"mechanical trick"

[windwalker]

I know you've got magic yi powers that amount to mind control and putting others on a string, but the rest of us have to rely on plain old physics, so that's the only understanding I can speak from.

Then speak from it.

You claim to practice taiji

I speak from my experience and understanding.

Not magic involved, just taiji.

A common everyday thing in China depending on
Level and depth of practice.

Many here write a lot,
Some how not understanding what they write about.

[origami_itto]

Of course I don't understand, that's why I'm seeking the counsel of the wise such as yourself. I am but an ignorant student.
Stop speaking around it and just speak to it. What do you think is happening and how?

[everything]

When people say “physics” it’s a little like saying “Jin”.

Same with “gravity”.

Saying one understands physics or Jin or gravity is a bit bold.

Don’t believe me? Look up Gravity explained in 5 levels.

And no, I can’t explain it, either.

The people who don’t know look at certain videos and say things with certainty.

The people who know have a hard time explaining in words.

It’s like that.

[origami_itto]

When people say “physics” it’s a little like saying “Jin”.

Same with “gravity”.

Saying one understands physics or Jin or gravity is a bit bold.

Don’t believe me? Look up Gravity explained in 5 levels.

And no, I can’t explain it, either.

The people who don’t know look at certain videos and say things with certainty.

The people who know have a hard time explaining in words.

It’s like that.

Physics itself is pretty broad, but newton's three laws are pretty straightforward and you don't need much more than that to understand most of taijiquan, I reckon. Some Galileo maybe.

[everything]

It’s enough for this mechanical trick this person in my first post shows.

Is it enough for what we might call the “good stuff” or the “fake stuff” … IDK.

IMHO if we want mechanical tricks, everyone here is already relatively expert. We can change to MMA.

If we want what Yang or Dong did, IDK…… IME there is “something else”… you may find I’m on a wild goose chase.

I know I know, someone should show it against Prime Fedor or Tyson…

[origami_itto]

I mean, I get "I don't understand physics" but that doesn't mean "physics therefore doesn't exist and I am no longer bound by natural law"

There's a lot of very cool, very spooky, very subtle stuff that I've come across, but nothing that couldn't be explained with basic physics, so I'm wondering what this supposed "good stuff" that breaks those laws is all about other than psychological tomfoolery.

[windwalker]

When people say “physics” it’s a little like saying “Jin”.

Same with “gravity”.

Saying one understands physics or Jin or gravity is a bit bold.

Don’t believe me? Look up Gravity explained in 5 levels.

And no, I can’t explain it, either.

The people who don’t know look at certain videos and say things with certainty.

The people who know have a hard time explaining in words.



It’s like that.

I would say, people have a hard time, accepting what they do not know...
takes awhile before they drop what they feel they do know... .

They do like to write about it

[origami_itto]

I'd be happy to drop what I know if you could show me something better.

And tell me what you think it is. Using your mind to direct the energy in their body to make them use their muscles to your advantage?

I mean I can do that in some cases with physics. What else is there. I'm asking earnestly and honestly, please, tell me plainly what you think is happening, and can you actually do it?

[windwalker]

General comments.

Many people freely talk about high level concepts of the arts they say they practice...
and then go on to mock others showing/demoing what they talk about but never manage to show....

People ask for explanations as here claiming they've emptied their own cup, and then start with "What else is there"

one might first understand what they say they practice, the theory that they write about which it's based on...already outlines "what else is there"

dropping what one knows..

Many threads on Adam Minzer, suggesting what he demos is quite easy to do, "basic" or by others even fraudulent....
Only a few, say they have visited him,,,notice they tend not say much....Why would they....

As the question itself..."Show me".

Doesn't work like that....If one has an interest they should seek out the more public teachers they have commercial public programs

For those teachers some call traditional one might have to show them that they'er worth teaching....
for the more privet ones, might not even be something they'ed be interested in doing...

The "show me " thing funny

Even doing this....Some might feel they have some basic skill already developed....The teacher may not think so...

What then ?

