Press Release:
Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
How Usain Bolt can run faster -- effortlessly
-
-
Link to original article:
http://www.significancemagazine.org...-Usain-Bolt-can-run-faster--effortlessly.html -
I really can't see how an author can title an article "How Usain Bolt Can Run Faster Effortlessly" when most of the factors he is using to describe how Bolt could run faster are something that every elite sprinter and experienced track coach already know and have known for four decades?! Do you really need "maths" to write a whole article about environmental factors that the athlete has little control over when running in their competitions?! Unbelievable!:bash::bang::mad: -
It does seem rather irrelevant to include this element in the calculation if the high altitude is not permissible in regards to official athletic world records.
-
I think they missed the fourth and most important element.
The tongue must be placed firmly in the cheek. -
Oh to have the credibility of Professorship (at Cambridge mind you) & have... "concrete mathematical evidence" at the same time when attempting to substantiate statements on Olympic interest topics such as this (this being an Olympic year & all)... How Usain Bolt can run faster – effortlessly (PDF).
I'm surprised the following hasn't surfaced yet... it should appear a bit more valid under the circumstances (i.e. a potential greater control element) as opposed to environmental factors such wind & altitude conditions for a set given race. Then one can also talk about surface/track "stiffness" as well for performance enhancement.
The Foot Drills:
-
I'm glad to see that I am not the only one who has noticed that when UB is running he stops going forwards for a hundredth of a second at each stride?
If he could stop having fifty starts in each race I am sure he would run faster.
Where's my tongue?
OK no need to be like that.
Bill -
Bolt just got beaten in the Jamaican Olympic trials:
Last edited by a moderator: Sep 22, 2016 -
Press Release:
Even Usain Bolt can't beat greyhounds, cheetahs...or pronghorn antelope
Animals still trump extraordinary Olympian athleticism on speed, strength and endurance
[Animal athletes: a performance view Veterinary Record July 28; 171; 87-94]
-
-
To have a human animal deciding that the combination of physical and mental characteristics it displays is in some way ultimately superior is laughable.
In what sense do human physical and mental characteristics make them more diverse/versatile than any other creature on the planet?
With all these 'superior' qualities, in the long term, humans can't even keep ahead of pathogenic microorganisms, which, by bumbling along in their totally brainless way, eventually 'outsmarts' humans.
Bill -
It would appear you are addressing my previous post Bill, hence...
However, humans will continually research ways to control potentially harmful microorganisms’ natural ability to survive, multiply & potentially cause health problems for us humans in the future. Yet this is hardly a battle of wits between humans & microorganisms... it’s a battle of something else.
Enjoy the Olympics... a global show where one species reveal their physical & mental potential (equestrian aside). -
No single species matches the physical versatility of human beings ............
I would go along with that. Although I would disagree that 'that is what the games are designed to display........' They may display it but they were not consciously designed to display it. But if they were why would anyone want to design games to show such a thing?
Thus holistically human beings are the most diverse/versatile than any other creature on the planet.
No I wouldn't go along with that. Selecting a narrow range of areas in which humans display a greater range of versatility does not allow you to generalise about human versatility. How versatile are we in terms of variation in atmospheric pressure, pH or surviving atomic blasts? The list is endless. Combine a few of them and you can create any result you want, eg rats are the most versatile animals on the planet or bacteria are more versatile than human beings.
My use of the word 'superior' was based on your use of the word 'most', which I think is a superlative?
Call yourself what you like but you are, like the rest of us, an animal and to find that 'debasing' would seem to add support my use of the word 'superior' to describe your view of humans with respect to other animals and plants.
Yet it's hardly a battle of wits between humans and microrganisms.
True but the one with the wits is always playing a game of catch up and is frightened witless at the prospect of the brainless competitor outwitting him, so to speak.
I will come back on the drugs in sport one later in another thread.
Enjoy.
Bill -
Bill, I really do think you need to read posts more carefully in future & not put your own slanted spin on what one is intending to say on a topic... this is known as a straw man argument... & this discussion seems to be going round in circles...
"Peter Singer - The Genius of Darwin..." :pigs: ... what a load of nonsense!
The fact that I believe you & everyone else as a more valuable being over an animal or plant should not be contestable... it is my opinion (backed up with valid facts in relation to the topic thus far) & a harmless one at that (some may say enlightening... potentially uplifting). I am also vegan for many reasons, two of which include optimal health for the human body & concern for the welfare of animals... as well as the biosphere.
*** Now back on topic... "How Usain Bolt can run faster -- effortlessly".Last edited by a moderator: Sep 22, 2016 -
Animal (definition): a multicellular organism that has a well-defined shape, usually limited growth, can move voluntarily, actively acquire food and digest it internally, and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli. -
Of course the definition you found to define “animals” is a valid one... but its association with homo sapiens - man/woman is???... could another quite rightly say that your association of humans with the “animal” definition you found is an... association fallacy (guilt by association)... particularly in relation to what should be overwhelming evidence of the distinct differences (uniqueness) of which you & I posses over the other creatures that fit into that holistic sterile definition.
Anyway, can humans fit within the above definition – of course they can... stands to reason really for any living complex (multicellular) organism living within the same biosphere (of the same planet) in order to survive. I could go on further & say that the definition ascribes most life forms on this planet as it could in part be of a blue print engineered from the workings of a common designer (heaven forbid if I were to use the word “intelligent” as in the notorious word association - Intelligent Design). Let’s put metaphysics aside on this post... for want of a better analogy we classify cars, boats & aeroplanes naturally in different categories, yet they may have similar driving mechanisms - mechanical parts due to a common designer – i.e. Rolls Royce making engines for vehicles within these three categories yet serving very different end roles/purposes.
