what does that have to do with how is the baton being used here? is he unable to punch with it because you think the proper way for it to be used is a swinging motion? did you get elected the arbiter of how a baton is used or something? this is very amusing to me.
for that matter, even if it was being swung, a hook is also rotational movement, with the force concentrated in the further point (the fist), and boxers still roll to avoid or lessen the force of it by moving perpendicular to the swing. I curious as to why you think some random person on Lemmy has a better grasp of the physics of a swing than, say, a winner of the Golden Gloves. do you figure you're eloquent enough to argue many decades of practical evidence that contradicts you? I'm willing to listen to you try it.
your argument was that mine was wrong because the baton is being swung with rotational force instead of linear force. the baton was brought straight downwards. is that rotational energy, or linear?
regardless, you would be wrong anyway, because hooks are rotational and boxers still move away from them to lessen their force. I'm going to accept the decades of practical experience they have over the opinions on how physics works from some random person on Lemmy.
Well one, the baton wasn’t being swung, it was being brought down, and two, the protestor was moving away from the direction of the tip and towards the ground.
So your argument is that since it’s increasing velocity, the force given from its momentum is increasing, but decreasing that momentum by robbing it of some velocity does not decrease the force.
Does my summary of your argument sound correct to you?
it's OK to just admit you don't know and were wrong. it doesn't make you less of a person. this comment didn't even argue anything, you're just dragging the conversation out because you don't have a good response, but want to get the last word in.
I don't need to? boxing and MMA have existed for decades now, it's been recorded likely thousands of times by now. see my reply to the other guy.
it's called impulse-momentum theorem. if you apply enough force to an object in motion over a long enough period of time, you reduce its momentum.
if you had fast enough reflexes, you could stop a punch to the head without it harming you by moving away from it at nearly the speed it was approaching you. while no human can reliably do that, moving away from any blow reduces the force of that blow by an amount that is measurable.
in boxing, they call it rolling with the punches. even if you are hit, rolling with a punch lessens the blow of that punch when it connects.
since you're just asking questions, it's called impulse-momentum theorem. if you apply enough force to an object in motion over a long enough period of time, you reduce its momentum.
if you had fast enough reflexes, you could stop a punch to the head without it harming you by moving away from it at nearly the speed it was approaching you. while no human can reliably do that, moving away from any blow reduces the force of that blow by an amount that is measurable.
this is why funding education is so important, people. this is a simple concept that anyone should understand.
it's 2025, and people on Lemmy are asking why stealing the velocity of an object over time reduces its momentum.
I'm not going to waste my time explaining this to you. if you really are interested in impulse-momentum theorem, watch a video on how seatbelts, air bags, and crumple zones protect you when you get into a car accident.
moving away by any amount lessens the force of the blow. this is elementary level physics, and your arguing it really shows the sorry state of American education.
because conservatives are lobbying them to, and they don't give a shit either way. they know they can't be replaced without upsetting a huge part of the consumer economy, so it's easier for them to capitulate than spend any effort fighting it, because they'll still be making billions and billions each year either way. they give absolutely zero fucks if they're doing business with a fascist regime or not. they're betting that the fascists are going to eventually win, so that's where they're sticking their eggs.
Proton has been an incredible game-changer for Linux
it's been a game changer for gaming in general. the fact that enough gamers are switching to Linux to boost its market share higher than it's ever been before is going to change gaming in ways we're only beginning to see. I mean, Valve is planning a console launch, and who knows what other consoles we'll see in the coming years. maybe some crowdfunded ones that actually take off. and all this attention from gamers is going to mean some of them start switching to Linux for their everyday tasks, which could end up having an affect on computing in general.
but the best part about it is that it might very well break up the monopoly microsoft has on computing, which is good for the users because it will mean we'll have more options, and that's never a bad thing.
these days, that's practically everything. last game I tried that didn't work was Rust, and that was a few years ago. these days, I don't even check ProtonDB to see if a game works, I just assume it does.
According to a report from Infobae, Warles previously acknowledged the illegal nature of the service, while informing followers that ‘no one could catch him’. The alleged operator had also appeared in press interviews and was active on YouTube as W4RLES.
![_cryptagion [he/him]](https://anarchist.nexus/static/media/users/M8/21/M821DmZ8t2aPdg8.jpg?format=webp&thumbnail=128)
what does that have to do with how is the baton being used here? is he unable to punch with it because you think the proper way for it to be used is a swinging motion? did you get elected the arbiter of how a baton is used or something? this is very amusing to me.
for that matter, even if it was being swung, a hook is also rotational movement, with the force concentrated in the further point (the fist), and boxers still roll to avoid or lessen the force of it by moving perpendicular to the swing. I curious as to why you think some random person on Lemmy has a better grasp of the physics of a swing than, say, a winner of the Golden Gloves. do you figure you're eloquent enough to argue many decades of practical evidence that contradicts you? I'm willing to listen to you try it.