Had a couple of decades of taiji experience before meeting my last teacher. Quite by accident...
He had what I felt taiji should be like,,,,It would be another 10yrs of training with him and his group just to gain an understanding
working on basic skills...

Another 10yrs to come my own understanding and maybe some small skill sets..

can you actually do it?

I think anyone who practices taiji, should be able to "do it" or understand the how/what and why / it's done according to their level and ability

Adam Minzer can "do it"

He is quite public and seems to be quite available with many programs, helping others to understand his work...

[Doc Stier]

Well, once again here, it should be quite obvious to everyone by now that subjective personal perceptions are often taken as reality by most people. Very few are able to entertain new ideas or different opinions without feeling obligated to accept them as truth.

[Appledog]

I speak from my experience and understanding.

Not magic involved, just taiji.

A common everyday thing in China depending on
Level and depth of practice.

Many here write a lot,
Some how not understanding what they write about.

Hmm,

I think anyone who practices taiji, should be able to "do it" or understand the how/what and why / it's done according to their level and ability

Adam Minzer can "do it"

He is quite public and seems to be quite available with many programs, helping others to understand his work...

I think that we all may have forgotten something very important, that people do martial arts for different reasons (I am not speaking about health vs martial) and that even more importantly different styles (and even different schools within those styles) can have wildly different interpretations of how things should be done -- usually based on the skill level of the teacher.

You see, once you reach a certain level beyond 'basic perfection' the vagaries of things, like what Wang yongquan writes about, don't really amount to very much. Yes, there are obvious technical flaws in Wang's theories. But that doesn't matter because his method will produce excellent results. And long before anyone reaches the level he is talking about they will be more than capable of adjusting for any incongruancies. There's always room for improvement, I mean to say, in anyone's method.

Case in point, i've studied the writings of Wang yongquan and and I can say now that I completely understand what he is talking about re: harmonizing and projecting shen, yi and qi -- and I can tell you categorically that while it can produce excellent results, it's just not how we are taught in 'my' school. Similar, but different, and for reasons. The same thing is probably true of how I was taught too. But on some sunny day in the future when we have all perfected everything our teacher has taught us, it would be fair to sit down over tea and discuss these kinds of things again, until then we have moved far beyond the idea of introducing beginners to the door of taichi and of promoting the art. It's fair to say that the reason why this discussion is useless is not because we cannot share information but because we've finally managed to put the cart before the horse and maybe we didn't even realize it.

[origami_itto]

General comments.

Many people freely talk about high level concepts of the arts they say they practice...
and then go on to mock others showing/demoing what they talk about but never manage to show....

People ask for explanations as here claiming they've emptied their own cup, and then start with "What else is there"

one might first understand what they say they practice, the theory that they write about which it's based on...already outlines "what else is there"

dropping what one knows..

Many threads on Adam Minzer, suggesting what he demos is quite easy to do, "basic" or by others even fraudulent....
Only a few, say they have visited him,,,notice they tend not say much....Why would they....

As the question itself..."Show me".

Doesn't work like that....If one has an interest they should seek out the more public teachers they have commercial public programs

For those teachers some call traditional one might have to show them that they'er worth teaching....
for the more privet ones, might not even be something they'ed be interested in doing...

The "show me " thing funny

Even doing this....Some might feel they have some basic skill already developed....The teacher may not think so...

What then ?

Had a couple of decades of taiji experience before meeting my last teacher. Quite by accident...
He had what I felt taiji should be like,,,,It would be another 10yrs of training with him and his group just to gain an understanding
working on basic skills...

Another 10yrs to come my own understanding and maybe some small skill sets..

can you actually do it?

I think anyone who practices taiji, should be able to "do it" or understand the how/what and why / it's done according to their level and ability

Adam Minzer can "do it"

He is quite public and seems to be quite available with many programs, helping others to understand his work...

Well I don't like to speak vaguely and beat around the bush. I don't like to speculate about what I can't confirm or reproduce. I take the tools that I have, see what they can do, and look for more tools.

So let's talk about Chi and physics for a second.

