|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Nov 4, 2017 23:15:55 GMT
adjective: dynamic 1. (of a process or system) characterized by constant change, activity, or progress. In other words, "moving" and here we go again, perhaps you could start a thread discussing the definitions of adjectives like "dynamic" as you seem to be obsessed by them, then everyone else could carry on discussing the subject "dynamic isometrics", which is just the name of an exercise protocol. noun:"dynamic isometrics" 1. isometrics with movement. In other words, combing isometrics with movement The difference is I quoted from a dictionary whereas you just made an oxymoron.
|
|
|
Post by fatjake on Nov 5, 2017 0:05:28 GMT
and here we go again, perhaps you could start a thread discussing the definitions of adjectives like "dynamic" as you seem to be obsessed by them, then everyone else could carry on discussing the subject "dynamic isometrics", which is just the name of an exercise protocol. noun:"dynamic isometrics" 1. isometrics with movement. In other words, combing isometrics with movement The difference is I quoted from a dictionary whereas you just made an oxymoron. I didn't make anything m8, not my name plus its not an oxymoron
|
|
|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Nov 5, 2017 0:22:08 GMT
The difference is I quoted from a dictionary whereas you just made an oxymoron. I didn't make anything m8, not my name plus its not an oxymoron You made up a fake defintion. You did not copy it from a dictionary. noun:"dynamic isometrics" 1. isometrics with movement. In other words, combing isometrics with movement You made up a fake dictionary definition. My definition of dynamic is copied from a dictionary. I'm pretty sure we already covered what an oxymoron is but anyway...
|
|
|
Post by fatjake on Nov 5, 2017 0:26:41 GMT
I didn't make anything m8, not my name plus its not an oxymoron You made up a fake defintion. You did not copy it from a dictionary. noun:"dynamic isometrics" 1. isometrics with movement. In other words, combing isometrics with movement You made up a fake dictionary definition. My definition of dynamic is copied from a dictionary. I'm pretty sure we already covered what an oxymoron is but anyway... I already told you I didn't make anything up, cant you read? also a name is not a "figure of speech"
|
|
|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Nov 5, 2017 6:32:42 GMT
Could you possibly get any more childish?
|
|
|
Post by fatjake on Nov 5, 2017 10:19:03 GMT
Could you possibly get any more childish? that's hilarious coming from you this entire argument is all because you cannot accept the simple truth that a name is just a name, not an adjective, not a description, not a figure of speech, not a (insert your childish argument here).
|
|
|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Nov 7, 2017 9:08:59 GMT
The argument is about the simple fact that the name is also a description but is the wrong description.
|
|
|
Post by fatjake on Nov 7, 2017 10:32:51 GMT
The argument is about the simple fact that the name is also a description but is the wrong description. That is a lot more sensible than your earlier points, but never the less, a name is NOT a description, its a name, not sure why you cannot accept that simple, obvious fact. If you mean the name could be confused for an incredibly short description, then yes I suppose it could if you don't know the difference between nouns and adjectives, but it's just a name. From Oxford dictionary:- dynamic - A force that stimulates change or progress within a system or process. isometrics - A system of physical exercises in which muscles are caused to act against each other or against a fixed object. "dynamic isometrics" - there is no contradiction and it's a great name actually, unlike many names it actually makes perfect sense when you break it down. You just don't like it as you think it sounds like a twatformetrics name, then have tried to work backwards and find reasons why it is wrong to justify that as people didn't agree with you. But even if you use the definition for the adjective version of "dynamic", the very same definition which you have used already in this thread, it still works fine dynamic - (of a process or system) characterized by constant change, activity, OR progress (emphasis mine) it still fits perfectly as an exercise name, no contradiction whatsoever, "a system characterized by constant progress", is a great name for a new exercise protocol! Not sure if Cedric actually realised that "dynamic" fits so well when used either as an adjective or a noun, or whether that was just a happy coincidence, either way, great name!
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Nov 7, 2017 14:09:05 GMT
From Oxford dictionary:- dynamic - A force that stimulates change or progress within a system or process. isometrics - A system of physical exercises in which muscles are caused to act against each other or against a fixed object."dynamic isometrics" - there is no contradiction and it's a great name actually, unlike many names it actually makes perfect sense when you break it down. That is NOT the DEFINITION of "isometrics", although Self Resistance and effort against fixed objects CAN be isometric. "dynamic" .... ? Sounds like change to me (change or progress sounds like "moving" to me). No change in muscle length or joint angle w/ isometric effort applied. That's what makes it isometric, m8.
|
|
|
Post by Bruce Tackett on Nov 7, 2017 14:12:16 GMT
you cannot accept the simple truth that a name is just a name.. You must remember this, A name is just a name, A sigh is just a siiiiigh....
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Nov 7, 2017 14:15:56 GMT
There are myriad exercise names that are not oxymoronic, many names even describe the exercise. The names that don't describe or give any clue about the performance of the exercise are not oxymoronic. I don't see any valid reason to pick an oxymoronic name for an exercise except to be cryptic, contrary or cultish.
