Pool Ball Terminal Velocity

[Linwood]

This is one of the few scientific type threads to appear on AZB -- your statement is so non-scientific that I am not able to respond to it.

You can 'believe' anything that makes you feel good or better about yourself and your environment .. everything is going to be alright .. ;-)

By the way .. you do not have to worry about proving anything to me.

Have a nice day.

Is it unscientific?

A lot of very scientific theories today wonder if time is an illusion.

Some very literate types wonder how we would tell if our existence turns out to be a simulation.

What is the origin of conciousness, can internet bots achieve it?

How can one tell the difference in a bot and a person? Maybe some of the players in this thread do not exist (as humans)? (Read about the Ashley Madison event).

Yes, my comment was somewhat unscientific, because a lot of the trolling statements are pretty unscientific.

You can pick apart any statement and find fodder for discussion, e.g. the phrase used that I was responding to was "scientific fact". What is a scientific fact? Science tends to rely on observations and hypotheses that explain them, which gain more and more credibility and in doing so might be then called theorems or laws but are they ever facts?

Even mathematics tends to be a closed system, starting with certain axioms which are accepted but not provable, to derive other theorems which are said to be "proven" but only to the degree the axioms are correct. Read about Gödel's incompleteness theorems.

To the original point: I would suggest that the reality of "I" is a lot less well understood, scientifically, than gravity.

 

[mikepage]

Actually you are describing the effects of the force called gravity when you illustrate people jumping off a cliff -- lol -- You have not defined in any way what that force actually is.

[...]

Forget the word "fact" for a minute, because that get's people in trouble.

Let's say we have "observations" about which we agree.

---the apple falls from the tree
---big apples hurt your head more
---the tide come in, then goes out, then comes in, then goes out ....

likely no disagreements here; also no explanations.

We might want to "explain" a collections of observations by proposing they are consistent with a broader, more fundamental generalization: gravity. So we would have a THEORY that the tides are explained by gravity.

Then we might see this gravity explanation not only is consistent the the observations we've made in the past. But we can predict new observations where we haven't yet looked and see if they check out. The theory is always tentative as an explanation, but it gets stronger the more observations that fit it.

So what about gravity? Can that be explained in terms of something broader and more fundamental? I don't know. Maybe, and maybe not. When we use the word "physical law," we are implying the buck stops here in terms of explanation: it is an end of the line of sorts--a broad generalization about the patterns in the observations we've made about world around.

You could call it God's will if you like. Or you can say it is what it is. Or you can search for broader, more fundamental pattern connecting a greater number of observations. Your call...

 

[Ghosst]

I understand and agree with what you wrote here. But again, this is only describing the effects of gravity and not identifying what it actually is.

Here, again, is the difference between science and conspiracy. Conspiracy theorists have an explanation for every little detail of their theory. They don't prove anything, only rebut the works of others as they don't have original ideas of their own. Scientists don't assume their total knowledge because they aren't writing a fallacy, they are exploring the boundaries of collective human knowledge.

There is no, "This Is How Magnets Work (with particles) vol 2, ed:9", out there. We know they work. We understand why(ish). But the *exact* how, not so much. In that is the beauty of exploration and understanding. While once we thought a solar eclipse was the end of the world because we did not know what magic caused the day to turn into night, we now celebrate that rare chance to observe the corona (not the beer) to gain more knowledge of that life-giving, mid-range, cool-yellow, middle aged star in the center of our solar system. (Yes, that was a run-on sentence JAM; it was intentional to show a train of thought).

However, for the OP, the question remains. Why is the distance a cueball must travel in order to meet its' terminal velocity of import? Your silence, rather well placed I might add, intrigues me. I feel this mystery might involve a collection of neurons collectively firing through their synapses to resolve a pattern which I must gain superiority over in animal display of survival intelligence to be worthwhile. Much the same as the theory of the universe as a hologram and how machines could well have invented it, I feel that human desire to reach beyond my bounds. It's interesting to note though that a neuron, by itself, does little. A few hundred, and nothing. A few million, and life takes shape. They are less intelligent, on their own, than a calculator. And yet, we have cellular phones each with more power than the entire lunar landing mission in our hands connected together in a global network called the internet. Perhaps, dear friends, we are already through the looking glass and simply haven't noticed it.

What were we talking about again? Oh yeah, I lost 20-16 last night, but at $5 a rack it was worth the lesson. I need to work on my fundamentals some more.

 

[garczar]

Ya I was getting ahead of myself...didn't realize I would have to spoon feed you guys the obvious. Terminal velocity according to the op's question would be the same for all objects regardless of mass. Do I need to explain why or can you "mechanical engineers" figure it out?

....................................................................

