I'm not a juggler, but watching this has inspired me to relate these principles to my own interests. I feel that this is extremely useful to curious persons with disparate interests to discover a crossover between them. Thank you Allen Knutson.
yes, juggling is allways an ongoing process. there are almost (i believe...) an infinite number of combinations of patterns, throws, catches and styles. And as long as you feel good doing it, dont stop practicing. it improves peripheral vision, reflexes, and is realy fun!
Cornell lectures on the events involving Ursa Major Jester on June 6, 2021. Juggling balls is super cool, houuever houu to access a solar system through its central sun and change the positioning of the solar system adjacent to it in that asterism. This is fascinating. Thank you.
Re: checking for invalid patterns (around 46:00), check the pattern average. 442 adds up to 10, 10/3 isn't an integer and the number of balls must be an integer. Similarly for anything that adds up to a prime number the pattern must be invalid.
That's what "average" means. Sum up all individual values and divide by the number of values. However, for juggling, we need to divide by the number of beats. Multiplex throws (e.g. [54]) are always a single beat and between synchronuos throws (e.g. (4,4)(4,4)) there always exists an additional beat where nothing happens by convention and which is not notated. He also talked about decomposing a pattern into orbits and then calculating the number of balls for each orbit individually. The decomposition in itself can actually be usefull, but to just get the number of balls, do it directly. When I script a small juggling act, most often with glowing juggling balls, it is really helpful to understand how patterns decompose into orbits. E.g. 531 decomposes into 501 (2 balls) and 030 (1 ball), so it looks nicest with two balls of the same color and one ball of a different color. However, for simply communicating or learning the patterns, orbits are mostly irrelevant. Well, for harder patterns like 661515, you could leave out an orbit and just practice 661500 first.
Technical gripe (good lecture though): It is possible to compute the validity of vanilla siteswaps in linear time: Simply calculate each throw's "landing slot" and then look through landing slots to make sure that no slot has 2 different throws landing in it. This is one computation per throw which is significantly more efficient (and easier to do manually) than one computation per throw pair.
Speaking in codes and mathematics of juggling about realigning planets and universal systems to make the desired mark of love and union a success and not disaster.
in my oppinion the real beauty of it, is being able to juggle. when you try, try and try a new trick, and then you start being able to do it. the feeling of achieving that is far more rewarding to me then making a good show and people telling how cool it is... don't you remember when you were a little kid and you learned to ride the bicycle?
Actually, I just learned to juggle this past week (well, it's an ongoing process, but I can juggle 3 balls pretty well now). It's a lot of fun. For something that's so simple to do, it really impresses people. Looking at someone else, it LOOKS like it's difficult, but I was really surprised at how easy it was once I got the muscle memory down. I started with tennis balls, but I'm to the point where I can juggle most things I pick up, which is neat and makes practicing very easy.
he was talking about different throws making more noise in general (the one was the loudest and the zero and two the softest) but, in anything, this would make finding the pattern easier, so yes, that would work.
It's a masterful performance, because he's giving a mathematical lecture in its own terms but all the while breaking into skilled juggling - and it all flows so well. The juggling supports/motivates the ideas and the ideas then makes the juggling even more watchable. It's like when teachers use 'affect'. Shame he can't cram it into 18 minutes eh?
at 41:10 minute mark Allen is asked about the rhythm of a pattern. Some throws will sound different, loud 1's etc, but the rhythm is always even. The pattern shouldn't speed up or slow down. Each throw should occur evenly timed from the previous one. Some patterns are easier to juggle uneven, 51 for example, but from a siteswap point of view they should all be even.
This is awesome! my high school physics teacher Dave Morton went to college with this guy and held a world record for 5 years in passing 12 balls with this guy. I thought he was just lying to us but I guess its true
Interesting question: Would it be possible to determine the pattern based only on sound if one hand was gloved and made a different sound or would any of the balls have to make a distinct sound as well?
Mathematics of juggling: 1) Hold all balls 2) Start throwing balls in the air 3) If and only if no balls in your hand you may catch a ball 4) If one ball is in either hand throw it in the air 5) Repeat 3) and 4) as needed.
