Posted by: bgffder (dg@aol.com) on Sun Aug 21 16:37:37 2005

> I wonder if the confusion about these issues comes from the lack of a common definition of the terms. The "oarlock" analogy is just senseless, no one ever suggested that in rotational mechanics the hands remain stationary. They move in an arc, not in a linear fashion. Linear, by definition, means a STRAIGHT line. What rotational mechanics and the angular momentum theory suggest is that the hands must move in a curvilinear fashion (just another name for an arc) to maintain the rotational forces. A straight linear hand path will lose the angular momentum. So - the forceful movement of the hands and arms is very important for power - the path they describe through the air is also vital to harnessing rotational power. Daniel
> And by the way - I wrote the anonymous message. I stand by my original observations.

hghghhjhg