|
|
|
Post by gruntbrain on Nov 7, 2017 14:23:38 GMT
Now's the time to anal-lize yielding isometrics
|
|
|
Post by fatjake on Nov 7, 2017 16:00:44 GMT
From Oxford dictionary:- dynamic - A force that stimulates change or progress within a system or process. isometrics - A system of physical exercises in which muscles are caused to act against each other or against a fixed object."dynamic isometrics" - there is no contradiction and it's a great name actually, unlike many names it actually makes perfect sense when you break it down. That is NOT the DEFINITION of "isometrics", the Oxford dictionary would disagree with you m8, but anyways insert any other reasonable definition in there it does not make any difference, for example:- dynamic - A force that stimulates change or progress within a system or process. isometrics - A type of strength training in which the joint angle and muscle length do not change during contraction. still no contradiction, even using a different dictionary definition, therefore not an oxymoron, no matter how hard you try and make it so. With a real oxymoron there is no need to try so hard to justify it and even dispute actual dictionary definitions to try and make it so. With a real oxymoron there are no special conditions or qualifications needed either, it either is, or is not, an oxymoron. In this case, it is not. "dynamic" .... ? Sounds like change to me (change or progress sounds like "moving" to me). "change or progress within a system or process", does not mean the same as "moving", no reasonable person would suggest otherwise. I suppose if you were really desperate you could say "change" means moving from one state to another, so you can shoehorn the word "moving" in there even though it does not mean physically moving or anything like it. But in fact, the entire reason most people exercise is to stimulate change or progress.
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Nov 7, 2017 16:06:06 GMT
Isometric ExerciseIsometric exercise or isometrics are a type of strength training in which the joint angle and muscle length do not change during contraction (compared to concentric or eccentric contractions, called dynamic/isotonic movements). Isometrics are done in static positions, rather than being dynamic through a range of motion.[1] Overcoming versus yieldingIn an overcoming isometric, the joint and muscle work against an immovable object. In contrast, in a yielding isometric, the joint and muscle are held in a static position while opposed by resistance. In the context of the bench press, an example of a yielding isometric would be holding the bar at a given place even though it could be pressed higher, and an overcoming isometric would be pressing the bar up into the safety guards of a squat cage that prevent pushing the bar any higher. The distinction is that in a yielding isometric, one is pressing roughly the exact amount of pressure needed to negate the resistance, neither dropping nor lifting it, whereas in an overcoming isometric, one can be exerting more force and simply unable to move it. The yielding wavers slightly into concentric and eccentric actions due to inexact control, whereas the overcoming isometric is more purely isometric and can involve more variation in the force used, since one can press harder without the bar moving. UnweightedIn overcoming isometrics, subjects can safely do 100 percent effort, and continue with 100 percent available effort as strength is depleted, allowing longer time under (maximum volitional) tension. WeightedYielding isometrics allow measurable progress. Free-weight enthusiasts tend to believe the "back pressure" of real weight is superior for building strength, possibly triggering a productive "fight or flight" response. However, the extremely heavy weights needed by advanced subjects can be an inconvenience, and present a risk of injury. DefinitionAn isometric exercise is a form of exercise involving the static contraction of a muscle without any visible movement in the angle of the joint. The term "isometric" combines the Greek words "Isos" (equal) and "metria" (measuring), meaning that in these exercises the length of the muscle and the angle of the joint do not change, though contraction strength may be varied.[2] This is in contrast to isotonic contractions, in which thecontraction strength does not change, though the muscle length and joint angle do (change). Isometric resistancePlank Resistance in isometric exercises typically involves contractions of the muscle using: The body's own structure and ground Structural items (e.g., pushing against a fence) Free weights, weight machines, or elastic equipment (e.g., holding a weight in a fixed position) Pressure-plate-type equipment that has a digital display of maximal force. Depending on the goal of the exercise, the exertion can be maximal or sub-maximal. HistoryIsometric exercises are thousands of years old, with examples listed from the static holds in certain branches of yoga or oriental martial arts. Isometric exercises were first brought to the modern public's attention in the early days of physical culture, the precursor to bodybuilding. Many of the great bodybuilders of the day incorporated isometric exercises into their training regimens.[3] Many of today's training protocols incorporate isometric exercises, which are often made into parts of normal, isotonic exercises. For example, during a set of seated rows, a subject can hold their position when the handles are closest to their chest in order to "squeeze" the muscle, in an effort to further strain the muscle. Contrary to popular opinion, The Charles Atlas "Dynamic Tension" Course did not use any true isometric exercises but, rather, dynamic self-resistance; that is, pitting one muscle group against another, along with calisthenics.
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Nov 7, 2017 16:26:15 GMT
That is NOT the DEFINITION of "isometrics", the Oxford dictionary would disagree with you m8, but anyways insert any other reasonable definition in there it does not make any difference, for example:- dynamic - A force that stimulates change or progress within a system or process. isometrics - A type of strength training in which the joint angle and muscle length do not change during contraction. still no contradiction, even using a different dictionary definition, therefore not an oxymoron, no matter how hard you try and make it so. With a real oxymoron there is no need to try so hard to justify it and even dispute actual dictionary definitions to try and make it so. With a real oxymoron there are no special conditions or qualifications needed either, it either is, or is not, an oxymoron. In this case, it is not. "dynamic" .... ? Sounds like change to me (change or progress sounds like "moving" to me). "change or progress within a system or process", does not mean the same as "moving", no reasonable person would suggest otherwise. I suppose if you were really desperate you could say "change" means moving from one state to another, so you can shoehorn the word "moving" in there even though it does not mean physically moving or anything like it. But in fact, the entire reason most people exercise is to stimulate change or progress. Like I mentioned before, Dynamic-Isometric is an oxymoron ic name to anyone who can understand English. Yes, people want to stimulate change and progress for strength/muscle growth, but your definition states "WITHIN" the context of doing the exercise (as it is used in the definition "dynamic - A force that stimulates change or progress within a system or process.") The "system" or "process" is the exercise being performed. The change people are exercising to achieve (strength/muscle growth) happens during rest, not "within the system or process" of performing the Yielding Isometric. And, since we already have "Yielding Isometrics" according to grunt, it's pure Twattery to invent some new, oxymoronic, cryptic name for it.
|
|