physics and Ashby

[enewman]

He missed a lot.

I put a paper together using physics and work-energy theorem. I used Joel Maxfield's test as my example.

[Hardware]

These comparisons make my head hurt!!

Ashby clearly states that he's not looking for lab results but real world outcomes into tissue not some man made material. Comparisons need to be apple to apple not apple to orange.

[enewman]

These comparisons make my head hurt!!

Ashby clearly states that he's not looking for lab results but real world outcomes into tissue not some man made material. Comparisons need to be apple to apple not apple to orange.

Dr. Ashby stated THat with equal momentum but unequal mass the heavy arrow will out penetrate. Physics dictates this to be true.

That is not what physics tells us. His statement goes against physics.

Next. who tells us that we cannot use a different media to test in. The person that is also telling you that momentum built on mass will outperform momentum built on velocity. hahahahaaha

He also tells you that KE has nothing to do with penetration and momentum is force. That to goes against Physics.

The test done here was not a comparison to animals as I stated in the paper. The test was a physics test. Ashby's non-scientific outcome-driven tests are not scientific or physics.

To do a physics test you must receive variables. Animals have too many variables, making animals a bad test media to look at physics.

[enewman]

These comparisons make my head hurt!!

Ashby clearly states that he's not looking for lab results but real world outcomes into tissue not some man made material. Comparisons need to be apple to apple not apple to orange.

Next, you say we need to compare. Let's look at some of Ashby's comparable testing.

Ashby shows that a 40lb bow will outperform a 82lb bow with arrow weight being comparable. Then he talks about how this shows that KE means nothing. What he doesn't say is that the momentum for that 82lb bow is also greater. how did the 40lb bow outperform? It was in the arrow build. He tells you this.

So, you don't like my post as you say it is not apples to apples. almost all of Ashby testing is not apples to apples. So, why would you accept a non-scientific test but not a physics test?

Not one test done by Ashby has been quantified. But the data I just showed was quantified by physics.

[Gunnyart]

Insert popcorn eating deer meme here...

[Razorback01]

My uneducated opinion- Ashby is geared toward traditional setups, not modern equipment. I do agree with some of the applications- but not all. To each his own.

[Ruttin&Struttin]

In for the discussion! I always enjoy a good debate about actual archery subjects on a bowhunting forum!

[jhuddleston]

In for the discussion! I always enjoy a good debate about actual archery subjects on a bowhunting forum!

lol those are few and far between these days

[enewman]

lol those are few and far between these days

got to start debates.

[98ag]

I believe penetration is greatly effected by having a well tuned bow in which the arrow flies straight and impacts the target straight on. When you do testes with different arrow weights it is hard to say that the arrows are tuned exactly the same. Thus, the flight of the arrow makes the tests very difficult to reduce variables.

[enewman]

I believe penetration is greatly effected by having a well tuned bow in which the arrow flies straight and impacts the target straight on. When you do testes with different arrow weights it is hard to say that the arrows are tuned exactly the same. Thus, the flight of the arrow makes the tests very difficult to reduce variables.

agree

[warrington]

Why do I always go to the bottom to look for the conclusions

["DOC"]

[ATTACH]1068610[/ATTACH]

[enewman]

Why do I always go to the bottom to look for the conclusions

Haha, I don't know. The conclusion is in the first post. hahaha

[Loneaggie]

I believe penetration is greatly effected by having a well tuned bow in which the arrow flies straight and impacts the target straight on. When you do testes with different arrow weights it is hard to say that the arrows are tuned exactly the same. Thus, the flight of the arrow makes the tests very difficult to reduce variables.

Agree. Sadly this first hurdle is one that if I had to hazard a guess, 80% of bowhunters don't ever get past. The two most common things I see/hear as advice... 1. just shoot a mechanical, and 2. just move your pins.

As I've read/watched more and more on this topic, I think less and less of Ashby. In a way his whole methodology is constructed around reinforcing his theories, I feels a lot like confirmation bias. It gets even less "worthwhile" when its pointed out he contradicts physics. For the bowhunting academics its a fun topic to discuss and sure beats watching reality TV.