Is pool actually just mathematics?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- Get a signed first edition of Love Triangle from Maths Gear: mathsgear.co.u...
All UK options: www.penguin.co...
All USA options: bit.ly/3wCTesR
Huge thanks to Rollie and Jenn. Check out their videos on the diamond system.
• The Easiest 2-Rail Kic...
• 2-Rail Kicks Using Par...
Rollie's Climate Town videos: / @climatetown
Rollie is an average pool player: • Your Average Pool Player
Jenn's pool videos: / jenn9mmbarretta
We filmed at Jenn's fantastic venue: Skyline Billiards and Bar. You should go there! www.skylinebil...
And that Grant guy makes some pretty good math videos: / @3blue1brown
Huge thanks to my Patreon supporters. Whenever I bounce off them they give me plenty of spin. / standupmaths
CORRECTIONS
- None yet, let me know if you spot anything!
Filming by Alex Genn-Bash
Editing by Gus Melton
Written and performed by Matt Parker
Produced by Nicole Jacobus
Music by Howard Carter
Design by Simon Wright and Adam Robinson
Playing darts in the background out of focus: Bec Hill
MATT PARKER: Stand-up Mathematician
Website: standupmaths.com/
US book: www.penguinran...
UK book: mathsgear.co.u...
the scene of a pair of mathematicians breaking out the notes and measuring tape in the middle of a pool game is something straight out of a comedic skit
well watching modern player is as boring as this,when they turn around the table 4 times each shot and the lay the tip of their cue too many times on the cloth just to aim their shot that they will miss 75% of the time.Idiotics mathematics and tricks about spot on walls is what made this sport a snoozefest during the 90s.
Too much pseudo-mathematicians equipped with ridiculous 1000$ cues but not many natural physicist who can do all the same stuff even better with regular house cues.
@@mikescorpio13We get it. You don't like smart people who make you feel small
@@JC_923 hahaha i love smart people like me,i hate pretenders
well this is "stand-up maths"
These guys are mathematicians, yes. But they make a lot of videos like this BECAUSE it's funny! If you don't have the intellect to understand that, please don't vote.....
"There's more air in the room than I'd assumed" that actually broke me
2 mathematicians enter a bar with a measuring tape...
"Let's use inches!" Says one of them...
@@dj_laundry_list The other stabbed him with a bar stool
I can't believe they measured in inches then scaled in millimeters
@@russellbeaubien7430 And decimal inches while we're at it.
This is more fun than i thought
The second they said
"about --- inches"
They were doomed
"There's more air in the room than I assumed." 😆🤣😆
the pre-game banter was A-tier!
Matt's understated but incredible comedy chops really show in this one.
Best line ever
In more ways than one lol
I am 100% going to use this joke mid conversation
12:04 is incorrect. Running side is the opposite. It opens the angle, and therefore will arrive at the same point on the third rail, but coming from a different line of the second rail. Jennifer explained it correct at 13:17
Yep. This was the comment I was looking for.
Thank you! just came down here to say this!
I don't play pool, but intuitively I thought his animation seemed wrong.
"The math doesn't make a difference if you don't know how to hit the cue ball."
Genius.
Facile.
He said at one point 80% skill 20% math. That's probably pretty accurate. Math is there but it's a shadow in comparison to the physics.
Yeah, but it's a stochastic process, so you can still use statistics...
As a maths guy who likes to play billard from time to time, that was my first thought.
You can have the perfect idea, but playinga perfectly straight shot is hard af, and the slightest spin will make any plans about bouncing off the walls useless :D
@@asdads3948 absolutely. In ideal conditions with no air, drag, friction or spin, simple geometry might work but in reality, the math involved is very complex.
I love this, Jenn has such deep knowledge of the game, it's very interesting to hear these things explained by a pro
Alternative title - "Mathematicians discover how engineers feel when handed drawing plans from architects
My brother's entire career in beam steering systems was converting physicists' abstract theoretical designs through the black art of making it actually work.😊
This required a kind of intuitive, empathic understanding of real-world electrons, photons, and materials. The pool table is probably a pretty good analogy.
Counter - "Engineers discover how Builders laugh when handed plans from an Architect"
@FatGringo Boy, is that the truth. My dad was a builder. Outside of a few, he had little respect for architects. At that time, architects were not required to take any structural engineering classes. And most didn't. A few schools, such as Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo California, did require structural engineering, and graduation requirements included actually building a small building.
One example - a home my dad was building had a cantilever deck. But the architect forgot that a cantilever requires so.ething to hold down the other end. Well on the way to building the house, they had to stop construction, wait for new plans, tear out significant work, and rebuild.
Engineers realize the nightmare of architects 😂
@@GaryBickfordcantilever
"100.4 inches"
Wow, you upset both metric AND imperial users in one phrase. That's next level!
Yeah, was that really a tape measure with markings in tenths of an inch? Or was Grant approximating to 100⅜" in his head?
I was wondering why Matt didn't ask whether it is 100 4/8 or actually 100.4, instead of talking about metric vs imperial.
It's 96 inches = 8 feet anyway. But they measured the bed of the table, not the playing area.
@@andrasszabo1570 That's not the point of this comment. Rulers with inches always show markings with increments of 1/8th or 1/16th inches. 100.4 is not a standard way of measuring something in inches.
ohh wow, didnt know you guys use fractions instead of decimal places. Isnt it uncomfortable? not making fun, just really interested. an inch is "not as accurate" as centimetres (because inch>cm) and then instead of decimal places you opt for fractions? isnt this far more complicated and also somewhat inaccurate? or do you simply try to use full inches and leave out fractions?
"Is there friction?", "I assume not" LMAO🤣
I think you need a bit more janky Python code for this one.
By the time the Python code has given him the position and angle, the place is closing up 💀
@@vlc-cosplayer Do it in Julia, you'll get the result sooner.
Oooo I got you covered! Wrote an incredibly mediocre billiards physics program in college. It's a bit more accurate than their math, but not by much lol.
@@DaTimmeh i'd love to take a look
what about some terrible, terrible python code?
I loved your last two books and it is a real treat to see you and Grant together. I would 100% watch a show of you both trying to model or solve real world problems, maybe with a physicist in tow to be confused.
That would be amazing 😂
It was simply a fantastic video. Significantly better than ever before. When I’ve been in my studies, the very best and most inspiring sessions have been when we’ve had guidance, and several of us have stood by a board discussing and collaborating to solve questions or explore a topic. Where there has still been an adult to steer the conversation or provide help. Somehow, you capture exactly that feeling in your video - a sense of being in that room. Congratulations. Really impressive.
Pool Players: “They’ll never get it because they’re measuring based on the walls and not the diamonds.”
Mathematicians: “Jokes on you, we’re pretending that we’re playing in a hall of mirrors!”
Jokes on you, we just constructed a ghost universe
As one of those novel individuals that's good at both pool and math, I've long known the diamonds just made no sense at all, and to me, are nearly useless. I do use them as I can, but only as a vague guide or reference to compare to other points of reference, they don't help in determining how to actually shoot the shot. Even as stated in the video, the add-to-80 rule is only a rough guide, so it really does just all come down to practice and feel.
@@kindlinthe real question now is: can we come up with a better system for guiding marks than those diamonds?
@@engywuck85 I think the better question is: do we need to? Snooker tables don't have diamonds. If anything, we should be making things harder for the players.
Jokes on the mathematicians in this case, because they still can't play well at all and no amount of inventing theoretical universes and nonsense will change that. Pool is pure feel and tactile skill.
Can't get enough of Rollie on this channel. Keep the partnership up, two of the best people on youtube!
16:22 I can feel a ‘pool table to find pi’ coming on
"The table is 100 inches long, so when you divide into 80 segments, each segment is 1 inch."
New unit unlocked: the Parker Inch.
Time stamp or it didn't happen
@16:18, but he said "so that's the number of inches" a bit vaguely about it 100 is the number of inches (which it is) or if the 80 system is the number of inches.
And then Grant says 'hmm' but his expression changes 2 seconds later as he realizes the mistake. 🤣
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
1 parker inch=1.25 inches
I think the "diamonds" already respect the cushions. So the first and last diamonds have an offset. You can see at 22:07 that the imaginary last diamond of the bottom edge would be exactly on the cushion line of the right edge.
3:18 i love how Grant expected that exact reaction from Matt to the use of inches that he had is face ready for the comeback
and with how he just nods when the reaction actually comes, you can basically hear him thinking "mmh yes all according to plan"
My guy preloaded his face 😂
Grant's clearly watched Matt's video on imperial units.
