Abstract
IN NATURE of Mar. 15 there appeared a letter by W. H. Macaulay and Brig.—General G. E. Smith in which a theoretical treatment of curling was given. The results or conclusions were so nonconcordant with the known behaviour of curling stones that the authors ended their letter by raising a question as to what important feature of the motion had been over-looked.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
HARRINGTON, E. Curling. Nature 126, 351–352 (1930). https://doi.org/10.1038/126351d0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/126351d0
This article is cited by
-
Study of curling mechanism by precision kinematic measurements of curling stone’s motion
Scientific Reports (2022)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
