describe Ki/Qi . He said "'It is difficult to describe it. This is Qi:-- It is exceedingly great, and exceedingly strong. Being nourished by rectitude (Yi), and sustaining no injury, it fills up all between heaven and earth. This is Qi:-- It is the mate and assistant of righteousness (Yi) and reason (Li)."
Unlike the more limited concept of force, momenta do not care where the hinge of rotation lies, or when it changes or if it is continually changing and moving (a wave). The rotation potential easily shifts from center to center and remains constant until the rotation is realized, and even then may happily allow the center to continue to change. Changing the center of the potential or realized rotations utterly alters the perceived action or path of motion but with precisely the same momenta components -- which as a synthetic quantity, are together always conserved. (As Mencius says, "sustaining no injury.") And since the relative movement problem is obvious wiht a changing center, the only way to see both sides of the problem is to have a framework that encompasses heaven and earth as points of view.
Bishop Berkeley in
De Motu, dealt with the problem of angular momentum in similar terms to Mencius referencing the point of view of the heavens as a fixed reference. He also explicitly drew out a common Eastern reference (unknown to him) of stillness in motion:
Quote:
|
Berkeley, De Motu wrote:
... according to the difference of relative place, the motion of the same body may be various, and indeed a body may be said to be moved in one respect, and motionless in another; for determining true motion and true rest, ... it will be sufficient, instead of absolute space, to regard relative space as marked out by the heavens of the fixed stars considered as at rest. ... For howsowever forces may be impressed, whatever tendencies there may be, let us admit that motion is distinguished by means of action on bodies, it will however, never follow from thence, that there are absolute space and place, and that its change is the true place.
|
Aiki and the Eastern concept of Ki fits within this Western framework, which while less common in such broad use than the more analytic tools of force, acceleration etc. is nonetheless a valid, accurate and falsifiable physical basis for description of action of the type we associate with Ki.
The human body is constantly falling over, converting the gravitational moment potential into degrees of realized toppling (angular momentum). With various conscious and unconscious cyclic ( i.e.-- wave-like) components of angular momentum we use our several body sections as counter pendulums to damp the gravitational momenta and to counter that moment from being further realized. Or to project and intensify those momenta into our opponent. To give Mike credit, it is a type of restorative action, hence the image of springs is not so far off, but springs do not work like pendula. It is not simple 3d space vectors, because vectors do not work in a cyclic, segmented balance system, where the reference points are all moving relatively.
Extending Ki is literally extending that process past the structure of our bodies into the structure of our opponents, and training so as to make that process less conscious but more expressive.