"You're such an imperialist", said the man using imperial units.
@@HanabiraKage He's a mathematician. He knows how impractical imperial units are.
If you want a mathematician/scientist/engineer who also knows how to correctly apply math to pool, you get Dr. Dave (a guy who Rollie has already made a great video with, btw).
"there's more air in the room then I assumed" Matt Parker, 2024
than*
possibly *error, not air, too.
nope it's "air"
Sorry guys, not my native language
@@nikitafilippetti7504 may or may not be my native language either, so …
As an excellent mathematician and pretty good pool player, my money is on the pool players. Every time.
As a mathematician, I love the collaboration between Matt and Grant.
As a pool player, I love having the pool players here to teach them a lesson.
I it's more interesting that they were both engaging with each other. Jenn teaching them about the tricks they use but still open and curious about how Matt and Grant were thinking and trying it their way
2:09 Rollie sounds harsh here, but I almost immediately thought of the Parker Square. I already love this episode.
What a great way to show the difference between theory and application. Jenn was super patient and cool about everything, she's a great communicator. Rollie was there too!
Clearly the model wasn't accurate enough.
If your model is bad, even a perfect calculation won't get you to the goal.
A good model delivering only an approximate solution is often more desirable because you at least get what you calculated
Glorious. "Jenn was cool and good at teaching. Also, there was Rollie."
Rollie is there for the lols, drinking his coffee in a bar
the guy was so annoying
@@emperortgp2424 He made one decent joke ("the table is way larger than 10cm"). For the rest of the video he was just kind of there.
Who would win? Mathematicians, Stuff Made Here, or actual pool players?
stuff made here will use a cannon instead of a cue...
@12:00 you completely misunderstood what Jenn was telling you. In the animation the spin you gave the ball is reverse spin, it's working against the natural way the ball wants to spin off the rail. Jenn tells you to give running spin (in this case left spin). Recall that in your first attempt the ball went to the right of the 8 ball (from the POV of the balls movement). This is because you hit too far to the left on the second rail. Using reverse spin makes the cue ball rebound at a greater angle than incident which makes it move even further left before it hits the rail, missing by an even larger margin. Instead, you should have used running/left spin so that it rebounds at a lesser angle, rebounding to the second rail further to the right, and putting you more on track to the 8 ball.
Yeah I also noticed the wrong spin haha
Exactly. It was almost the opposite.
A mathematician without physics skills it seems. Awful representation of a science video.
Immediately searched for this comment after seeing the diagram and vigorously shaking my head at the incorrect animation.
The running side causes the cue ball to open up off the first cushion. It will hit a closer spot on the second cushion but since it has running side it will open again and head towards the intended target.
@@spaskis1976 calm down
This is a video from three creators I already watch, about two topics I enjoy. Why didn’t youtube recommend this to me? This is fantastic.
6:30
This is basically the way they made the reflective floors in Tony Hawk's OG shopping centre level
"My brain REFUSES to look at the inches"
My brain refuses to accept the existence of- uhh... What were we talking about?
Weeping Angels are in the chat.
Don't tell anyone 🤫
...but modern US inches are defined using the metric system.
There is one thing that both Brits and Americans agree on measuring in inches
@@BartdeBoisblanc More like the Silenc- what was I talking about?
Hi Matt, the animation at 12:08 is wrong. Jen uses running spin, which in this case is left spin - the left spin widens the angle after hitting the first rail, making the ball hit the second rail higher. This compensates for the induced spin, and the cue ball will reach the ideal target point.
Clockwise seen from the top, I presumed. Makes sense.
I was thinking that the ball should ideally contact the cushion rotating as it would if it was "rolling" along it, i.e. no slip condition with the cushion. Then it need not transfer angular momentum into momentum or v.v.
Yeah, the phone footage at 22:03 shows Jenn applying clockwise spin, as opposed to the anti-clockwise spin in the animation.
"there's more air in the room than I assumed" already incredible
I appreciate this kind of video to show the differences there really are between math and pool, and very little math is needed to play pool well.
