Knee Ball and Socket Dynamics
Comparing the knee dynamics of movements M1 and M2,
consider back and forth rocking clockwork motions compared to rotations of
a pestle and mortar. In M1 the hip rocks back and forth, which dynamic motion
is transmitted to the lower ball socket of each femur in its receptive joint
structure where each ball rocks gently back and forth tracking the pelvic girdle
movements responding to conservation of momentum laws. The motion is tracked
as each femur, for example, pivots slightly about its major verticle axis.
This dynamic massages the inside surfaces of the joints gently without ripping
at the connections. In M2 a gentle pestle movement in its receptive mortar
is simulated by the lower ball and socket of each femur as the principle pressure
point rolls along a "circle" in a "horizontal plane" inside the socket housing.
Thus, in M1 the lateral displacement dynamics reverse directions of velocities
of cells along fictitious boundaries of torque within the knee joint during
each movement. Whereas movement M2 sees stable velocities for the exact same
knee cells for the entire M2 movement's count. The asymmetry of stresses on the
knees occurs because of the staff's mass distribution geometry in M1 and because
of the staffs geometric constaints in M2. My solution is too recognize that
reversal of directions for such low stress dynamics would prevent and reverse
any temporal structural distortion due to asymmetric shearing forces along the
ball-socket connections. Interestingly, M1 has a small verticle decompression
compression cycle for each conical rotation of the staff which is not well
defined in M2. These significant geometric differences in the encounter dynamics
of ambiant ball and socket joint structures observed thru comparative analysis
of movements M1 and M2 emphasize corresponding differential benefits obtained
from M1 and M2 when cumulative effects over time are calculated. Curiously,
slight movements of balance using the feet, shifts one's center of mass which
in turn shifts slightly the principle direction of thrusting into the socket
walls. I allow the boundary impact points to float within each knee joint by
consciously floating the regions of principle body-support in the soles of my
feet. Repetitive impact has to be controlled and duty cycled to avoid damage.
Basicly a vein or flow path can be compressed if the compression is followed by
a decompression to create a natural constsructive cycle of motion which ends
in a rejuvenation dynamic. Whence, the Basic Rule of Joints: any compression
must be followed by a decompression. Notice that in movement M1 the finger joints
experience an extension-decompression prior to a compression. On the other hand,
the fingers experience an extension-decompression force for the entire M2 effort,
which importantly follows M1 finger socket compression due to conical rotations
of the staff "handle" during final implementation of M1. If I stopped exercising
after doing M2 and then M1, the reversal of order leaves me with relatively
nominally compressed finger joints. Whereas, implementing M1 prior M2 as in my
regimen leaves me with relatively nominally extended finger joints, which
facilitates partial pressure resolutions within the vicera. Laws related to
commuting the order in which Rogers Staff Movements are performed must be
recognized as having validity because the cumulative or integrated impact of
small differential changes may not manifest quickly, they must be anticipated
through mathematics. I use the principle: analogs of any model experience
relatively the same force geometry. Whence, I imagine and can feel similar
dynamics to that discussed for the knee when I probe my shoulder component
socket connections. Essentially, each rogersstaff movement transmits characteristic
dynamic action to all joints of one's body. Depending upon relative geometric relations
between a particular joint and the method of a particular cycle of movement,
a corresponding benefit accrues to the given joint. Other movements used have
knee dynamics which rock one's femurs back and forth over one's tibias.
Setting up an analog by viewing one's femur as the pestle and its mating tibia
as the mortar: the handle of the pestle pivots as its ball base rolls back and forth
in the cupped up portion of its mortar: so to, the lower ball of each femur rolls
back and forth in the upper socket of its mated tibia. The movement M3 appears
to focus at its extent (i.e. when the knee is farthest from the staff) on
anterior compression_decompression cycles whereas movement M4 appears to focus
at its extent on posterior compression_decompression cycles of the upper tibia
sockets inside each knee. An axiom of joints relative to a pestle and mortar
analog then might read: AS THE HANDLE ROCKS, THE BALL ROLLS. Curiously, one may
apply this view to the encounter dynamics for any bone-socket interfacing.
