View Single Post
Old 10-08-2012, 01:15 PM   #47
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: More on Aikido and the Floating Bridge of Heaven

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
No, Mary. David and I are just gently ribbing ...
For anyone who puts on a black belt and especially someone who teaches and promotes people to black belt, my remarks really should be considered mild and humorous.

But accountants' humor is not always terribly funny either, and you also don't want to get them on the subject of whether your numbers add up because then they are not so humorous. We have to keep a balance between friendliness and real concerns that should not be misrepresented.

In IP/IS/AIKI, our baseline is not what Ueshiba said but what he did.

Anyone can mimic what he said but very few can mimic what he did and fewer can actually do what he did.

You have repeatedly given us this diagram and I have said it's valid for what it is: a drawing of forces in a cylinder. I can understand that what happens is shear, but the question is can you actually produce that effect and is it either the same as or on the same level as the effect produced by Dan, who tells you your diagram is unrelated to actually producing the effect.

You asked "what would you like to see?" and I simply said more or less, "Physical results. Not a diagram."

And the comments about your fearing Dan, that's not intended as any kind of personality or character flaw. It's like a horse trainer saying, "Your horse shies away from the third jump." It's just a fact.

As a teacher, I just see it as a proof that you need to become more congruent with your mind, ki and body. An able horse jumps. An able martial artist stands up and goes to the scary guy with the big voice and broad reputation and exchanges physical truth.

And if you don't have the mind/body/spirit congruency to do that, then we come to the point of character in how you deal with your own incongruence. I have plainly said "I'm afraid of that guy and I don't want to get around him." But I didn't then turn around and say, "Although I can do anything he can do."

If I could do what he can do, then I would have no fear of approaching him.

Another approach I could take would be to claim that he is known to hurt people, when that's not heard of with Dan.

So I have walked the rim of that precipice where your comments transition from mere matters of training approach and depth to questions of character.

I don't mention what you've said to attack your character but to say these are the kinds of statements where one might confuse bad character response for a matter of training error. I say it to show that line and emphasize what it means to cross it.

I had forgotten why I put you on Ignore for quite awhile and this exchange reminded me, but I've been thinking a lot lately and I felt like I could engage in this with you without some of the former rancor.

I mention it here to emphasize only that whatever your diagram represents, your fear of Dan shows that you have not become a wholly integrated mind/body/ki unit as the IS/IP training creates. The six-direction training exercises all the elements of the body, all the presence of the mind and all the content of the ki in a mutual stress fest.

The difficulty of the training is directly proportional to the incongruencies of the mind/body/ki unit. And the ability to produce stunning responses is proportional to the congruency of these elements. When the mind/body/ki is congruent, the body is soft but incredibly powerful without tai sabaki stepping and turning. The result of this is a body and mind that will step up to someone like Dan and say, "Please show me."

A horse trainer can lead the horse out of shyness on the third jump and a martial arts teacher can lead the martial artist out of the fearful state of incongruence of mind body and ki to be able to look a man like Dan in the eye with respect for what he can do rather than fear caused by what the student cannot do. It is a defect in training which can inhabit the spirit if not corrected by someone who knows how to do it.

As to Leonardo's flying designs, as far as I know none flew.

I'm a long-time recumbent cyclist and an avid follower of the human-power movement, especially the World Human Powered Speed Challenge. I am also a pilot with a long history in the Experimental Aircraft movement.

If you want to say that the video you linked shows Leonardo DaVinci's design, then you would have to say that I designed the 80+ MPH bicycle that holds the current world record from a few years ago. When I was living in Japan with no access to any information on recumbent bikes, I sketched all kinds of designs on napkins and in notebooks. I found the basic limits and restrictions of the recumbent design in placement of the body, the pedals and the wheels so that no parts would conflict and the drive train would work, but I never built any of my designs. Interestingly, I later saw production models of almost all of my general designs including the short-wheelbase, long wheelbase and compact long-wheelbase, with several variations of handlebar design and placement I had also imagined. So I was on the right track and Leonardo was thinking in the right directions but you could not build any of his designs straight from the drawings and fly the resulting creation.

I also have theorized on various designs combining recumbent cycle mechanisms like in the video you posted, with cutting edge hang-glider technology to create a vehicle you could use to ride up a hill and fly down, possibly even soaring and gaining altitude. But I wouldn't really want to ride on it.

Are you sure you would want to ride on the energy you describe with your shear diagram? The black belt inheres with not only willingness but eagerness to go and find that power and understand and take hold of it in his own body.

The video you show has no remote resemblance to Leonardo's design and does not flap the wings as Leonardo proposed, which is really the crucial element. It's a question, finally, of power and Leonardo's method of flapping was comically underpowered. It's clear that he was dreaming of the power he needed and his mechanism was a place-holder for the engine he could not create.

Another aspect of the modern design's power is that it partially depends on modern materials to reduce the amount of power needed and Leonardo could never have succeeded with the materials in his design.

So, please, don't quibble in abstraction. It flies or it doesn't, it jumps the gate or falters, it goes to meet Dan or Mike or Ark or someone reputed to have IP/IS/AIKI power...or it publishes an unworkable design again with claims that it can do the same thing....

Please reconnect with some baselines for the discussions.

Thanks.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote