Does this prove the 'Fall' In the early downswing?

[Schrodinger]

Been reading some articles by a gentleman called 'Ben Allen Junior' and he has used 2D photo snippets that seem to show that there is very little shoulder rotation happening around the vertical axis of the upper body in the early downswing (ie. from top of backswing to lead arm horizontal to ground).

Have a look at some of these snippets he's done and wondering if this is what we in WIG call 'The Fall' ? Is this proof that pga pro golfers do the same and just bring their club/arm shoulder unit down without any excessive rotation of their upper body?

[COSTA103]

Hi guys,

IMHO, what Schrodinger is suggesting via these photos is correct.
The initial movement of the shoulders in the "early downswing" is DOWN (via Gravity) that WIG refers to as "fall".
It is NOT something that we "DO"? Rather it is something that we "ALLOW" to happen.

I believe that the genesis of many of amateur players' difficulties (generally referred to as "over the top"? or "outside-in") results from precisely this point.

Too many of us are too IMPATIENT and begin to interject ourselves in the "downswing" (...geez, I hate that word?) BEFORE we have any business interjecting?
In other words, we INTERRUPT the Momentum-cycle too EARLY. That "momentum-interruptus" re-directs the plane of the swing to the outside automatically; the same way that 50 years ago NASA used the gravity of the Moon to slingshot our astronauts back home...

The initial portion of the "downswing" needs to remain GRAVITY's job.....not ours.
Once we've allowed Gravity to do its initial job, each of us will be hard pressed to catch up??

A key lesson to be learned in this post for sure....

Love this place and you guys.

dude abides

[COSTA103]

Hi guys,
A nuance that may go unnoticed by some is that Gravity's influence does NOT apply only to the ARMS?
At that point of "transition", Gravity affects the entire BODY?
That's what the golf-industry often refers to as the "downswing SQUAT".

How do we "squat?

I contend that it is us ALLOWING Gravity to do it's job... We just stop holding ourselves up vertically??

At the top of the backswing we ALLOW the swing to change direction. That "change of direction" is not only laterally, but vertically as well.
We "fall" as part of that "kinetic-chain" to which our Chairman refers to so often and so eloquently...

Think about it.....Gravity is just hanging around waiting for you to ALLOW it to make your swing FOR you??

dude abides

[Ken Robie]

You can put it those terms if you like but that just don't happen. ;>) In order for the body to exert any motion in opposition to where it is currently positioned requires the core to become engaged as a result of muscle contraction. Hence the body recoils (shortens if you will) so that it may perform a movement of extension in another direction.

[COSTA103]

You can put it those terms if you like but that just don't happen. ;>) In order for the body to exert any motion in opposition to where it is currently positioned requires the core to become engaged as a result of muscle contraction. Hence the body recoils (shortens if you will) so that it may perform a movement of extension in another direction.

Unless the "motion in opposition to where it is currently positioned" is DOWN? No muscle contraction required. It is more of a RELEASE??

[Schrodinger]

This is what I've read about the fall from top of backswing to lead arm parallel to ground (they have used a method to monitor which muscles are firing - called electromyography)

------------------- FORWARD SWING

During forward swing, trunk rotation movement is initiated. Analysis of the trailing arm scapular muscles shows that the three portions of the trapezius have lower activation to allow for scapular protraction (Kao et al. 1995). However, the levator scapulae and rhomboid muscles display marked activity to control scapular protraction and rotation of the trailing arm. Analysis of the serratus anterior muscle in the trailing arm shows increased activity during forward swing to aid in scapular protraction and stabilization (Kao et al. 1995). Electromyographic studies of the lead arm demonstrate high activity of the trapezius, levator scapulae, rhomboids, and serratus anterior as they all contribute to scapular motion and stabilization as the arms move toward the ball (Kao et al. 1995).


Of the trailing shoulder muscles during forward swing, the subscapularis, pectoralis major, and latissimus begin firing at marked levels as the trailing arm increasingly accelerates into the internal rotation and adduction. The lead arm subscapularis and latissimus dorsi are both moderately active during the forward swing phase.

-----------------

So to all intents and purposes , the golf scientists are saying that this phase of the golf swing seems to be actioned by the shoulder girdle muscles . In simple terms, the shoulder girdle muscles sit on the ribcage like an overly big overcoat. So one can have a lot of movement of the overcoat up and down and side to side without any apparent movement of your ribcage.

For me personally , if I try and stretch my shoulder girdle muscles to the limit (ie. X-factor) between my upper torso and pelvis , and then try and contract them in an attempt to pull my arms down, I can't prevent myself rotating my pelvis and upper torso together in transition and I'll get an OTT (although that initial 'Connection' rotating 'upper torso/arms/club' as a unit does feel powerful).

I am actually letting the fall happen quite naturally these days and feel that my driving is becoming more consistent in terms of direction with less strain (which, to be honest, is becoming more important to me than distance).

[Schrodinger]

Hi Cally

I agree with what you've said above.

If I use my lower body (ie. the turntable) to turn my upper body to move my left shoulder socket, which will then pull on my left arm at the top of the backswing, its an OTT for me (because I have very little pelvic/torso separation). For me personally , when I do my perpetual motion swing, my body reacts to the swinging of my 'arms/club unit to target' exactly as per Shawn's recent video (Turbo Charge Your Swing For Way More Speed).

If I let my arms fall or even better, assist the 'fall' with the 'Centrifugal Pump/Squat' , I do not go OTT. It's almost as if my CNS has figured out the 'physics' of the swing for my body (if I use the correct focus and intent).

Looking at my swing from a physics standpoint , the arm and squat 'fall' (while the the wrists are cocked) will assist a straighter club path in the early to mid downswing and then help clubhead release (as my hands turns the corner). Remember that clubhead speed is dependent on hand speed and path. Pulling with the left shoulder socket (at top of backswing) using my pivot may feel powerful and initially create early hand speed but it will ruin my hand path which will ultimately affect my release (ie. clubhead speed probably peaking too soon in the downswing).

As Costa has mentioned previously 'patience' is the key here because the impulse to 'pull with the arm using my left shoulder socket' from the top can be inexorable when you have max stretch (ie. X-factor). Maybe that's why its better to feel that one is swinging to the top with some engagement of the muscles but not maximum stretch and allow the 'fall/assisted fall' to happen first.

[kid_fullerene]

Hi Cally .. Aloha WIG Friends and Fans of Sir Isaac everywhere..

I've been 'lurking' in and around this forum and this particular thread for the past few weeks .. mostly dealing with a lot of 'reality' in the 'real world' .. far from the much more fun 'confines' of the wonders of Crackpot National Golf & CC..

sometimes these things intrude .. and my focus has been making sure that my professional situation was secure so that I can afford my obligations and great flights of fancy. This Crackpot Golf Theorizing rarely pays the bills ..although it has gotten me the occasional beer after a round of golf.

So .. falling, dropping , relative orientation of arms, shoulders, core, core strength .. expansion contraction and parts in between.

This is all a bit tricky and a bit involved .. and kind of fun..

Luckily the operative pieces of gravity were figured out by Sir Isaac and got man to the moon and back without having to crack open the more complex stuff in and around Quantum physics.

I've attached a great worksheet with 'key' so that you can take a big dip in Lake Newton's Laws of Motion.. https://www.cusd80.com/cms/lib/AZ010...heet%20KEY.pdf

which are operative in what we're talking about .. or at least what I think we're talking about.

Apples and Cores can only drop straight unless an outside force acts upon it or them somehow.

So as Costa was saying .. these are all more or less straight line forces until they're attached to something and then we can get into counterforces or action/reaction.

To grab and likely misuse Ken Robie's point - there will be some kinds of muscular reactions ..both contraction and extension as the muscle pairs fire in response to the forces now in play. So much of it is balance .. which we're maybe seeing as maintaining posture..

which leads to .. 'arms falling' .. relative to what??

in WIG they're definitely an Arm Club Unit .. and as such .. they're definitely falling .. and relative to the now fully cleared 'out of the way' body..

but do the 'arms fall' in every permutation of every swing type?

forgive the obviously rhetorical question - the answer of course, is NO..

or more qualified ..they will likely move in some kind of sync with say a clubhead that is moving first .. but not necessarily as the 'heavy arm unit' as they would in WIG.

and that's because it's relative to the turn of the hips ..

hips turn first = heavier arms

hips turn with falling club = arms won't feel as heavy..

why? because it has to do with what part of the spine you're swinging around ..

as you work from higher in your spine .. the swing feels a bit more downward..

as you work lower in the spine .. the swing feels a bit more around..

if you plant and shift .. and then clear. the swing will feel like 'arms fall down' and be heavy down and then snap out..

there's always stuff that's falling .. but the sequence and the feels relative to that fall and then turn around your spine makes all the difference.

we speak the same language .. but not necessarily in the same order .. it might make a surprisingly big difference.

Does the WIG swing work? Absolutely .. and it can work amazingly well ..

Shawn and his team do outstanding work bringing his thinking and teachings to life..

WIG is also a philosophy of having a specific sense of target and intention .. and organizing yourself to stay committed to your task - think about why Shawn had so many different analogs to describe the swing and its feels -

the other tangent I'll throw out there .. and I doubt that I'll get any takers.. but somebody pull Tommy Aaron's swing .. it's on Youtube and see if you can break it down in WIG terms. Master's Champion , Tour winner and long time student of Manuel De la Torre'

so big turn, heel lift and heavy plant?

pre-turn?

lateral weight shift and body clear then ACU drop?

those will be tough to find in that swing .. as that's not how that swing works .. but things are clearly falling and rotating..

this isn't a purely semantical exercise.. it's in hopes that you find the differences .. not just with WIG... but to get to a sense of 'many ways to get this done' .. I don't advocate this method or any other over WIG ..

but if you can see when the butt end of the club syncs into the belt buckle.

and you can see which joint on the lead arm is in rotation primarily ..

it will tell you a lot about that particular golf swing..

one more for the pile -

Ernest Jones to Angel De la Torre' to Manuel De la Torre' to Tommy Aaron .. was 'swinging the clubhead' .. how might that be different from the Arm Club Unit ?

some of this is perception I suppose .. but it's tied into how you see yourself interacting with your chosen tool relative to your sense of target and intention..

I'll leave this here for now .. but I believe that noted Philosopher, Bruce Lee said .. 'I don't believe in styles, styles separate men, it's a process of continuing growth' -

and yet there are styles .. and I would say .. study them and see how they're different and ask why.. as it might help you learn your own style ..

it's a hard path .. but in this game there are sometimes no easy answers...

cheers for now

k_f

[Schrodinger]

I've always found anatomy mysterious and I think this is one of those areas in golf which might not yet be explainable.

For example Costa said the following:

"How do we "squat?

I contend that it is us ALLOWING Gravity to do it's job... We just stop holding ourselves up vertically??


But when you read this article , it all becomes even more mysterious and it looks like we haven't yet found an explanation for something called 'eccentric' muscle contraction.

https://www.painscience.com/articles...ntractions.php


Note these specific examples mentioned in the article that might apply 'tenuously' to the golf swing .

• The quadriceps muscle group contracts eccentrically as you descend stairs or a hill. The quadriceps are “anti-gravity” muscles when contracting concentrically, extending the knee powerfully to lift you up. But when you step down, your knee starts straight and then bends like a spring as your body follows: the quadriceps contract eccentrically to keep the knee from collapsing too fast or too far.
• The extensor muscle group on the back of your forearm (see Massage Therapy for Tennis Elbow and Wrist Pain) gets heavy eccentric use in raquet sports, where you are constantly swinging a heavy “weight” — the end of the racquet. That weight would drag your wrist into deep, floppy flexion with every swing … if not for eccentric contraction of the muscles on the back of the arm, which resist the flop and keep your wrist stable and reasonably straight. It still bends back, but it’s controlled and limited

From reading the above, it seems that the quads are actually contracting 'eccentrically' to allow the 'fall' to happen without losing complete control to gravity . Maybe the 'secret' is just doing enough to allow gravity to help with the fall while still also doing enough to feel the dynamic weight of the arm/club unit (ie. forward swing x-factor).

Further as the club swings through to target , are we doing what the tennis players do with that extensor muscle group on the back of the forearm? To keep the wrist stable through impact to avoid injury?

Obviously , I am not thinking about any of this when I swing to target , but I can imagine my CNS doing the above to keep me safe.

[Schrodinger]

Here's a good video which shows there is more than one way!!! Hey, Shawn and Arnold have the same 'Helicopter' follow-through.

P. The best article I've read explaining what causes the club to release and increase clubhead speed is below.

http://www.angelfire.com/realm/moeto...TH_REAL_1.html

There is a lot of maths and graphs later in this article but I usually just look at the results. Basically the centripetal pulling action on the lead arm is the major force that releases the clubhead . The pulling force on the lead arm creates a force vector across the club and a 'moment of force' across the 'Centre Of Mass' of the club . Release is the physics of 'parametric acceleration' , although the golfing industry usually refer to 'parametric acceleration' happening in the late downswing a few feet from impact. But in reality we are effectively using 'parametric acceleration' a lot earlier in the downswing.


Note what the writer says:

Fig 16 shows the basic idea. Whilst A starts to rotate, diminishing hence the angle θ and therefore the torque, the force F, tracing the curvilinear path, is 'trying' to maintain some angle and hence a positive torque, as long as possible. Intuitively one can feel here the reason for the interest of Dr Nesbit, in his latest research efforts, for determining the optimum path for the hands. It also is related to Homer Kelley's endless belt effect, to 'pop the whip game' (Fig17), to shortening the swing radius, or equivalently, parametric acceleration.

When writing above, it made me think of Newton's cannon ball thought experiment (Fig18) - the ballistic problem of firing a canon ball at a certain angle and appropriate speed such that when the cannon ball starts falling back to earth, the earth just rotates away at the same rate with the consequence that the canon ball remains at constant height and behaves like a satellite, illustrated by path C. This problem has a bit of the same flavor as the curvilinear path of the hands to optimize torque.

Is invoking a linear force, acting along a suitable curvilinear path, sufficient to explain the vigorous release action felt by a golfer in the impact zone ? Or is there still more to it ? There is indeed. We have taken the club in isolation but in real life it is connected to the arms through hands/wrists. Very quickly in the down swing a rapidly increasing centripetal inward force is exerted through the arms/hands onto the handle. This the definite crux of the release issue. More on this below.

The beautiful free-wheeling action in the swing of a Bobby Jones through impact looks like there is no torque being exerted on the club since the golfer seemingly simply holds on. However that is a bit like the motion of a duck on water - all the vigorous activity beneath the surface is hidden from a casual onlooker. When the golfer lets go, there is a fairly large inertial torque at work making it appear like the golfer is just getting something for free.

[kid_fullerene]

Hi Cally

as always - thanks for your consideration of what can be described as the ramblings of a known Crackpot ..

to take that initial purported 'backgrounder' on Newton's Laws.. and make it a bit more applicable..

let's have a quick 'go' at what might be operative in golf .. which is inertia..you can grab the relevant bit at about the 3 minute mark.. the whole video is actually pretty fun and informative.

a couple of 'keys' to this ..

1. Frame of reference.. think about the drop of the ball for the rider in the train vs. the observer.. it might be comparable to things like 'golf secrets' 'secret moves' and 'feel is not real' as the way gravity is working from your perspective or 'frame of reference' my look a bit different to an outside observer.

2. The speed of the train on its 'track' or 'line of intention' is its own.. not yours .. all you can do is fight with it somehow.. which leads to ..

3. The 'secret' is in the drop .. and to me .. it's in the wrists .. when and where the wrists go from their hinged state into dynamically unhinging .. (at the speed of gravity) and relative to the turn of the body is what will tell the tale..

it may be the tale of 'heavy arms' ..

it may be the tale of 'swinging the clubhead'

it may be the tale of 'plant/fall .. plant/fall'

think or dig up Shawn's teachings on how and where the wrists are dynamically unhinged or snapped in WIG .. why does he use examples like 'throwing the club'?

compare that to what Tommy Aaron is doing or what Ernest Jones specifically writes..

these are different things ..

your grip and swing keys are radically different .. as your your feels and posture relative to the swing sequence.

they have to be .. gravity is gravity .. inertia is inertia .. but how we interact with them varies..

look at what moves first in the change of direction .. and how.. it will tell you a lot ..

cheers for now

k_f

[Schrodinger]

Hi Kid - Not sure I'm with you on 'dynamic unhinging' of the wrists unless its for short irons.

One of the opinions I've read so far, says active use (ie. negative or positive torque) of the wrists will probably cause the clubhead speed to peak too early or too late and also impair the transfer of energy from the body to the club.

It's been shown that the club shaft moves from being stressed (reverse bend) in the early downswing (or even just before transition) and then 'forward' bend when release starts to occur (ie. angle between club and lead forearm increases) all the way to impact. Forward bend of shaft means there is negative torque on the grip end which means (and I know this sounds weird) the hands actually end up slowing the 'angular velocity' of the club (the hands just cannot physically keep up).

In fact , there are 2 groups of 'golf scientists/biomechanic experts' that are currently at loggerheads with each other about active wrist torque vs 'oily passive wrists' and also differing opinions on the shaft bend ('near the hands' in the mid-late downswing).

I tend to believe the 'oily' wrist scientists who claim there is negative torque in the wrists/hands at impact ( Dr Kwon, Dr Sasho Mackenzie, Dave Tutelman).

The other group is 'Dr Steven Nesbit, Brian Manzella, Mike Jacobs'. Dr Nesbit is well respected in the field of golf science and biomechanics but not so sure about the latter 2. I must admit that when I view/listen to Mike Jacobs 3D videos , it only makes some sense but most of the time its just incoherent.

"Never the twain shall meet" is the current status.

[kid_fullerene]

Hi Kid - Not sure I'm with you on 'dynamic unhinging' of the wrists unless its for short irons.

One of the opinions I've read so far, says active use (ie. negative or positive torque) of the wrists will probably cause the clubhead speed to peak too early or too late and also impair the transfer of energy from the body to the club.

It's been shown that the club shaft moves from being stressed (reverse bend) in the early downswing (or even just before transition) and then 'forward' bend when release starts to occur (ie. angle between club and lead forearm increases) all the way to impact. Forward bend of shaft means there is negative torque on the grip end which means (and I know this sounds weird) the hands actually end up slowing the 'angular velocity' of the club (the hands just cannot physically keep up).

In fact , there are 2 groups of 'golf scientists/biomechanic experts' that are currently at loggerheads with each other about active wrist torque vs 'oily passive wrists' and also differing opinions on the shaft bend ('near the hands' in the mid-late downswing).

I tend to believe the 'oily' wrist scientists who claim there is negative torque in the wrists/hands at impact ( Dr Kwon, Dr Sasho Mackenzie, Dave Tutelman).

The other group is 'Dr Steven Nesbit, Brian Manzella, Mike Jacobs'. Dr Nesbit is well respected in the field of golf science and biomechanics but not so sure about the latter 2. I must admit that when I view/listen to Mike Jacobs 3D videos , it only makes some sense but most of the time its just incoherent.

"Never the twain shall meet" is the current status.

Hi Schrodinger

I think you're right to call me out on the expression 'dynamic unhinging' which frankly is kind of a misuse of the language and the relevant concepts I was trying to put forward..

for what it's worth - I was trying to describe something along the lines of 'oily wrists' that are being acted upon by either Gravity or Momentum depending on when they're being released relative to the body turn..

one of the better descriptions of the various falls and potential 'faults' related to the sequence is from Vivian Saunders. excerpted here from one of her teaching videos..

which gets into necessary timing of the turn of the body and fall of the club around a few of the sequence types.

I guess the 'dynamic' that I was going for with a description of any wrist action was related to the squaring action of the clubhead acting under the forces generated in fall & turn as opposed to some kind of 'deliberate action' or contrivance by the golfer ..

again I seek to avoid trying to describe 1 golf swing in terms of another .. for example .. does Moe Norman's Feeling of Greatness translate into a perfect action pattern in say Peter Thomson's swing?

so in which swings would 'forward shaft lean' be desirable vs. swing types where it might not be helpful at all?

go back to some of the earliest swing types which were more eye hand or 'throwing actions' like Dunn's .. they're different things than what developed later with different equipment .

I know that you are an astute and clever student of the technical aspects of this game ..

contrast Ernest Jones and Alex Morrison's teachings..

both work ..

but both work differently..

some of the template needed to sort this is found in determining the differences in these early 20th century teachers.

I'd be intrigued as to what you might make of the differences

cheers

k_f

[kid_fullerene]

Thanks Kid! So with inertia, it's all relative, based on our frame of reference! Is this a succinct summation of a very complex topic?

BTW, since everything is always moving, even though we don't sense it, is anything ever really at rest, i.e., an object at rest stays at rest, as in Newton's First Law of Motion?

Hi Cally

it's a matter of perspective .. for example an object .. like a golf ball can be settled on the ground .. as it might have fallen/rolled to a resting position.. but the surface that it is on is travelling in a rotation, in an orbit, within a the motion of multiple stars and the rotation of the galaxy and of course the motion of the galactic clusters themselves.

but within our space time.. determined by the masses that generate gravity and our ability to be in one place long enough to perceive 'time's arrow' .. we can interact with those same forces to add enough energy to our swings to transfer it to that very same golf ball .. and send it to where we intend.

from our vantage point or frame of reference we see the ball fly and land .. but if we had the ability to view all the forces involved it would be much more complex.. Here's a way it could be described outside of the usual models..

we've found ways to briefly escape this world we inhabit .. this protected area of localized greatest available mass.. it helps create our time . and gives us a safe place to look at and talk back to the universe around us.

imagine that so many of the secrets of our universe are available to us with the extension of our arms and the drop of the mass at the end of a well made stick..

cheers for now

k_f

[Schrodinger]

These weird 'fictitious' forces that you may feel (and see ) usually present themselves when you are actually in a 'non-inertial' frame of reference (ie. accelerating).

Because your body is rotating (ie. lower torso/upper torso /arms /wrists/hands ) you can probably feel these forces (which are really reaction forces) but not actually see them (unless your moving body segments each had a pair of eyes). So yes , 'feel' might be different from one golfer to the next depending on how their body segments accelerate (I mean linearly and in rotation).

Imho, feel is not real for 2 reasons.

1. These fictitious forces (that seem 'real') - Centrifugal / Coriolis
2. The time it takes for a sub-conscious action to be consciously felt. Example is in transition where you expect to feel the inertial pull/push of the clubhead in your hands at the top of the backswing but actually 'feel' that pull/push nearer impact. Giving you the false impression that you are applying pressure on the grip handle to make the clubhead move faster through impact (like a hockey slap shot).