First, Newton's Laws: https://www.britannica.com/science/Newt ... -of-motion
1. A body at rest or moving at a constant speed will continue to do so until acted on by a force
2. The force is equal to the mass of the body and the acceleration (defined as a change in speed, not just going faster)
3. When two bodies interact, they exert an equal and opposite force against each other.

Can we all agree that this is the way the universe works and that no matter how much Qi we think we're moving around, our Taijiquan does not defy this set of laws? If you disagree with this point, then we need to have a serious talk about it before we move on.

As always I DO NOT think I'm that great at Taijiquan, I DO NOT think I've "got it" if I did I'd either be running a full time school or retired from the community with nothing to gain but sullying my art with inferior influence.

So now that I've established that, how about you break it down?

Here's my understanding.

Two free-floating fully inflated balloons bump into each other, they will both bounce away.
If you throw a balloon against a balloon taped to the wall, one will stay and the other will bounce away.

This is a direct illustration of the three laws of motion.

In the first case, the bodies interact, they exert equal force, and their momentum changes.
In the second case, the bodies interact, they exert equal force, but it is all directed back into the free floating balloon.

Or a brick wall, if you run into a brick wall headfirst, you will likely stop dead in your tracks. The wall will exert force equal to your mass and acceleration, aka the change in speed from charging ahead to a dead stop.
Now the wall doesn't think about the force, it doesn't DO anything to exert it, by virtue of it's mass and structure it is just passing the force through to the ground and back out at you again.

Quite simply, there is no acceleration without force, the only question is how is the force being generated and directed.

Now it may not be "about" force, and when we say force or read it in the classics we don't always mean the same thing we do when discussing it from a physics perspective. Just like "theory" it's a word that gets imprecise outside of academia.

So, force.

We're admonished not to use force against force.

If someone strong is pushing directly against us, we don't push directly against the line of their force. They could be stronger, it is hard on our body and may cause injury. It puts more energy into the system which makes it more difficult to control.

We're told that 4 oz can deflect 1000 lbs.

I mean, kind of, the measurements are a bit off, aren't they? But what I've understood that to mean is that, if someone strong is pushing directly against us, they have a strong line of force. If I let them connect, then yield slightly and turn, I can potentially throw them out or make them fall. That works. There's also just adding to their push and changing direction.

Now here's the thing, though. If I don't have something with at least 4 oz of support to back me, I can't even apply that 4 oz. I usually understand that support to be the earth through whatever interface I have with it at the moment. In a grappling or throwing context it could be your opponent's body. It zero gravity it could be a wall.

The movements are directed by the thought within, not the force without, or something like that. This is all off the top of my head over morning coffee so pardon me if my quotes are imprecise. This is basically my working knowledge so it's what counts anyhow, right?

That's about Li. It doesn't mean we're not using force, because, again, there is movement, there is acceleration, therefore, force is present.

That doesn't mean we're using dumb force, Li. Which I essentially understand as direct application of muscular force.

I understand this more as we're cultivating a different way of engaging the body. There are studies regarding the effects of intention on grasp, perhaps the most sophisticated science we have regarding kinesiology unfortunately. We're essentially applying this change in intentionality and perspective to the entire body. It has nothing to do with hands and the entire body is a hand.

So with the mind aspect, what I personally work on is eliminating unnecessary muscular tension, changing the way I engage and address my body to be more in line with the Kohnstamm phenomenon, and feeling the energy flow through my body, learning to direct and channel that with as little interference as possible and as little noise from my own engine as possible. This serves my purposes in many ways.

But this is the way energy flows through a structure, not electricity through an extension cord. Again, I'm not completely closed to the idea that we're emitting invisible energy and it can make for a useful model to achieve this change in intentionality, but it seems highly improbable from a physiological standpoint.

But we must recognize that there is no movement without some muscular action of some sort. That's just the way human bodies work. Even movement in stillness requires internal change to be dynamic and effective.

By. All. Means. Prove. Me. Wrong. Please.

