all i wish to say or point out, is in all realistic reality (i mix square theory with my circle theory[circle instead of square]) you can have a 9 diamond theory which makes the bottom middle the very bottom and so on, its just tilting it really. Actual reason for commenting: one mans same time butterfly, is spiderman standing on the walls split-time butterfly(its all just 90degree perspective on what ur doing) and a lot of theory can follow after that. i feel like you are missing moves from it.
Great video series Charlie! Maybe next Wildfire I'll wake up early enough to take one of your classes, One the subject of quarter mode stalls, I think to truly keep the formulas consistent between modes, quarter mode stalls would be at a 45 degree angle to cross mode. There's a lot I've come up with to confirm this, but I've got to keep this under 500 characters.
We need to talk about the radial stalls - I'm pretty sure that you're changing your circle size in order to compensate for the fact that in-spin stalls are naturally inward, not tangential to the original circle. In other words, you're operating as if your poi's circle is a chunk of a spiral, and that's how you're getting that stall.
The size of the circle doesn't change, the shape does. You end up cutting off the "corners" of the circle with your hand.. Obviously, you can be slick about this and keep the change pretty much hidden. If you look at in within the framework of the clap method you taught me for basic stalls, it'll make sense. - Chad
Nope - and this is why: You can describe all non-stable curves as a transition between two circles of different sizes. This is the only way to establish scalable congruencies in technique. You aren't actually "changing" the shape, because that would negate the vast majority of advanced flower theory. Drex covers a lot of this as well, if you've been keeping up with his tech videos. This is even more important when looking at 3D long-form repeating patterns that deal with differing scales.
You are also missing the basic point I'm making, which is that "in-spin stalls" from a single traditional flower pattern, with a constant rate of spin, always points straight toward the center of the compound circle. "Radial stalls" require breaking that pattern, which negates the very idea of flowers as a series of shapes created from an involate compound circle, with a single prime point of rotation (usually the shoulder).
One last point - the "clap method" I showed you is just the first half of the core of ideal stall technique. It is a good training tool, but when discussing theory, it is only half of the puzzle. Specifically, it's missing the half that is pertinent to this conversation :)
That is to say, the clap method only describes what happens with an antispin stall, not an inspin stall.
Yes, I explained that badly. When I mentioned the "clap method" I wasn't speaking of applying it literally. I was using the basic point that in order to stall a revolving body in any direction, the required force occurs at a direction 90 degrees to the tangent of the path of motion. So it's more of an un-clap. But I mistranslated my imaginary force diagram and explained it wrong.
As for in-spin flowers naturally stalling in, that is, of course, true. However, a regular extension is constantly accelerating towards the center of the circle (otherwise it wouldn't be a circle). At any point on the circle, the poi is pointed strait out. In order to do a "radial" stall, you want the poi to be at right angles with the radius. In order to get from strait out to radial stall, you're bringing the poi head closer to the center.
So you need inward acceleration in relation to your hand on to of the existing inward acceleration in relation to the center of the circle. This means the poi head has to accelerate to a faster speed than your hand in order to get ahead of it and closer to the center of the circle., If you lock your hand to the circle it's already following and speed up, the poi speeds up as well. Once the poi is sped up, slowing down your hand will create the speed differential you need.
Aha! Okay, now I understand the differences in our thinking, and I may have presented my own case poorly. What i was trying to say is that changing either the path of the hand or the speed of the poi creates a "virtual nexus shift", where the spinner is altering the poi's path to mimic the "natural" behavior of a different 9-square system. Is that clearer? Obviously the move looks the same regardless :)
I'm liking what I'm seeing from the 8 step pattern at 3:45ish! I really want to see that in full 27 cube 3D! When you have the full 2D version, post that mother, yo!
all i wish to say or point out, is in all realistic reality (i mix square theory with my circle theory[circle instead of square]) you can have a 9 diamond theory which makes the bottom middle the very bottom and so on, its just tilting it really. Actual reason for commenting: one mans same time butterfly, is spiderman standing on the walls split-time butterfly(its all just 90degree perspective on what ur doing) and a lot of theory can follow after that. i feel like you are missing moves from it.
