Well, except the things that are determined by chemistry.
Arguably, that's a subset of physics ;-)
Well, except the things that are determined by chemistry.
Yeah, but that's still determined by physics. EVERYTHING in the physical world is determined by physics. We're clearly talking past each other.
Yeah, but that's still determined by physics. EVERYTHING in the physical world is determined by physics. We're clearly talking past each other.
I have opinions on where you should ski, what you should ski on, what you should wear, and what I like to ski the most.
But on ski technique I post up the most objective truth possible, in most cases it is un-debatable. Something that is based on physics should have no opinion on what should be done. There are only people who are right and then there are those that have opinions. Unless I am proven objectively wrong about something I saying about ski technique then I am right. It also gives anyone else the right to objectify someone else's subjective ski technique opinion.
Skiing is science, no you do not need to use number or equations, but it just comes down to we are moving in physical world and in the end there is only one right answer. How to get to those right answer I would agree is subjective.
And is always the case, just because an idea is blindingly right, does nt mean there will not be detractors. So unless you ski in fantasy land where the laws of physics do not apply, why do you feel like trying to discredit me? People have been ignoring science for decades, when its some know it asshole telling you that you are wrong(AKA ME) I guess its even easier to ignore. In the end it does nt matter if I say it, If you say it, if someone random joe says, the truth about skiing is right because its right, and it has nothing to do with who is saying it.
Here's a question. Does a ski instructor ever give guidance that is NOT related to making the student more efficient?
I'm not sure that just standing straight up could be called efficient, because the amount of energy required not to crash is so high that most of us probably couldn't manage it. It takes a lot of effort to hold still against those forces.
I do believe that there is such a thing as personal style. But I also believe that within a given approach (carving vs smearing powder; zipper line vs big wide arcs on bumps; hop turns down a crusty couloir), the best possible version of that approach is the most efficient. Which I would say means that in the best possible scenario, your own body and movements aren't interfering with your intent. I think that's the closest I've come so far to expressing what I mean by efficient.
Here's a question. Does a ski instructor ever give guidance that is NOT related to making the student more efficient?
Well, except the things that are determined by chemistry.
Arguably, that's a subset of physics ;-)
So thought and choice, for instance, are subsets of physics?
If you're saying that thought and choice are determined by chemistry, then I'm saying they're determined by physics.
I'm saying that they aren't determined by physics, and that physics doesn't determine everything. But you seem determined to argue the point into meaninglessness, and I am disinterested, put off, and otherwise engaged so as far as I'm concerned you are welcome to your belief.
I hve been watching the thread and I am coming to the same conclusion. The same point is being made over and over by the same people just with more emphesis. There has been a bit of baiting and there has been a few pointed barbs that really didn't add anything. I don't think really anything can be said that hasn't been so I will keeping an eye here and maybe its time we move on.I kinda ... okay, sure. I also agree that this discussion isn't going anywhere. I don't actually think we disagree as much as it seems like we do, but it's not fun anymore. I would be happy to buy you or anyone in this convo a beer at some point and we can just talk about how much stoke we have about skiing.
Steins skiing was the objectively most correct skiing for 1952....its silly to think though that as equipment changed that what technique was objectively correct did not.
wanting to ski like Stein today is a truly a pointless endeavor unless you want to emulated a style that worked best and 50 era gear, if you want to emulated him, because that is what you want to do then go for it, no one is stopping you.
I would like to see video of Erikson ski on the wide skis of today. I can under stand him skiing on shape skis but I want to see him on wide skis.Style is timeless.
Eriksen skied with modern equipment also, he skied with different technique when he did. But his style remained.... Timeless....
But hey! It's the internet. A mile wide and an inch deep.
I'm sure he would love to honor your request..... In spirit at least.I would like to see video of Erikson ski on the wide skis of today. I can under stand him skiing on shape skis but I want to see him on wide skis.
Your are the one that said he skied on modern equipment, did you see that yourself or did you see a video?I'm sure he would love to honor your request..... In spirit at least.