However, as I have briefly outlined before, humans are different to the creatures defined within the animal kingdom for a number of reasons i.e. highly formed rational faculties which most here on Podiatry Arena are exercising when conveying their thoughts on this intricately designed/engineered cyberspace medium. Our ability to develop an argument, follow a line of logic, draw conclusions & frame hypotheses far out cedes any within the animal kingdom. Of course this is done via the use of language (& the potential to understand/use many languages) with the use of a vast vocabulary. All of this is the result in part to our strong sprit of inquiry... i.e. mathematics – astronomy; chemistry – pharmaceuticals; biology – medicine; physics – biomechanics, engineering etc... Then we have the realm of philosophy – where did we come from, who are we, where are we going (the search of origin & destiny)... this passionate (for some) quest for meaning... inquiry unlike any creature within the animal kingdom.
Then we humans have this creative ability, some with a creative impulse... to produce music, dance, poetry, paintings, stories... to then collate these attributes into films/movies, albums, plays/theatre... along with the use of humour & drama to invoke certain emotions within us (i.e. inspiration). I don’t think I need to elaborate further on the issues surrounding morality & love when comparing between humans & “animals”.
I will always stand by my position on the view that we humans are vastly different (unique) to “animals”... it goes far deeper than the physical/molecular level & should not be assessed within the narrow confines of that “animal” definition. That said, I acknowledge that many animals have fascinating behaviours (i.e. those of dogs, dolphins & elephants). Yet it isn’t clear to what extent this is ‘instinct’ & to what extent there is distinct conscious decision or behaviour in an altruistic manner. I personally feel there may in part be a relationship with the size of the frontal lobe of the animal’s brain. Yet, whilst humans continue to progress as a species (i.e. technology, education, creativity etc...) year after year throughout known history (particularly since the 19th century), animals seem to have continued to do what they have always done... simply survive within their environment. That said, I see humans should play a custodian role for animal welfare as well as the welfare for the planet... & each other (but something has gone wrong along the way).
All these apparently very unique attributes (in relation to the animal kingdom) are more than just mere higher cognitive ability... they reveal something else... in fact a few things... one of which is free will & choice, of which consequently we also have this ability to take for granted these beautiful qualities, abuse them... dumbify them to the mere hypothetical consequences of uncaused, uninspired, undirected, random chance events from microbes to man evolution with some non-existent famous (or infamous) bipedal primate springboarding to homo sapien ... effectually debasing human value & meaning... & with not a shred of sound scientific evidence to support it... just a bankrupt historical philosophy, glorified by academia (materialists, Neo-Darwinists) within the sciences (evolution/naturalism) due to what could be seen as an underlying fear of the unknown & subsequent speculated consequences of having a... “metaphysical foot in the door”.
Back to the crux of the original topic, I came across this interesting paper recently in analysing the running speed of the "fastest men on earth" (Usain Bolt, Tyson Gay & Asafa Powell) via Spring Mass Model data...
Spring Mass Characteristics of the Fastest Men on Earth
M.J. D. Taylor (1), R. Beneke (2)
1. Centre for Sports and Exercise Science, University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom
2. Department of Medicine, Training and Health, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Germany
-
Press Release:
Usain Bolt could break his own record with the help of altitude and the wind
-
-
Thanks Bill for eventually responding... watching the Olympics were we? ;) :D (inside joke there).
Anyway, like I've stated before when responding to you...
Besides, how much further do I need to go on elaborating on attributes? My posts are long enough as they are (I'm sure most here will agree) without needing to delve into every possible aspect of my position. It seems you just don't want to understand the gist of my point - that is humans have quite unique attributes that set us apart from the animal kingdom. I have outlined some key points that most could grapple with. Funny enough, when some animals express like characteristics in similar manner we then like to associate it with human traits (& not vice versa).
I don't!
... & have outlined to reasonable extent on this thread as to why I feel this way (the audacity of me).
- “But with so little evidence to go on, the origin of our genus has remained as mysterious as ever.” - Kate Wong, ‘First of Our Kind’ Scientific American, April 2012, p. 32.
- “We thought we had just about nailed human evolution, now everything is up for grabs again.” - Ed Yong, New Scientist, July 30, 2011, p. 35.
- “The origin of our own genus remains frustratingly unclear.” - Bernard Wood, paleoanthropologist, in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, June 15, 2011.
- “The last common ancestor of chimpanzees and humans remains a holy grail in science....” - Jennifer Viegas, Discovery News, 2010 Discovery Communications.
But... I'm not about to turn this thread into an evolution debate. We have gone too far off topic as it is - you have asked questions & I have given you the courtesy of a reply. Yet the title of this topic is... "How Usain Bolt can run faster -- effortlessly." Of which I have interest in because of my long standing involvement with athletics.
The other one is naturally the Evolution thread... starting here at post # 71.
Like I said, I am not going to turn this thread down this path; if people want to use evolution for their reasoning, I have the right to put forward an alternative perspective which better fits the science & laws of logic as we currently know. It would seem most topics (i.e. foot mechanics, running footwear views etc...) can handle such alternative inquiring &/or competition - apparently not evolution... which should speak volumes about its shaky grounding.
Good bye & all the best Bill... of which I will continue to view this mindful discussion with a human being, purposely made & special among the human kingdom - not an animal within the animal kingdom.
Loading...
- Similar Threads - Usain Bolt run
-
- Replies:
- 2
- Views:
- 10,643
-
- Replies:
- 4
- Views:
- 6,411
-
- Replies:
- 11
- Views:
- 9,738
-
- Replies:
- 7
- Views:
- 8,636
-
- Replies:
- 0
- Views:
- 3,308