 

[AtLarge]

Just for anyone interested, I used the Break App for several breaks at the US Open 8-ball.

Fastest break I clocked was Thorsten at 25mph. Shane was mostly at 23-24mph. Dennis was around 22-23 (never hit 24), and Alex was consistently at 21.5ish.

Freddie <~~~ 20ish

Freddie -- I think I heard you say that app works off the time difference between two sounds -- tip hitting CB and CB hitting OB. The distance between CB and OB can differ quite a bit on break shots. How does the app account for that?

 

[pt109]

Freddie -- I think I heard you say that app works off the time difference between two sounds -- tip hitting CB and CB hitting OB. The distance between CB and OB can differ quite a bit on break shots. How does the app account for that?

I much prefer the radar gun that was used long ago...
...it told you what speed the cue ball was traveling AS IT MET THE HEAD BALL...
...I been told that the cue ball is decelerating before it gets t the pack...so at the head
ball is really the pertinent info.

I was hearing some big speeds at a break contest at a Canadian bar championship
about 20 years ago...but they were being clocked only one diamond after it was hit...
....a little fake news was a problem even back then.

 

[Agent 99]

Forget the word "fact" for a minute, because that get's people in trouble.

Let's say we have "observations" about which we agree.

---the apple falls from the tree
---big apples hurt your head more
---the tide come in, then goes out, then comes in, then goes out ....

likely no disagreements here; also no explanations.

We might want to "explain" a collections of observations by proposing they are consistent with a broader, more fundamental generalization: gravity. So we would have a THEORY that the tides are explained by gravity.

Then we might see this gravity explanation not only is consistent the the observations we've made in the past. But we can predict new observations where we haven't yet looked and see if they check out. The theory is always tentative as an explanation, but it gets stronger the more observations that fit it.

So what about gravity? Can that be explained in terms of something broader and more fundamental? I don't know. Maybe, and maybe not. When we use the word "physical law," we are implying the buck stops here in terms of explanation: it is an end of the line of sorts--a broad generalization about the patterns in the observations we've made about world around.

You could call it God's will if you like. Or you can say it is what it is. Or you can search for broader, more fundamental pattern connecting a greater number of observations. Your call...

Excellent post. I suppose that I am some what old-school.

My call is to only credit veracity to observations that are made by observing controlled experiments that replicate the same effects each time the experiment is conducted.

I have nothing against a good theory - in fact theories are what lead to controlled experiments in order to produce a comprehensive understanding rooted in undisputable fact. -- Now you have a building block for extrapolation of new understandings.

I remember years ago, when mathematical statistics came to being. A good friend of mine, who is a remarkable mathematician, did not think much about the theory of statistics.

When I asked him about this 'new mathematical discipline' he laughed and said, "Statistics were invented so people would have a way to lie with mathematics."

I never forgot that, and wonder if the same is true with physical theories, when used as undisputable fact in order to claim a new factual break through, or to substantiate the validity of an unknown matter.

You summed it up perfectly, thanks again for the book.

 

[Cornerman]

Freddie -- I think I heard you say that app works off the time difference between two sounds -- tip hitting CB and CB hitting OB. The distance between CB and OB can differ quite a bit on break shots. How does the app account for that?

You move the cueball on the app to where the breaker is set up. They all were breaking just off the head spot.

 

[Cornerman]

Excellent post. I suppose that I am some what old-school.

My call is to only credit veracity to observations that are made by observing controlled experiments that replicate the same effects each time the experiment is conducted.

I have nothing against a good theory - in fact theories are what lead to controlled experiments in order to produce a comprehensive understanding rooted in undisputable fact. -- Now you have a building block for extrapolation of new understandings.

I remember years ago, when mathematical statistics came to being. A good friend of mine, who is a remarkable mathematician, did not think much about the theory of statistics.

When I asked him about this 'new mathematical discipline' he laughed and said, "Statistics were invented so people would have a way to lie with mathematics."

I never forgot that, and wonder if the same is true with physical theories, when used as undisputable fact in order to claim a new factual break through, or to substantiate the validity of an unknown matter.

You summed it up perfectly, thanks again for the book.

Just a little perpsective, you just responded to a retired Physical Chemistry Professor that you're old school when it comes to sciences.

 

[Cornerman]

I much prefer the radar gun that was used long ago...
...it told you what speed the cue ball was traveling AS IT MET THE HEAD BALL...
...I been told that the cue ball is decelerating before it gets t the pack...so at the head
ball is really the pertinent info.

I was hearing some big speeds at a break contest at a Canadian bar championship
about 20 years ago...but they were being clocked only one diamond after it was hit...
....a little fake news was a problem even back then.

