curving an object ball....

michael4 · Mar 30, 2016

Sorry, dont have time to read the whole thread, but here are my comments anyway...

1) Can we curve a CB? Yes, obviously by using spin

2) Does the spin put on the CB transfer to the OB? yes, at some microscopic level it must.

3) Can the spin transferred to the OB cause it to curve? yes, at some microscopic level it must.

4) Is the amount of "curve" that can be transferred to an OB ever enough to see with the naked eye? Maybe, Maybe not.

5) Is the amount of curve that can be transferred to an OB ever enough to matter in a real pool game? Nope.

Straightpool_99 · Mar 30, 2016

michael4 said:
Sorry, dont have time to read the whole thread, but here are my comments anyway...

1) Can we curve a CB? Yes, obviously by using spin

2) Does the spin put on the CB transfer to the OB? yes, at some microscopic level it must.

3) Can the spin transferred to the OB cause it to curve? yes, at some microscopic level it must.

4) Is the amount of "curve" that can be transferred to an OB ever enough to see with the naked eye? Maybe, Maybe not.

5) Is the amount of curve that can be transferred to an OB ever enough to matter in a real pool game? Nope.

OMG!!! Watch the bloody video!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkRs_m2Br3c

Straightpool_99 · Mar 30, 2016

michael4 said:
Sorry, dont have time to read the whole thread, but here are my comments anyway...

1) Can we curve a CB? Yes, obviously by using spin

2) Does the spin put on the CB transfer to the OB? yes, at some microscopic level it must.

3) Can the spin transferred to the OB cause it to curve? yes, at some microscopic level it must.

4) Is the amount of "curve" that can be transferred to an OB ever enough to see with the naked eye? Maybe, Maybe not.

5) Is the amount of curve that can be transferred to an OB ever enough to matter in a real pool game? Nope.

This falsehood can be put to sleep forever, TODAY! Read the thread, watch the video. Then try it yourself. There, now this nonsense can end. (Edited for harsh words).

michael4 · Mar 30, 2016

Straightpool_99 said:
[/B]

This falsehood can be put to sleep forever, TODAY! Read the thread, watch the video. Then try it yourself. There, now this nonsense can end. (Edited for harsh words).

OK, watched the video several times, in the spirit of cooperation I will admit that if mastered it could be used in some bank situations when the hole is partially blocked.....

(I assume it only works on bank shots)

Maxx · Mar 30, 2016

lfigueroa said:
?

Science cannot explain a plastic ball, being hit by a wooden stick, on a cloth covered surface, hitting a rubber cushion...

Lou Figueroa
someone alert
CERN

?

Can it explain why you're not using a tip...

The Renfro · Mar 30, 2016

michael4 said:
Sorry, dont have time to read the whole thread, but here are my comments anyway...

1) Can we curve a CB? Yes, obviously by using spin

2) Does the spin put on the CB transfer to the OB? yes, at some microscopic level it must.

3) Can the spin transferred to the OB cause it to curve? yes, at some microscopic level it must.

4) Is the amount of "curve" that can be transferred to an OB ever enough to see with the naked eye? Maybe, Maybe not.

5) Is the amount of curve that can be transferred to an OB ever enough to matter in a real pool game? Nope.

I would suggest you READ the whole thread because otherwise you will be spending all that time you can't use towards that to being a complete dumbass LOL

Corwyn_8 · Mar 31, 2016

Straightpool_99 said:
Science explains most things, and teaches us much. One should think that after thousands of years of setbacks, paradigm shifts, as well as stunning new discoveries, that it would also teach some humility. Sadly that's the lesson that some people learn the last. Some never do.

Reading comprehension would be nice too.

Thank you kindly.

KRJ · Mar 31, 2016

michael4 said:
OK, watched the video several times, in the spirit of cooperation I will admit that if mastered it could be used in some bank situations when the hole is partially blocked.....

(I assume it only works on bank shots)

Masse shots work pretty good to

Rubik's Cube · Mar 31, 2016

Good evening, Dave and Bob.

I've just spent a couple of hours endeavouring to complete Bob's challenge on a snooker table and thought you might be interested to hear the result.

Essentially, I failed. It is my belief whatever advantage I gained by playing on a napped cloth was countered by the balls being three-sixteenths smaller and thus less inclined to spin as fast. A small amount of curve was apparent (about the same as shown in the previous two videos) but certainly not enough to make me confident your $2,000 will be winging its way across the Atlantic anytime soon.

Kind regards,
RC.

dr_dave · Apr 1, 2016

Rubik's Cube said:
Good evening, Dave and Bob.

I've just spent a couple of hours endeavouring to complete Bob's challenge on a snooker table and thought you might be interested to hear the result.

Essentially, I failed. It is my belief whatever advantage I gained by playing on a napped cloth was countered by the balls being three-sixteenths smaller and thus less inclined to spin as fast. A small amount of curve was apparent (about the same as shown in the previous two videos) but certainly not enough to make me confident your $2,000 will be winging its way across the Atlantic anytime soon.

Kind regards,
RC.

Thanks for the info RC!

Please consider posting a video so we can see the best you can do on the snooker table.

Catch you later,
Dave

Rubik's Cube · Apr 1, 2016

dr_dave said:
Thanks for the info RC!

Please consider posting a video so we can see the best you can do on the snooker table.

Catch you later,
Dave

Good afternoon, Dr. Dave.

I don't have access to decent camera equipment at the moment, sir. I was planning on sorting something out if you permitted a snooker table attempt and the challenge was beatable.