The point 2 example above is sometimes used by golf instruction to promote active wrist torque (later in the downswing and imho incorrectly for certain longer clubs) to create extra clubhead speed.

Here is a good demonstration of the mysterious Coriolis force if your eyes were moving in a 'non-inertial frame for reference' (ie. rotation is an acceleration).

Seems weird doesn't it ? As if there is a magical force curving the ball flight but its not real because there is no 'outside' force causing that curvature.

[Schrodinger]

Here's a nice video showing that the golf scientists/biomechanics are delving into the shoulder joint vs ribcage movements in the golf swing

Might help golfers who are flexible and losing power in their downswing but unsure how it would help someone as inflexible as me. I think I'd rather let my CNS do the physics for me :-)

PS. Here is yet another video which confuses me even more.

They are almost promoting an X-factor stretch in the downswing where the ribcage leads into the upper lead arm (ie.connection) for extra power but then he says if you overdo it then you can get a 'rotator cuff ' injury. Maybe John Dunigan got those 2 rotator cuff injuries trying to implement that 'power move', but its certainly something I don't want to happen to me.

Here is a video that clearly shows that a lot more analysis needs to be done with regards what's happening at shoulder joint level. Shawn says that there is limited 5% movement of the shoulders when you grip a club in front of you and I suspect he is right for many of us who are inflexible, but maybe that doesn't necessarily apply to everyone , especially pga pros (who have been swinging since they were very young).

[kid_fullerene]

Yes, lots of lunar craters. I believe they even name some of them after people.

They would probably have to design a lunar crater wedge with a special sole and a super heavy shaft, otherwise one might be stuck in there all day long with a conventional sand wedge.

Hi Cally

we may yet live to see how your Namesake company deals with the 'Lunar Game' .. as we are likely closer to some kind of semi-permanent habitation of the Moon than anybody realizes. There are all kinds of surveys and very specific searches for water (probably at the Lunar South Pole) and ancient Lava tunnels that could be converted into some kind of base - a bit like what they did at Earth's North & South poles in the Ice about 50 years ago.

Believe it or not - some of why we need to get there involves a specific isotope of Helium .. Helium 3 .. which opens a few doors to all sorts of progress

https://www.explainingthefuture.com/helium3.html

Not saying that this is going to happen tomorrow - but you can see that the build out is actually relatively achievable .. and it could also make an excellent power source for travel within the local solar system..

wish I could claim credit for these flights of imagination .. but greater minds than mine blazed this trail generations ago..

and is there Gravity in Space?

the short answer is 'yes' ..but not necessarily in a way that is immediately conducive to proper golf .. but it will substantially rearrange our galaxy and the next one over some time from now..

it the fullness of time .. what we knew will somehow be reworked entirely as part of a brand new shining structure .. that will also take shape under the rules explored by the likes of Newton, Einstein and Noether.. and rules that we do not yet know ..but suspect .. working from the minds of Hawking, Thorne, Cox, Feynman and Wheeler.

hope my little Golf Course on Planet Crackpot will somehow survive it all ..

we thought it through and parked it just inside a stable event horizon of a perfectly engineered black hole .. but these things on a cosmic scale.. they can just sort of have it their own way.. even Crackpot National Golf & CC (est. 2011) may need a bit of tweaking to deal with this proposed Galactic Merger.

remind me to talk to the Board in about 3 Billion years.. figuring a 1 Billion Year Head Start probably gives us enough time to do some planning.

I've been playing the Truvis Hearts.. but I'm thinking that Callaway could whip up some Truvis ChromeSofts with some Black Hole inspired graphics..

cheers for now

k_f

maybe even lead to some proper golf on Mars.. Venus seems like a mistake.. and Jupiter might have a couple moons that could work .. but all in all is kind of a stretch for a weekend round.