Miimz0rz 1 year ago
Comment removed
csvobo1 1 year ago
Great video series Charlie! Maybe next Wildfire I'll wake up early enough to take one of your classes, One the subject of quarter mode stalls, I think to truly keep the formulas consistent between modes, quarter mode stalls would be at a 45 degree angle to cross mode. There's a lot I've come up with to confirm this, but I've got to keep this under 500 characters.
csvobo1 1 year ago
3D Cube would change everything. More Planes... More Fun!
FireWater42069 2 years ago
We need to talk about the radial stalls - I'm pretty sure that you're changing your circle size in order to compensate for the fact that in-spin stalls are naturally inward, not tangential to the original circle. In other words, you're operating as if your poi's circle is a chunk of a spiral, and that's how you're getting that stall.
Aluminiferous 2 years ago
The size of the circle doesn't change, the shape does. You end up cutting off the "corners" of the circle with your hand.. Obviously, you can be slick about this and keep the change pretty much hidden. If you look at in within the framework of the clap method you taught me for basic stalls, it'll make sense. - Chad
csvobo1 1 year ago
Nope - and this is why: You can describe all non-stable curves as a transition between two circles of different sizes. This is the only way to establish scalable congruencies in technique. You aren't actually "changing" the shape, because that would negate the vast majority of advanced flower theory. Drex covers a lot of this as well, if you've been keeping up with his tech videos. This is even more important when looking at 3D long-form repeating patterns that deal with differing scales.
Aluminiferous 1 year ago
You are also missing the basic point I'm making, which is that "in-spin stalls" from a single traditional flower pattern, with a constant rate of spin, always points straight toward the center of the compound circle. "Radial stalls" require breaking that pattern, which negates the very idea of flowers as a series of shapes created from an involate compound circle, with a single prime point of rotation (usually the shoulder).
Aluminiferous 1 year ago
One last point - the "clap method" I showed you is just the first half of the core of ideal stall technique. It is a good training tool, but when discussing theory, it is only half of the puzzle. Specifically, it's missing the half that is pertinent to this conversation :)
That is to say, the clap method only describes what happens with an antispin stall, not an inspin stall.
Aluminiferous 1 year ago
Yes, I explained that badly. When I mentioned the "clap method" I wasn't speaking of applying it literally. I was using the basic point that in order to stall a revolving body in any direction, the required force occurs at a direction 90 degrees to the tangent of the path of motion. So it's more of an un-clap. But I mistranslated my imaginary force diagram and explained it wrong.
csvobo1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As for in-spin flowers naturally stalling in, that is, of course, true. However, a regular extension is constantly accelerating towards the center of the circle (otherwise it wouldn't be a circle). At any point on the circle, the poi is pointed strait out. In order to do a "radial" stall, you want the poi to be at right angles with the radius. In order to get from strait out to radial stall, you're bringing the poi head closer to the center.
csvobo1 1 year ago
So you need inward acceleration in relation to your hand on to of the existing inward acceleration in relation to the center of the circle. This means the poi head has to accelerate to a faster speed than your hand in order to get ahead of it and closer to the center of the circle., If you lock your hand to the circle it's already following and speed up, the poi speeds up as well. Once the poi is sped up, slowing down your hand will create the speed differential you need.
csvobo1 1 year ago
Aha! Okay, now I understand the differences in our thinking, and I may have presented my own case poorly. What i was trying to say is that changing either the path of the hand or the speed of the poi creates a "virtual nexus shift", where the spinner is altering the poi's path to mimic the "natural" behavior of a different 9-square system. Is that clearer? Obviously the move looks the same regardless :)
Aluminiferous 1 year ago
I'm just glad that it's not a requirement to go through this analysis for every move before being able too do it :)
csvobo1 1 year ago
Comment removed
csvobo1 1 year ago
I'm liking what I'm seeing from the 8 step pattern at 3:45ish! I really want to see that in full 27 cube 3D! When you have the full 2D version, post that mother, yo!
- Baz
Aluminiferous 2 years ago