Myself and a friend began by banking balls (2 and 1\16ths of an inch) into a centre pocket to gauge the amount of curve (if any) that could be possible. From the viewer's perspective it sometimes appeared as if the object ball might have been bending. We were using a set where the coloured balls are numbered and these gave the optical illusion of greater curve when compared to the solid reds. I'd value your opinion on this effect.

Once the baton and pegs were brought into play, however, it became readily apparent that any attainable curve (by me) fell short of the required parameters by some margin.

Kind regards,
RC.

Rubik's Cube · Apr 1, 2016

One further point, sir.

Regarding the $2,000 prize, I believe Bob's original stipulation of his presence at any successful attempt should be adhered to in all fairness.

dr_dave · Apr 1, 2016

Rubik's Cube said:
It is my belief whatever advantage I gained by playing on a napped cloth was countered by the balls being three-sixteenths smaller and thus less inclined to spin as fast.

At the fast speed required, I don't think napped cloth will help much. Concerning the ball size being smaller, this should have no effect on the physics since spin effects scale proportionally with ball size (i.e., ball radius doesn't appear in any of the important pool physics equations). Now, if the cushion nose is at a relative height different than on pool tables, that could have an effect.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave · Apr 1, 2016

Rubik's Cube said:
We were using a set where the coloured balls are numbered and these gave the optical illusion of greater curve when compared to the solid reds. I'd value your opinion on this effect.

The numbers certainly show the spin more, and this could mislead your eyes, as pointed out in the list of possible optical-illusion effects on the bank bend resource page.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave · Apr 1, 2016

Rubik's Cube said:
One further point, sir.

Regarding the $2,000 prize, I believe Bob's original stipulation of his presence at any successful attempt should be adhered to in all fairness.

Bob and I are releasing the revised challenge rules, with a demonstration video, soon ... hopefully today. Video entries will be allowed.

Catch you later,
Dave

Rubik's Cube · Apr 1, 2016

dr_dave said:
At the fast speed required, I don't think napped cloth will help much. Concerning the ball size being smaller, this should have no effect on the physics since spin effects scale proportionally with ball size (i.e., ball radius doesn't appear in any of the important pool physics equations). Now, if the cushion nose is at a relative height different than on pool tables, that could have an effect.

Regards,
Dave

Hello again, Dr. Dave.

Many thanks indeed for your swift replies, they're much appreciated.

I was certainly very surprised to read that ball radius does not feature in any of the important pool physics equations. I play various billiard disciplines and it has always struck me that far greater sidespin is attainable when using a bigger cueball and, for this reason, presumed ball radii would literally loom large in many equations.

Cheers,
RC.

dr_dave · Apr 1, 2016

Rubik's Cube said:
Hello again, Dr. Dave.

Many thanks indeed for your swift replies, they're much appreciated.

I was certainly very surprised to read that ball radius does not feature in any of the important pool physics equations. I play various billiard disciplines and it has always struck me that far greater sidespin is attainable when using a bigger cueball and, for this reason, presumed ball radii would literally loom large in many equations.

Cheers,
RC.

One exception is how fast or easily sidespin wears off. A bigger and heavier ball will retain sidespin longer. So with a slow and long-distance shot, a bigger and heavier ball will definitely retain more sidespin than a smaller and lighter ball, especially on a slow and "sticky" nappy cloth. That might explain your perceptions and experiences.

Regards,
Dave

Rubik's Cube · Apr 1, 2016

dr_dave said:
One exception is how fast or easily sidespin wears off. A bigger and heavier ball will retain sidespin longer. So with a slow and long-distance shot, a bigger and heavier ball will definitely retain more sidespin than a smaller and lighter ball, especially on a slow and "sticky" nappy cloth. That might explain your perceptions and experiences.

Regards,
Dave

Thanks, Dr. Dave.

Apologies for not grasping the concept, but is it not easier to make the edge of a larger cueball move faster than a smaller one, and hence attain greater sidespin effect?

Cheers,
RC.

Rubik's Cube · Apr 1, 2016

Or put another way: if two cueballs, one 2.00 inches and the other 2.25 inches, were both spinning at 500 rpm, would the edge of the larger cueball not be moving more rapidly?

dr_dave · Apr 1, 2016

Rubik's Cube said:
Or put another way: if two cueballs, one 2.00 inches and the other 2.25 inches, were both spinning at 500 rpm, would the edge of the larger cueball not be moving more rapidly?

Yes, but it also takes more force to change the direction and spin of the ball (e.g., when the ball hits a cushion). Many physics effects apply in proportion to size/weight.

BTW, I was exaggerating a little when I wrote "ball radius doesn't appear in any of the important pool physics equations." For example, see Equations 34 and 35 in TP A.4 - Post-impact cue ball trajectory for any cut angle, speed, and spin. Draw and follow cut shot CB trajectories are affected by ball weight/size (due to the R terms in the equations). However, with a natural-roll follow shot, the 30 degree rule still applies (see Equation 38, which contains no radius or weight terms). The 30 degree rule applies equally well to pool, snooker, and carom balls, assuming the CB and OB weights are the same (for more info, see ball weight difference effects).

I hope that helps,
Dave

curving an object ball....

AzB Silver Member

I see dead balls

I see dead balls

AzB Silver Member

AzB Platinum Member

Outsville.com

Energy Curmudgeon

Support UKRAINE

Pool Ball Collector

Instructional Author

Pool Ball Collector

Pool Ball Collector

Instructional Author

Instructional Author

Instructional Author

Pool Ball Collector

Instructional Author

Pool Ball Collector

Pool Ball Collector

Instructional Author