Re: Physics debate
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2023 4:19 pm
Things would be so simple and easy to define were it not for so many dynamic and flexible components in the system. If that were the case, we could just call it Alpine Skiing and move on...GrimSurfer wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 3:56 pmOnce you say “spring”, you’re back into a net force deal… input force = output force, ergo net force = 0. Fortunately, you’re using the NASA term “springy, bendy kind of lever”.jalp wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 3:40 pmTrue, yet I propose that the cable in combination with the boot sole, is effectively, a lever system. It's a springy, bendy kind of lever but a lever none the less.
So, where is the fulcrum in this system? Well, it should be at the ball of the foot. My proposal assumes that the skier is using good form, keeping the BOF down. If the BOF is down, the fulcrum is at the BOF of the boot sole. Remember, a fulcrum is much less a thing, than it is a place.![]()
I agree that the fulcrum could be the ball of foot. But this would be problematic because we’re back to a force and mass discussion (since all force exerted by the skier based on mass transfer goes through the ball of foot anyway when the heel is raise. So what is the net benefit of the cables, from a force perspective?
These are some of the problems one is confronted with when looking at the cable as a lever, spring, etc.
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)