I appreciate you finding that article - interesting one.

I’m very much amateur curler, and can’t see how that tiny touch would impact it, but maybe it does at that level of competition.

Using a perfect shot to stop on the button with no spin, and energy= all kinetic (1/2mv2) =friction energy(F*deltaX), we get a release speed of 1.8m/s (with a .006 coefficient), and a 2.98m/s speed (with a 0.016 coefficient).

Using the same equation, I go ahead and rerun the number, but adding a distance of 0.1m, a value I used as a good approximation of a reliable accuracy of an Olympic throw, and a time of 0.2s (the approximate time I estimated based on the video), which means a deltaX2 of 0.36m, or 0.596m.

1/2mv2+fapplieddeltaX2 = ffrictiondeltaX Fapplied comes out to 0.326N to 0.526N which is a miniscule amount.

That seems to indicate that a tiny touch DOES have the potential to make a significant difference. Some sources say 0.25 to 0.5N is required for a keyboard press, so its roughly on par with that

But, how much of a difference does the sweeping make on stone speed? Its easy to say that tiny change can impact things, but how does it compare to, say, sweeping hard vs not sweeping?

This study shows a sweeping change of 45+/-8mm. Thus a change of 25% on top of that is not insignificant.

So the last question is, does it make sense for someone to train specifically by cheating this way rather than doing it right and just pushing off with a more accurate force? That’s likely going to be subjective, but seems difficult to me.

Who knows, maybe this is a crutch and it is making a difference. Sounds like they need to stop doing it any case, whether a way they’ve trained or not. Or wear a camera showing they don’t touch the rock and just hover their finger behind it.

The problem I have is with how productivity is measured. Either GDP or GNI are both negatively impacted by positive planning and bureaucracy, but are driven positively on paper by cheap, breakable goods requiring regular repairs and replacement.

For example, City/designers of a road take an additional 500 hours to do design work which provides an increase of 10 years in lifespan. Now that doesn’t need to be repaired for longer, meaning less future costs (driving down the cost side), while at the same time increasing the hours spent. This has a negative impact on GNI, but is actually a GOOD thing by any rational persons view of the situation.

Or someone produces a set of clothes at a reasonable price that lasts twice as long. If people all move to that product, our GNI would drop despite that being a positive change.

Or thousands of frivolous or stupid lawsuits due to problems avoided by proper planning and/or bureaucracy show up as a benefit to GDP/GNI despite being a waste of time and money.

Using productivity as an end measure misses a lot of important points and measures that a modern society should be aiming for.

Sounds like the “loophole” we need to address is our lack of funding courts and justice systems - a problem seen Canada wide. Seems like a very easy and popular way to solve the issue.

I can’t say I’m too surprised. I’m not involved in the auto sector in anyway, but the media I’ve seen about it with respect to Canadian manufacturing has been all negative - US companies or US owned companies pulling their manufacturing out of Canada despite deals made (looking at you Stellantis). If our auto sector is diminishing/pulling out, what do we have to protect?

That being said, I’d like to see more manufacturing jobs here as part of that deal, but I’m entirely uninformed on how that would work or what it would look like.