Core Stability Training Spinal S-shape

[Guest guest]

Dear Mel Siff,

As you perform Peer Review and are knowledgable in

physics please let me know where I may send you course 1 no charge.

I am doing that because I want you to have full advantage as I appear

to be tested by you in this forum. I am for academic freedom and

competition. I also actually feel like we have a finite Einstein vs.

quantum mechanics Bohr contest going here, which is great.

I would also say I was a member of the NSCA back in the 80's It my

impression it is the greatest. It deals with the magic of taking on

the task of devleoping technology to inprove human production. I can

tell strenght and conditioning is your baby as it is mine. It

appears that your integrity, knowledge and sincerity are impeccable

compared with what I have found so far in the NSCA leadership.

I am not interested in telling you any more what I have read -- for

instance you mention Kapandgi You will see his works in the course as

I paid for their use. You for instance say Mel Siff Denver I would

prefer not to waste time either Scherger Ridgefield. So lets

not be evasive lets get to the math. I am not interested in titles or

impressions If I am wrong lets prove it so I will not even being

wasting my time because I better get back to the drawing board if I

am wrong.

[Why not share your proofs right here with the entire list, because the

collective brain is sure to offer a much more balanced and fairer forum than

relying on my critique alone? You might also like to discuss your point of

view with the BIOMCH-L list (of about 4000 of the world's top

biomechanists there), if you really wish to see if you are wrong. You may

sign on there at:

http://isb.ri.ccf.org/biomch-l/

....and really receive some serious analysis of your ideas. See you there in

the near future? Mel Siff]

Your knowledge of lever systems is that their exists three 1st 2nd and 3rd

Class is this true or not.

[ANYTHING can exist if one creates a definition or classification scheme which

brings a given concept into being. The concept of levers has been known for

thousands of years and their scientific formulation goes back at least to the

ancient Greeks. In more recent times, three classes of lever were classified

and the usual basic equations describing them were derived. Given a single

fulcrum, one effort and one load, there are only three possible permutations

of how these items can be arranged, though we could conceivably state that there

are only two classes of lever: one with the fulcrum in between the effort and

the load and another with the fulcrum at one end of the system (this class would

then have two subclasses in which the effort and the laod change places). And

that's it - there is no other possible way to classify levers. If so, do show

us.

Mel Siff]

Your knowledge of these 3 are based on a structural identification of

site of Fulcrum Site of force of effort and site of resistance. EFR

Effort- fulcrum- resistance would be example of 1st class FRE

fulcrum- resistance- effort would be example of 2nd class

FER fulcrum -effort -resistance would be an example of 3rd class

--- is this true or not.

Your knowledge of lever systems is that they have functional

implications -- true or not

Your knowledge of lever systems is that determing force of effort is

found by using the functional formulae resistance x resistance arm

lenght divided by effort arm length will give you amount effort. (I

know you do because you printed the formulae)

Is your knowledge of lever systems such that given a 3rd class lever

system that being where the force of effort has a closer site of

attachment on the fixed resistance arm to the fulcrum than the force

of resistance that it is mathematical certainty that the force of

effort to stabilize the force of resistance will have to exceed the

force of resistance. Yes or no?

[i really don't know what you are trying to say or show, because none of

your reasoning is clear. Are you saying that we need to entirely abandon

the concept of levers in physics and engineering or are you simply trying

to say that one can makemistakes when trying to apply classes of lever

systems to various movements of the limbs? If the latter, then this fact

is well known. What is also well known is that the class of lever may even

change in a given movement if one's posture and use of joints changes

in a multiarticular movement. You have consistently evaded my questions

about your reasons for rejecting cantilever, arch, suspension bridge and

tensegrity models of the spine - please answer them for once and for all.

You also failed to respond to my remark that you can quite happily model

the spine without bothering to invoke any levers systems - via use of a

tensegrity model (see the archives for my earlier letters on this topic).

Would you care to critique THAT type of model, too? Mel Siff ]

Since lever systems demonstrate mathematical function such as force of

effort vs. force of resistance or at their mutual fulcrum point in

the form of compression or shear forces created Do you have knowledge

of a funtional definition or identification of lever systems? Yes or

no?

I do not intend for you to say yes or no only elaborate if you will.

[if you have some point to make about levers, please make it and actually

prove to all of us right here why there are no such things as lever systems (or

whatever you are trying to get at). I could say that Newton's 3 laws of motion

are wrong, but nobody would take me seriously if I failed to provide

incontrovertible proof why I consider old Newton to be wrong. So, at this

moment, you are in that very position - what you have written cannot be taken

seriously until you have provided the necessary evidence. I started this forum

to have discussions like this, so please make use of it in a way which benefits

all of us. Mel Siff]

Jon Sherger

Washington

* Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence

if you wish them to be published!