The power of chi

[goldwing24]

Is it real or fake cause I found a video. check it out and tell me cause I think its fake.

 

[Mokele]

It's a complete load. Sadly, I can't find the video, but I remember some cocky guy who thought he could use 'chi attacks' in martial arts, and accepted a challenge from a real martial artist. He got laid on his ass in one hit.

[goldwing24]

I would believe the video but the "chi power" doesn't work on others besides on his own students

[ydoaPs]

It's a complete load. Sadly, I can't find the video, but I remember some cocky guy who thought he could use 'chi attacks' in martial arts, and accepted a challenge from a real martial artist. He got laid on his ass in one hit.

 

For the love of the gods, find that video!

[Mokele]

Found it! Two of the videos on this page show the pretentious "energy master" getting his ass kicked from two angles.

 

Rational beatdown, now with actual beatdown!

[goldwing24]

Everyone is a fake these days

[GutZ]

It's a complete load. Sadly, I can't find the video, but I remember some cocky guy who thought he could use 'chi attacks' in martial arts, and accepted a challenge from a real martial artist. He got laid on his ass in one hit.

 

Here you go:

 

[cameron marical]

Bruce Lee was able to push a guy in the chest with his palms and he would go sprawling across the room.

 

Im not saying that i beleive in this, but Bruce Lee is a pretty well respected character in my book, i think that he beleived in this and thought he could do this "chi" so much that he disregarded any other explanations.I think that its just the fact that they use all of their body muscles instead of the usual few in the specific area through practice.

[GutZ]

It has nothing to do with Chi. Bruce Lee was just a phenomenal athletic human being. He could hold a 120ibs barbell out infront of him, and he weighed 135ibs. The man was insane for his size...

 

That came from hard work not Chi.

[cameron marical]

I agree. I am not undermining him in any way, the guy rocked, hes one of my heros. I am just saying that he did beleive in chi and that he claimed that that was what he used to propell a person in action. Maybe he just did not beleive his own strength and said that it was due to chi since that was quite a big thing in aisia in that time period.

 

He was able to hold 120 barbell out infront of him!? and he was only 135!? wow! I did not know that, I thought he was more tone than bulk anyways.

[Mokele]

I'm skeptical of the barbell story. Even if we grant him infinite muscular strength, he'd have to lean back at a very sharp angle to counterbalance.

 

He'd also need deltoids the size of his head. Training can do a lot, but it *cannot* change the maximal force per cross-sectional area of a muscle. Not unless he had obliquely-striated muscle, and while Bruce Lee was a lot of things, I'm fairly certain he wasn't a squid.

 

-----

 

Addendum: Some ballpark calculations would require his deltoid to have an effective cross-sectional area of 56 cm2. Accounting for the fact that it's a pennate muscle, that's a slab of meat thicker than a grown man's leg. Even if I'm off two-fold (unlikely), it would still require a physique which would look monstrous on the Incredible Hulk, let alone a small human.

Edited May 6, 2009 by Mokele

[iNow]

Let me premise with the acknowledgment that you quite obviously are better versed on this than I am...

 

I do, however, see a potential problem with your approach. You seem to be assuming that all lifting is being done by the deltoid, and the deltoid alone. Where I think some benefit is conferred is when one adds the cumulative effect of the core muscles... the belly and back which... when taken together with the delts, and all of the other arm muscles like the biceps and forearms and everything else... could just account for such a feat like holding a really heavy bar straight out in front of him.

 

As Gutz rightly commented... that comes from hard work, not chi... but it can be built up. Those shaolin techniques are pretty profound when practiced religiously over a lifetime, and when the body as a whole is regularly improved and built.

 

Basically... The idea is one of leverage. He's leveraging much more than just one bundle of muscles, but instead several deeper larger muscles into a single longer "unit" and it is the leverage gained by the total "unit" of muscles which would be most relevant when discussing power output and leverage.

 

 

Just a thought. I've seen some pretty small guys do some pretty amazing things.

 

 

 

As per the OP ... I've always been of the frame of mind that "chi" is just a rhetorical short hand to describe a larger collection of muscle, nerve, circulatory and pulmonary movements/systems. There IS a better way to articulate what's happening, clearer and more measurable terms... a more scientific approach, but those less versed in those subjects just tend to get a little lazy and call the whole thing "chi" instead. That's my "only even prime number" of cents.

Edited May 6, 2009 by iNow

[Mokele]

You seem to be assuming that all lifting is being done by the deltoid, and the deltoid alone. Where I think some benefit is conferred is when one adds the cumulative effect of the core muscles... the belly and back which... when taken together with the delts, and all of the other arm muscles like the biceps and forearms and everything else... could just account for such a feat like holding a really heavy bar straight out in front of him.

 

Actually, that doesn't change anything. Think of it like a chain - all the links are under the same force.

 

The deltoid is the only really substantial muscle capable of abducting the shoulder joint (the supraspinatus is pretty pathetic), so logically, it must bear pretty much all of the force. If he's keeping his elbow steady with his biceps and brachialis, these two muscles must also bear all the force. Ditto at the wrist.

 

Muscles in a limb add up in the case of work and power, but in the case of force, every joint must resist the force, otherwise, it would bend.

 

As Gutz rightly commented... that comes from hard work, not chi... but it can be built up. Those shaolin techniques are pretty profound when practiced religiously over a lifetime, and when the body as a whole is regularly improved and built.

 

Training can indeed affect a lot of things. But some aspects of our physiology are written into our genes, or limited by the physics of our bodies. Training can increase power, and can make muscles bigger, but cannot alter the isometric force per unit area - that's a property of the actin and myosin molecules.

 

Basically... The idea is one of leverage. He's leveraging much more than just one bundle of muscles, but instead several deeper larger muscles into a single longer "unit" and it is the leverage gained by the total "unit" of muscles which would be most relevant when discussing power output and leverage.

 

Even leaving aside the "links in a chain" aspect, length doesn't influence muscle force, only work and power. Cross-sectional area alone determines force.

 

Just a thought. I've seen some pretty small guys do some pretty amazing things.

 

So have I, but always within the realm of known physics and biomechanics.

 

A lot of what small guys do is precisely because of the cross-sectional area issue. If I shrink to 1/2 of my current height, my muscles are 1/4th their current CS area, but my total mass is 1/8th. That means I can bench press a higher fraction of my body weight. (I could jump higher relative to my height, but that has to do with more complex issues of scaling at the level of the muscle cells.)

Edited May 6, 2009 by Mokele

[john5746]

now we know where martial art films started. Students making the old guy look good.

[GutZ]

Maybe it wasn't 120 exactly..The man had muscles.

 

 

 

His lats are insane! he could fly with those.

 

Mokele:

 

Is there anyway that the actual quality of the muscie is different, I have a very crude understanding, but is it possible that the quality of the tissue or many the micro-tears heal better and where you get more density per volume? I guess that would come as weight right? at 135 -145, he is still limited. lifting a barbell infront of you is tough. I see what your saying

 

There are alot of feats that he has done that are recorded I will look around to see if there is any evidence....could be just a made up fact.

 

I got a barbbell here at home with 85 pounds on it for curling...I tried to do it myself...I couldnt even get my arms out straight. I could probably do 50.

 

Edit:

 

Yeah it wasnt 120ibs it was 75ibs for 20 seconds...That's tough still.

 

sorry for the incorrect info.

Edited May 6, 2009 by GutZ

[Mokele]

I suspect it was something more reasonable, like 30-40 lbs, and possibly not in a standing position, but over the years, the story became exaggerated.