Let us call this The Principle of Rock and Roll for ball and
socket joints or the interfacing of a bone end and its receptive well. Consider
the question: what is the Rock and Roll behavior of each joint while one is
actively exercising? I can visualize a particular joint and notice that by slightly
changing the thrust directions in a Roger's Staff movement, I induce a corresponding
change in the Rock and Roll behavior at the encounter interfacings within
the corresponding joint complex. The Principle of Rock and Roll emphasizes
the reduction of shearing forces...the ball is not to slide within its receptive
wells, fictitious or not, it is to roll over or along each well's surface.
Roger's Staff movements should be joint friendly by intent of design geometry.
Allowing interfacing coordinates of maximal stress to float about within each
joint's interfacing geometry reduces the risk of repetititve motion induced
damage. However, rogersstaff motions are minimal movements whose components
are found in natural minimal adaptive behaviorial actions performable by
humans and should not be problematic if done conscienciously. In fact, pain
is not required for gain. Roger's Staff prefers you feel less pain with
no sweat when you implement your rogersstaff regimen. After Rock and Roll,
so to speak, one should feel energized with an enhanced will for doing
other things. For example, those implementing a rogersstaff regimen, find they
hesitate less initiate other activity. Personally, I perform Roger's Staff
movements before I go out, mainly, because I feel able to do things easily
which might otherwise be cause for hesitation...it is easier to rescue
people or to engage others in offset settings, as it were. Implementing
a rogersstaff regimen pre-accelerates coordinated chains of cells along paths
of tension variation associated with historically required survival actions.
Competence in the verified ability to will action along this dynamic basis
produces a natural confidence in oneself, as a direct result from the
mapping out of potential directions for structured sequencial sets of
repetitive minimal actions effectiveness has required of persons, such as
one's Roger's Staff Regimen. In the knee dynamics
of movements M5 and M6,the anterior and posterior backsuspensions.
Movement M5 has a decompression compression cycle as the human femur's
lower ball moves up and down in its receptive well above the upper cradle
of the corresponding tibia, as does Movement M6. Observe that knee pressure
focus in M5 is anterior towards the front of the knee, while knee pressure
focus in M6 is posterior towards the back of the knee, above the gastrocnemius
or calf muscle. Thus, depending on which side of one's knee is closest to their
staff, the encounter geometry force and pressure dynamics redistribute
themselves characteristically. By allowing one's center of mass to float
gentlly within a a horizontal disc one inch in diameter, one can condition
the sockets of the tibia as well as the balls of the femur.Throughout the
period of implementation of backsuspension movements M5 and M6 one's arms
apply a steady vectored verticle thrust, which reduces the compression
when heels are dropped slightly and subsequently one's upper_body is set
quickly down by arms which cannot hold it up though they maintain tautness.
The downward tamping action of the femur on the tibia is less than if one
walks at all, because of the upward lifting force vector transmitted thru
rogersstaff being held by grasping hands at the end of stressing arms, whose
shoulders suspend one's upper_torso ever so mementarily while the lower body
catches itself by re-tensing legs before one's heels strike the ground in
response to gravity. It is essential to understand that being light on
one's heels for movements M5 and M6 means that the heels do not encounter
the ground throughout the counting cycles for each of these movement's
variations, to avoid impact shock damage at the joint level. This replaces
running's periodic pulsing jets throughout the body's vessels by a
steady relatively gentle pumping action...the difference is between bearing
all gravity based force pressure dynamics catching the entire body on one foot
after flying thru the air during a run versus using all four appendages to catch
the body after momentarily releasing leg support during a rogersstaff
backsuspension. The integrated or cumulative damage done running is
much greater than that experienced here thru Roger's Staff, because properly
implemented, the cumulative impact of these rogersstaff movements is less than
that done walking, by geometric construction.
|