Interesting. I always thought the radar gun was showing peak velocity, including the entire path of the cueball to the rack.

 

[AtLarge]

You move the cueball on the app to where the breaker is set up. They all were breaking just off the head spot.

Ah, so it's a graphic of a playing surface, and you can place the CB in the appropriate place on that surface. How about the head ball in the rack -- can it be moved, e.g., in 9-Ball with the 9-ball on the spot? I'd guess "yes," in order for the app to be usable for any shot on the table, not just break shots.

 

[Cornerman]

Ah, so it's a graphic of a playing surface, and you can place the CB in the appropriate place on that surface. How about the head ball in the rack -- can it be moved, e.g., in 9-Ball with the 9-ball on the spot? I'd guess "yes," in order for the app to be usable for any shot on the table, not just break shots.

It's the Predator Break Speed App.

There is a way to set up custom distances, but moving the rack isn't a feature (that I know of).

 

[Agent 99]

Just a little perpsective, you just responded to a retired Physical Chemistry Professor that you're old school when it comes to sciences.

I happen to be retired as well...

 

[pdcue]

Interesting you should say that.
This was all meant to be a theoretical discussion but I have indeed considered such a ramp before.
Actually, as you pointed out, it would have to be more of a "slide" than a ramp, but still not impossible to do.

So, Will you call it a Galileo tribute slide?

Dale

 

[LAMas]

"...earth gravity, with no air resistance)..."

Terminal velocity means that velocity at which the resistance due to air molecules hitting the object exactly equals the force of gravity. So in an absolutely perfect vacuum and a perfectly uniform gravitational field that extends throughout all space, the body would accelerate forever.

The speed is variable.

 

[Mr. Bond]

" I am. I said.
To no one there."

- Neil Diamond

 

[Texdance]

Near and dear to my heart. For a flat earth, if you're near the edges, balls would "drop" sideways-ish. As with the waterfalls .

And of course, with a flat earth, we'll throw out the earth gravitational constant since it wouldn't be constant on a flat earth model.

Freddie <~~~but I'm ignorant of such things

A dozen years ago we visited a Flat Earth Society combination ghost town and preserved village, somewhere along the Gulf Coast, can't remember and now can't find it on google. It was a fascinating little tourist diversion.

Inside the village meeting hall was a massive wooden curved beam and straightedge device, very well made, possibly by a boat builder. The device and some other info purported to prove the earth's flatness.

Most interesting, however, were the collection of small buildings ranging from shops to storage to dorms - apparently this community was self-supporting by the sale of goods made collectively. In that sense it was an experiment in social engineering also.

Sorta like azb, where even engineers ignore the viscous fluid requirement under the dictionary definition of 'terminal velocity' to try to make sense of a post.

I wonder if the OP could restate his query in light of the many replies, and let us know what use he intends to make of the information. Maybe he wants to build a ramp to experiment with break shot speed and location, where his ramp gives each shot a somewhat repeatable nature depending on the ramp height, spin applied at start, and positioning of the exit. I think 35' tall ramp to achieve a 30 mph break might be discouraging, though.

 

[Mr. Bond]

Knowledge is it's own reward.
What you do with it is up to you.

 

[jay helfert]

Now can we do a comparison of the terminal velocity of a Gold Crown table compared to a Diamond?

I have personally witnessed the aftermath of a Valley bar table being dropped from 30' high during the set-up stages for the U.S. Bar Table Championships in the late 90's at the Flamingo Hilton in Reno. We were using a crane to lift the tables one at a time into the third floor window of an upstairs ballroom when a table slipped from the restraining straps and fell to the ground. Fortunately the area underneath had been roped off to pedestrians, otherwise someone might have ended up in the morgue! The table crashed with a sound rivaling a hand grenade and sent debris flying as far as 100 yards away. We all had to take a long break after that to collect ourselves and thank our lucky stars that no one was close enough to get hit by the shrapnel.

 

[pt109]

Now can we do a comparison of the terminal velocity of a Gold Crown table compared to a Diamond?

I have personally witnessed the aftermath of a Valley bar table being dropped from 30' high during the set-up stages for the U.S. Bar Table Championships in the late 90's at the Flamingo Hilton in Reno. We were using a crane to lift the tables one at a time into the third floor window of an upstairs ballroom when a table slipped from the restraining straps and fell to the ground. Fortunately the area underneath had been roped off to pedestrians, otherwise someone might have ended up in the morgue! The table crashed with a sound rivaling a hand grenade and sent debris flying as far as 100 yards away. We all had to take a long break after that to collect ourselves and thank our lucky stars that no one was close enough to get hit by the shrapnel.

I can just see the head lines....
CRANE BREAKS, DESTROYS TABLE