Note: Blog post subject matter is discussed in more detail on the Athalonz Podcast.
Click to Listen. Click to Watch.
Life sciences are the study of living things and physical sciences are the study of non-living things. Life sciences include anatomy, biology, medicine, sport science, biomechanical engineering and like disciplines. Physical sciences include physics, chemistry, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering and like disciplines.
Not surprisingly, the curriculum of life sciences is substantially different than the curriculum of physical sciences and there is very little overlap. As such, a typical life scientist knows little about the physical sciences and a typical physical scientist knows little about the life sciences.
While there are significant differences between life sciences and physical sciences, the driving forces behind all science are to understand how things work, to predict how things will respond to a set of conditions, and to create new things based on well-understood things. All science starts with a hypothesis. For example, when Isaac Newton watched an apple fall from a tree, he hypothesized that there must be some force that draws the apple to the ground. He then conducted experiments to test his hypothesis of gravity.
As Newton’s experiments confirmed his hypothesis of gravity, he began to mathematically model his findings. As others learned of Newton’s hypothesis, experiments, and results, they conducted their own experiments to test Newton’s hypothesis and to substantiate or rebuff Newton’s experiments and results.
We know today that gravity exists and we can accurately model falling objects’ behavior using the mathematical models of gravity. Once something, like gravity, has been extensively tested and the results are always the same with no known exceptions, it becomes a scientific law.
When we use scientific laws to design a new product, we build a prototype to test that it will do what it was designed to do. If we did the math correctly, it will. If we didn’t do the math correctly, it won’t. In either case, we don’t have to prove that the scientific laws work; that’s already been done.
When something is not a scientific law, it can be classified as a scientific statement. So, it’s somewhere between a hypothesis and a scientific law. A scientific statement has been test but not to the level of a scientific law, it provides a range of results (not a specific one), and/or it has exceptions to the expected result.
For example, it’s very well-established that aspirin reduces inflammation and thins the blood to reduce the risk and/or severity of a heart attack. But, it doesn’t work for everyone and, from person to person, it can work differently. As such, aspirin’s effects on the body is not a scientific law because not everyone responds the same.
As another example, an experiment was done on twenty college athletes in a six week period to determine if a particular movement would help athletic performance. The six week studied revealed that 14 of the athletes (70%) had 0.2% or greater improvement in athletic performance, 5 of the athletes (25%) had no measurable improvement in athletic performance, and one athlete (5%) had a 0.4% or more decrease in athletic performance.
The trustworthiness of a scientific statement is based on the level of testing and the probability of the expected result occurring for all. In our present examples, the scientific statement regarding aspirin is trustworthy since it has been extensively studied and helps a majority of people even if the help varies. The athletic performance improvement scientific statement is of very limited trustworthiness. There is just not enough testing to have any confidence that the particular movement will help 70% of all people improve their athletic performance. More testing would need to be done using all segments of the population, the test duration would have to be longer, and so on to build trustworthiness in the scientific statement.
These examples exemplify the difference between the physical sciences and the life sciences. In the physical sciences, there are a significant number of scientific laws for physics, chemistry, electricity, materials, mechanical structures, and so on. That’s not the case in life sciences. There are few scientific laws of medicine, of sports science, of biomechanical engineering, and so on.
This creates a substantially different mindset between physical scientists and life scientists. Physical scientists only need to prove they applied the scientific laws properly to produce a trustworthy scientific statement. Life scientists, however, having few scientific laws to work with, so they have to conduct extensive and diverse experiments or studies to produce a trustworthy scientific statement.
Since sports are played by human beings, sports has primarily been studied by life scientists. As such, it’s expected that significant studies need to be done to produce a trustworthy scientific statement regarding sports. But, sports are a combination of life sciences and physical sciences. For example, a golf swing involves the physics of the body interacting with the ground, the body interacting with the club, and the club interacting with the ball. The golf swing also involves a series of biomechanical movements. The physics can be mathematically modeled using scientific laws to produce trustworthy scientific statements, while the biomechanical movements requires significant experimentation to produce trustworthy scientific statements.
This is why Athalonz can say that our golf shoes will provide 9% more power; it’s physics that has been mathematically modeled and verified. Hence, the 9% more power is a trustworthy scientific statement. It is our hypothesis that the 9% more power will improve the series of biomechanical movements to yield more stability, increased distance on shots, and provide more control to produce less misses. Our testing to date substantiates our hypothesis, so it’s growing in trustworthiness as a scientific statement.
To this end, we ask you to share your results and conduct your own experiments. Compare Athalonz golf shoes to any other golf shoe, measure your distance, measure your misses, and video your lower half. With respect to lower have, how stable are your legs during your swing? Watch a slow-motion video of Tiger Woods’ swing and watch how stable his legs are; no sway and the angle of his shins stays constant up to the point of contact. Also look at the movement of your feet within the shoes. In our shoes, you’ll notice much less movement to keep the legs stable. In other shoes, there can be significant foot movement to try to keep the legs stable.
About Me:
I am the CEO and Founder of Athalonz, LLC., I am a founding partner of the patent boutique law firm of Garlick & Markison, I am a survivor of child abuse, and I am an inventor on over 300 patents.
About Athalonz:
Athalonz is a technology company based on Mesa, AZ. It develops and sells athletic footwear, which incorporates its patented technology that leverages the laws of physics to improve athletic performance. Website: athalonz.com
About G&M:
Garlick & Markison is a patent law boutique firm that assists clients in building a patent business within their business using proprietary tools and techniques. Website: texaspatents.com
Athalonz Supports the Joe Torre Safe at Home Foundation
Click here to learn more.
Comments will be approved before showing up.
Today was a good bit of climbing. A little over 2,000 feet of elevation gain. Not as much as day 1 or day 2, but not trivial. I am really enjoying traveling through the small towns. The people have been friendly, the service has been good, and the food has been excellent.
