Rising fastball

[jxt127]

At 95 mph a baseball will drop 3.5 feet in the 60 feet from mound to plate.

[edited to add] due to gravity.

[NIump50]

Originally Posted by jxt127

At 95 mph a baseball will drop 3.5 feet in the 60 feet from mound to plate.

Please tell me you're joking.

[jxt127]

Originally Posted by NIump50

Please tell me you're joking.

I work for the government I never make jokes.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by jxt127

At 95 mph a baseball will drop 3.5 feet in the 60 feet from mound to plate.

[edited to add] due to gravity.

What? That's almost as nuts as SA's riser! If a 95 mph pitch dropped that far, every pitch would be in the dirt and not the strike zone!

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

What? That's almost as nuts as SA's riser! If a 95 mph pitch dropped that far, every pitch would be in the dirt and not the strike zone!

I haven't done the math, but I think the answer is approximately correct.

Most pitchers actually release the ball on a slight upward trajectory.

[fmsc]

I have intended to stay out of this mess and I will probably regret this but I will attempt to offer the views of an engineer who has been designing for consideration of earth's gravity for 30 years. Due to gravitational forces only; an object with an intial horizontal velocity of 95 mph released on a horizontal line (that is with intial vertical velocity of 0 mph) will drop 2.99 feet in 60 feet of horizontal travel. The path followed is a parabolic arc with its apex at the release point. The calculation is a basic high school physics problem. 95 mph is equivalent to 139.3 ft. per sec.The time duration of travel assuming no loss of horizontal velocity (true only in a vacuum but close enough) is 60 ft. divided by 139.3 ft/sec. or .431 sec. Average gravitational acceleration on earth's surface is approximately 32.2 ft. per sec. per sec. The drop is caculated as 1/2 times acceleration (32.2 ft/(sec squared)) times the time duration squared (.431 x .431). or 2.99 ft.
jxt's statement of 3.5 ft. would presume an initial downward velocity of approx 1.2 ft. per sec. That would mean an initial trajectory of 1.1 degrees below horizontal. Therefore a ball released at 6 ft. above the elevation of the plate at 95 mph at such an angle would arrive at the plate 2.5 ft. above the plate. I am 6 ft. tall and the hollow beneath my knee is 19 inches from the bottom of my shoes meaning that pitch would be a thigh high strike. If the ball had followed it's initial tajectory of 1.1 degrees it would have dropped 1.15 ft. ( tan 1.1 times 60 ft.). Therefore if it arrives at the plate any where between a drop of 1.15 ft. and 3.5 ft. it has NOT RISEN but dropped less than gravity alone would account for. If it arrives with less than 1.15 ft. of drop then areodynamic forces have exceeded or overcome gravitational forces.
Therefore,I can accept the statements that it is not humanly possible to create enough rotation to overcome gravity and that the rising fastball is due to perception because the drop is less than expected for an object traveling 60 feet in less than 1/2 second.

[UmpJM]

fmsc,

I am deeply disappointed in you.

I mean, if you're going to go around throwing a bunch of facts and science into the mix, I don't even see where it makes any sense to engage in this fascinating conversation. (Oh wait - it doesn't - I already knew that.)

Besides, it sounds like you're one of those "science mumbo-jumbo" non-believers who thinks the Earth is a sphere - just because of some "doctored up" photos alledgedly taken from, get this, "outer space". Puhleeeze! Anyone with two eyes can simply step outside and see for themselves that it is perfectly flat.

JM

[jxt127]

Gotta be something about engineers.

As my dad put it

Mechanical engineers build weapons.

Civil engineers build targets.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by jxt127

Gotta be something about engineers.

As my dad put it

Mechanical engineers build weapons.

Civil engineers build targets.

And, electrical engineers just raise a lot of static!


Tim.

[greymule]

In a somewhat related area, I have seen softballs crushed off criminally hot bats do seemingly impossible mid-air tricks, enough so that everyone on the field notices. I've seen line drives (1) corkscrew out to left field, (2) whiz over an infielder's head and drop precipitously to hit in front of the outfield grass, (3) travel just over a leaping F6's outstretched glove and then go over a 10-foot fence 300 feet away, (4) and appear to be headed for center field but shift sharply toward right-center.

I figured maybe the high-tech bats were compressing the balls so much that as they traveled so fast through the air changing shape, they moved around unpredictably. My friend at the university, however, says that some kind of super spin imparted by the bat is the likely cause. (That makes sense. The batter tries the usual upward swing to hit a home run but tops the ball slightly.) The strange effects clearly could not be obtained with a thrown ball, but of course the balls are traveling off the bat much faster than anyone could possibly throw them. For example, a 300-foot throw with a softball would be remarkable (and possible only at a high arc), yet batted balls that travel 350 feet or more are common at higher levels. The bat can probably impart more spin than a human could, too.

[LMan]

so, who do we pay to get THIS thread locked??

[Carbide Keyman]

Originally Posted by LMan

so, who do we pay to get THIS thread locked??

I'm in. Just tell me how much you need.




Doug

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by LMan

so, who do we pay to get THIS thread locked??

Well damn it, I guess I'll have to tell someone that I'm gonna kick their a$$!