>The dirty secret is that literally nobody has ever seen a brain rotate inside a skull and result in concussion.
Are you sure?. We have a thing called tomography with things like xrays, magnetic resonance that let's us look inside bodies.
Experiments were done in the past with animals that have a similar brain to us, specially aviation military, that were extremely interested on concussions.
At least they have x-rays photography of impacts. By the way all this research led to car's seatbelts.
Thousands of brain surgical procedures are done each year, there are experts in the anatomical features of the brain, and we have detailed maps of sliced brains and complete heads.
Tens of thousands of people die in car accidents and hundred of thousands are injured. Insurance companies have extensive documentation on those.
We know the physical properties of those things and we have things called computers that let us do very complex models about the brain with finite elements or just analog 3d printed models with gelatin and plastics.
To say that nobody can imagine a brain in motion, so everything is a hypothetical mechanism is quite unfortunate.
We know a lot about what happens more or less. Things have improved dramatically for people like motorbike racers because we actually know a lot and lots of lives had been saved because of that.
Literally all those things you mentioned happen in static environments. Note that I said we can’t image a brain in motion, all we have for that are computer models. Sure, they’re plausible, but we can’t even agree on what crashing forces applied to the cranium look like, let alone the resultant brain movement and pressures induced. You can’t CT a brain as the head is falling. Nobody has ever drilled holes in someone’s skull and mounted pressure transducers inside the skull to truly validate the pressures during impact. All the “validation” has happened in lower fidelity domains (particularly the time domain), this is a bit like claiming that you know calculus because you can do addition really good. Every mechanical engineering student will tell you that dynamics is a different beast than statics. Fancy computer images does not the truth make.
Note that I’m not saying that a MIPS or WaveCel helmet is worse than the previous generation, I’m just pointing out that the timing in which these features appeared on the market is suspect, which causes me to suspect the “science” behind it. It is most likely that these antirotation features don’t make the helmets worse but also not any better.
Are you sure?. We have a thing called tomography with things like xrays, magnetic resonance that let's us look inside bodies.
Experiments were done in the past with animals that have a similar brain to us, specially aviation military, that were extremely interested on concussions.
At least they have x-rays photography of impacts. By the way all this research led to car's seatbelts.
Thousands of brain surgical procedures are done each year, there are experts in the anatomical features of the brain, and we have detailed maps of sliced brains and complete heads.
Tens of thousands of people die in car accidents and hundred of thousands are injured. Insurance companies have extensive documentation on those.
We know the physical properties of those things and we have things called computers that let us do very complex models about the brain with finite elements or just analog 3d printed models with gelatin and plastics.
To say that nobody can imagine a brain in motion, so everything is a hypothetical mechanism is quite unfortunate.
We know a lot about what happens more or less. Things have improved dramatically for people like motorbike racers because we actually know a lot and lots of lives had been saved because of that.