<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Will we ever run the 100 metres in 9 seconds?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/07/18/will-we-ever-run-the-100-metres-in-9-seconds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/07/18/will-we-ever-run-the-100-metres-in-9-seconds/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:00:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melissa G</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/07/18/will-we-ever-run-the-100-metres-in-9-seconds/#comment-15569</link>
		<dc:creator>Melissa G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2012 01:19:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7284#comment-15569</guid>
		<description>@Peter

Using arms when running counterbalances the legs. The natural motion when running or walking is to have the arm swing coincide with the opposite step. This is to keep things balanced and help enable you to move in a straight line. If a runner has poor upper body form, the lack of an arm swing can slow the legs because they are working harder and against the upper body. Having them balanced with the same intensity is the key to getting faster. The arms should start bent at the elbows at a 90-degree angle. The range of motion will largely depend on how fast the runner is going. Faster running calls for a higher knee raise while a distance runner who is going slower can afford to keep the hands low and have less arm swing. Though the arm motion will be fast and vigorous, it should be done with relaxed muscles and joints. A weak upper body will make it difficult to swing your arms aggressively enough to keep up with your legs, which causes you to work harder and tire sooner.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Peter</p>
<p>Using arms when running counterbalances the legs. The natural motion when running or walking is to have the arm swing coincide with the opposite step. This is to keep things balanced and help enable you to move in a straight line. If a runner has poor upper body form, the lack of an arm swing can slow the legs because they are working harder and against the upper body. Having them balanced with the same intensity is the key to getting faster. The arms should start bent at the elbows at a 90-degree angle. The range of motion will largely depend on how fast the runner is going. Faster running calls for a higher knee raise while a distance runner who is going slower can afford to keep the hands low and have less arm swing. Though the arm motion will be fast and vigorous, it should be done with relaxed muscles and joints. A weak upper body will make it difficult to swing your arms aggressively enough to keep up with your legs, which causes you to work harder and tire sooner.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Old Geezer</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/07/18/will-we-ever-run-the-100-metres-in-9-seconds/#comment-15568</link>
		<dc:creator>Old Geezer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 20:10:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7284#comment-15568</guid>
		<description>For decades the best scientific minds agreed that there would never be a sub-four minute mile. Then a fellow named Roger proved them wrong.  Shortly thereafter it became somewhat of a habit to break the four minute barrier.  At some point it will be shown that an even better human body will come along and break the 9 second barrier.  Shortly thereafter....well, you know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For decades the best scientific minds agreed that there would never be a sub-four minute mile. Then a fellow named Roger proved them wrong.  Shortly thereafter it became somewhat of a habit to break the four minute barrier.  At some point it will be shown that an even better human body will come along and break the 9 second barrier.  Shortly thereafter&#8230;.well, you know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Junjay</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/07/18/will-we-ever-run-the-100-metres-in-9-seconds/#comment-15567</link>
		<dc:creator>Junjay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 16:17:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7284#comment-15567</guid>
		<description>The clap skate effect is hard to apply to running, but maybe tuning the shoe bounce for individual runners is one way to improve their speeds (they may already do this in the olympics, I&#039;m not sure). Harvard Prof. Thomas McMahon tuned a track there that increased running speeds and reduced injuries. See http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1999/2/19/prof-mcmahon-tuned-track-creator-dies/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The clap skate effect is hard to apply to running, but maybe tuning the shoe bounce for individual runners is one way to improve their speeds (they may already do this in the olympics, I&#8217;m not sure). Harvard Prof. Thomas McMahon tuned a track there that increased running speeds and reduced injuries. See <a href="http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1999/2/19/prof-mcmahon-tuned-track-creator-dies/" rel="nofollow">http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1999/2/19/prof-mcmahon-tuned-track-creator-dies/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rogier</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/07/18/will-we-ever-run-the-100-metres-in-9-seconds/#comment-15566</link>
		<dc:creator>Rogier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:03:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7284#comment-15566</guid>
		<description>John Brenkus in The perfection point argues that we&#039;ll reach &lt;9 seconds (actually, his calculations come out to 9.01, but he says we&#039;ll break the 9 because of the &#039;boundary&#039; factor). I&#039;m not sure I agree with all his calculations and assumptions, but it&#039;s an interesting read nonetheless!
He reiterates most of the data/suggestions from his book here:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=5349284
I&#039;d be interested in your views on his ideas!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John Brenkus in The perfection point argues that we&#8217;ll reach &lt;9 seconds (actually, his calculations come out to 9.01, but he says we&#039;ll break the 9 because of the &#039;boundary&#039; factor). I&#039;m not sure I agree with all his calculations and assumptions, but it&#039;s an interesting read nonetheless!<br />
He reiterates most of the data/suggestions from his book here:<br />
<a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=5349284" rel="nofollow">http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=5349284</a><br />
I&#039;d be interested in your views on his ideas!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Georg</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/07/18/will-we-ever-run-the-100-metres-in-9-seconds/#comment-15565</link>
		<dc:creator>Georg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 16:47:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7284#comment-15565</guid>
		<description>Who is &quot;we&quot;? Whoever, not I!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who is &#8220;we&#8221;? Whoever, not I!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Tungate</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/07/18/will-we-ever-run-the-100-metres-in-9-seconds/#comment-15564</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin Tungate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 14:46:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7284#comment-15564</guid>
		<description>@Peter: Arm swing has a strong correlation with stride length.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Peter: Arm swing has a strong correlation with stride length.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/07/18/will-we-ever-run-the-100-metres-in-9-seconds/#comment-15563</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:37:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7284#comment-15563</guid>
		<description>I wonder what effect runners&#039; arms have. It seems that sprinters tend to have very muscular arms, while long distance runners tend to have quite small, weedy arms. It makes sense to have small arms to reduce one&#039;s body mass, so presumably arm strength has a positive effect on sprinting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder what effect runners&#8217; arms have. It seems that sprinters tend to have very muscular arms, while long distance runners tend to have quite small, weedy arms. It makes sense to have small arms to reduce one&#8217;s body mass, so presumably arm strength has a positive effect on sprinting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
