My point is that often people apply terms that sound scientific, but are applied incorrectly, so that, other than the words, it isn't science or physics. A good example of that is Chen Manching's use of "science" in one of his published books. (It's been a long time since I've read it.) It sound all scientific, but holds no validity from the perspective of hard science.
Does it?
I beg to differ
http://www.chuckrowtaichi.com/ChengCh.7.htmlFor quite a few years, I have been reading and re-reading Cheng Tzu’s Thirteen Treatises,1 written by my first T’ai-Chi teacher, Cheng Man-ch’ing (1900–1975). I consider most of this book to be very clear and filled with valuable information. However, even though my Ph.D. is in physics, I found Treatise 7, entitled “Strength and Physics,” very hard to understand. This essay ends with Prof. Cheng saying, “This treatise reveals the secret of many generations of T’ai Chi Ch’uan masters. I hope the practitioner will pay special attention to this!” He evidently considered this essay, which deals in part with neutralization, to be very important and chose to use physics as the main expository tool.
Do you have a PHD in physics and teach it?
Chuckrow has a Ph.D. in experimental physics from NYU and taught physics at NYU, The Cooper Union, Fieldston, and other schools for forty-three years.
http://www.chuckrowtaichi.com/Abouttheteacher.html
My point is that often people apply terms that sound scientific, but are applied incorrectly, so that, other than the words, it isn't science or physics.
care to comment on his work? is it correct or incorrect?
Many of the people I work with are engineers mech and electrical.
All are American Chinese most having emigrated here long ago. I only mention this to indacate that those I work with
come from backgrounds were they can bridge the gap, in one sense but are unable to in another. Makes it very interesting
at times.
Today in talking to a mech engineer I asked about some of the things mentioned here.
He agreed with me in that physics can be used to explain a lot of the things that people question, but when mixed with verbiage from the Chinese culture it can be problematic unless one either has an in depth understanding of the etymology of the word how its used and in what context, or a very in depth understanding of physics, or a mind that can adapt and see how the theories relate, or could be related to something like taiji.
We talked about “dantain” as it's commonly used, the component words and so forth.
It’s not so straightforward, as one would think…
You’ve mentioned what you feel are others misunderstandings
with out posting your own understanding.