Among other things, of course. It's a many faceted jewel. That's part of why these discussions get so stupid is because we're talking about different things with the same words and leaving too many things unsaid and assumed.

And let's face it, an air of mystery and laying out enticing breadcrumbs serves the brand and our ego, but does it truly serve the art we claim to love who's slow death due to committed teachers and students?

As far as mind control, I'm not a denier, but I haven't seen firm evidence either. People are just so weak and scattered generally it doesn't seem much more of a stretch. I see it more of a Shen issue than a Yi or QI control, but that's just me...

[Appledog]

If you read the writings of Wang Yongquan on windwalker's blog, you will notice he practices what is said to be a kind of 'Yi gong'. This is spoken of frequently as a basic requirement of Tai Chi. Feng Zhiqiang said it, Chen zhenglei said it, Fu zhongwen said it, and a few others I can't remember off-hand. The practice takes many forms but it is essentially exactly as wang yongquan said in those writings.

The information is out there, but (to comment on something else you said) you get what you pay for. It is a very normal question for someone to ask, how much time and effort are you willing to invest in this, and how much money is it worth to you? I myself have spent decades and tens of thousands of dollars on this 'hobby' as well as significantly interrupting my life at various times go travel and learn. I mention this because to me the answers to the questions you're asking are not just obvious but seem to be stated everywhere in the literature. Honestly I don't think it is about secrets and I do not disparage you for asking but I really feel that for most people they just can't be bothered to explain all of these 'simple things' because it can take quite a while and frankly more often than not the answers are blatantly rejected out of hand by the people asking the question.

The truth is out there -- as agent mulder said.

[robert]

We're told that 4 oz can deflect 1000 lbs.

I mean, kind of, the measurements are a bit off, aren't they?

I like the post. Sorry to pick on something so trivial, but I was looking at the Taijiquan Treatise recently and discovered something I wasn't aware of. 四兩撥千斤 (four ounces can move a thousand catties) is an idiom. As a figure of speech, it means to achieve much with little effort. It probably isn't meant to be taken literally. FWIW.

[origami_itto]

If you read the writings of Wang Yongquan on windwalker's blog, you will notice he practices what is said to be a kind of 'Yi gong'. This is spoken of frequently as a basic requirement of Tai Chi. Feng Zhiqiang said it, Chen zhenglei said it, Fu zhongwen said it, and a few others I can't remember off-hand. The practice takes many forms but it is essentially exactly as wang yongquan said in those writings.

The information is out there, but (to comment on something else you said) you get what you pay for. It is a very normal question for someone to ask, how much time and effort are you willing to invest in this, and how much money is it worth to you? I myself have spent decades and tens of thousands of dollars on this 'hobby' as well as significantly interrupting my life at various times go travel and learn. I mention this because to me the answers to the questions you're asking are not just obvious but seem to be stated everywhere in the literature. Honestly I don't think it is about secrets and I do not disparage you for asking but I really feel that for most people they just can't be bothered to explain all of these 'simple things' because it can take quite a while and frankly more often than not the answers are blatantly rejected out of hand by the people asking the question.

The truth is out there -- as agent mulder said.

So are you in favor of a non Newtonian explanation?

We're told that 4 oz can deflect 1000 lbs.

I mean, kind of, the measurements are a bit off, aren't they?

I like the post. Sorry to pick on something so trivial, but I was looking at the Taijiquan Treatise recently and discovered something I wasn't aware of. 四兩撥千斤 (four ounces can move a thousand catties) is an idiom. As a figure of speech, it means to achieve much with little effort. It probably isn't meant to be taken literally. FWIW.

Sure, that's valid. It could theoretically be less or far more than a literal 4oz. Leading a bull with a ring in their nose.

Like this makes sense to me. I have experienced it on both sides. Sensitivity and understanding how the body needs to move to control both bodies with one mind makes it possible to just leave someone of sufficiently low level unable to control themselves under your touch.

There's no magic energy it's just good body control and sensitivity. It's all newton.

I wonder how many of the magic energy camp train spear or pole shaking...