Ok. So anyone who knows me well knows that this time of year especially I become obsessed with a livecam of a pair of Red Tailed Hawks at Cornell University. But I've always wondered what it was like to sit in on a class at Cornell. I found this video and I was reminded that God gives us each great gifts and mine isn't math, but I applaud the use of a real life example in teaching math. I have always said that doing so is the key to teaching math and science in particular. And for a visual learner in particular this is a great approach! Thanks for this cool glimpse into an Ivy League classroom! P.S. I loved the use of the old school chalkboard.
+Mary Wilbur Reed This isn't an example of a class at Cornell. This is a guest lecture for Math Awareness Month. This is something students go to in their free time. Math isn't a "gift," it's something you work at. Unless you suffer from dyscalculia, you can do math just fine if you put your mind to it. "Visual learning" and the other "learning styles" were debunked a while ago. www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/learning-styles-debunked-there-is-no-evidence-supporting-auditory-and-visual-learning-psychologists-say.html
Ok you could do 3,3,3 in a manner where you throw all the balls before the first one lands but later for example in the 661515 the first 6 does not land after the other throws have been made
@daltonjuggles Even though I feel like I know 99% of this stuff, it's nice to hear it in the form of Q&A as well. This video really makes me want to record my upcoming 4 ball sync-siteswap video as soon as possible.
Juggling Theory is strange. a 5 in a 3 ball trick is much higher than a five in a 5 ball trick. take 531 for example. The 5 goes approx 2.1m to keep the same throwing pace. In the 5 ball cascade the throws are much lower. (I have somewhere calculations for this...)
A 5 throw isn't a defined height, you can juggle five balls at varying heights and the siteswap would still be five, the number is defined by the amount of beats under it as opposed to the height.
A 5 throw isn't a defined height, you can juggle five balls at varying heights and the siteswap would still be five, the number is defined by the amount of beats under it as opposed to the height.
Can someone please built a juggling robot who performs different patterns while calculating new ones according to site swap rules? Plus the robot should be able to do the "random juggling" Cornell is talking about in the end.
i dont think someone who doesnt juggle with 10 boll can figure it out so easy, i had a pretty hard time trying to figure it out... often you use the 5ball pattern and multiplex throws
you just missed out what the x means in patterns like (6x, 4)(4 6x) and also the notation for numbers higher than a nine. If you'd've done that it'd've been comprehensive.
At 37:35, why did he start the 53 with simultaneous throws from both hands. (I'm having trouble getting to the point where I can juggle 53 and I'm wondering if that's an expedient I should be trying.)
Becasue thats the right way to d oit. Its the 4-ball halfshower and you start it from synchronous 4 ball fountains. Just search for a 4 ball halfshower tutorial online.
He basically starts with a (4x,3) throw and then continues into a 53, which is in theory a "hurry", as his right hand has to throw in consecutive beats. What he does: _ _ (4x,3) 5 3 5 3 .... He could have just done: _ 5 3 5 3 5 3 ... So pull the 4x throw forward by one beat, thus requiring a higher 5 throw and avoiding the need for both hands to throw at the same time and avoiding the need for his right hand to throw in consecutive beats. You could also interpret his first throw as a (5,4x), turning his pattern into _ _ (5,4x) _ 5 3 5 3 5 3 ... This removes the "hurry". Thats basically up to your interpretation, whether there happened an actual beat in between the synchronous throw and the first 5. Also, be aware, that in (4x,3) and in (5,4x) both throws cross hands. When you transition from synchronous to asych patterns back and forth, it is possible to encounter crossing even-value throws (denoted by x as in purely synch patterns) and non-crossing, straight odd-value throws (denoted by s).
It's actually easier than reading music. Each number directly corresponds to a throw height. And numbers are far easier to recognize than black ovals sitting on an array of lines. If you walk up to any sufficiently proficient juggler (understands siteswaps, can juggle 5 balls) and tell him a pattern that he never juggled, let's say 6316131, his main struggle will be the execution, not the understanding.
I dont understand. He keeps telling that the number means how many throws happen before it lands. But actually in a 3, 3, 3 pattern when you throw first ball in the air then only one throw happens before the first ball lands. Shouldnt it be that the number is the number of throws after which the first ball is thrown again.