Though there are mistakes and ambiguities in the explanation from both sides, it also shows how complicated things are
Annimation at 12:08 is incorrect. The cue should be applying left (running) spin on the ball so that the bounce off of the first cushion has a smaller angle of reflection, which then means the impact on the second cushion is closer to the left side of the screen and then the ball, again, has a smaller angle of reflection than incidence and goes towards the pocket. (backed up by viewing the ball at 22:20 and Jenns explantion of "opening the angle" i.e opening the angle between the incident and reflected line)
Huh. This is very interesting because I think it should work both ways. I was confused at 22:20 because I expected what the animation shows, but your explanation makes sense.
On the other hand, if you spin the ball the other way (like in the animation) the ball should stop spinning when it bounces for the first time and wouldn't open the angle on the second bounce, which I think should also work.
@@moonshine7753 if you were to apply the displayed spin, you would actually need to aim further down the screen as it would steepen the angle of reflection, however the spin of the ball would still be reversed after the impact due to friction on the cushion meaning the angle would still open up on the second bounce. But yes, still playable
It will only work with left hand spin, right hand spin will affect the angle of the first bounce making it come longer down the table for the second bounce and it will likely still have spin from the first bounce, the original comment is correct and the only way to make the correction apart from aiming differently.
yes, well said.
Yeh it was wrong. He showed the animation and Jen explained it, the two didn't match up 😅
The first bounce would have come off at a different angle, which was the compensation, not the spin/lack of spin on the second bounce.
Great way to look at the angles. Good video
As much as I love Rollie, he really didn't need to be here for this video haha, he just stands in the back silently the whole video
He is very much playing the "mutual friend" role here, being the link that connects the chain from Matt to Jen
Did you miss the scale burn?
@@OhJustSomeRandomGuy Have to admit the scale burn was pretty good. Otherwise he was just kind of there.
And whenever he did say something it was pointless and not funny.
I learned this in high school geometry by watching an old 1959 Disney short, "Donald Duck in Mathmagic Land" (available to watch on UA-cam in full, as I post this). In one segment, they lay out the underlying mathematics behind the pool diamonds, and I've always loved how cleanly it was demonstrated.
8:50 Alex Turner absolutely thrilled
When I was a kid, I used to watch this Disney VHS all the time called “Donald in Mathemagic land” (or something very similar), and there was a whole segment about using math for making shots in pool.
Hi Matt as a graduate student who loves math and pool it's so cool to see this video!!! One thing I want to point out is that at 12:07, the diagram shows you are putting right spin, however in reality people put left spin (running spin) to overcome the angle-widening effect on the second rail.
Matt! You got the explanation at 12:05 wrong! They don't add 'check side' (as you've animated - side spin to narrow the angle of reflection) to counteract the imparted spin. They add 'running side' (the opposite), so the angle off the first cushion is widened, causing an earlier second-cushion bounce (i.e., further to the left as we look at your diagram) such that, during this second bounce, the angle of reflection widening due to the running side actually brings the cue ball back on to a line that leads to the target!
Anyone remember the show No Ordinary Family? The son's superpower was math and he did a pool game scene and nailed every shot.
23:38 - Matt invents raytracing.
That "spot on the wall" is also the math behind navigation using leads. If you want to follow a straight line, pick a near and far point with the angle you want between them, and position yourself until they line up.
“Donald in Mathmagic Land” is when I first learned about math and billiards.
Yes! I loved watching it in school!
Me too, but I never understood what was the "key position". Sadly, after this video I still don't understand that concept too clearly (I have a PhD in mathematics now)
Thank you for mentioning this memory from Elementary School… maybe during a rainy-day recess in the mid-1970s?
As a Math teacher, I still show this at least once a year 😁
Darn, I was going to mention that too.
ua-cam.com/video/yuntK56wL7A/v-deo.html
Actually, the friction at the first rail causes the first angle to be steep (closer to 90 deg.) AND the spin causes the second angle to be shallow.
I remember watching Rollie's pool videos years ago, then finding his climate town channel and other colab with Matt.
Very sweet to see him playing pool again
9:01 from my stand point you'd have to pretend the borders of the "mirror tables" have a slight refractive index to account for the friction of the cushions on the real table, we're not playing with spherical chickens anymore. 😂
As much as I love Mathematics and Physics, No "system" can replace "feel" and "experience". These systems work only at a certain speed with a certain amount of sidespin. Hit any harder or softer and the path changes (due to cushion compression). To add the to complexity, if the table and cushion cloth is new, you will encounter the sliding cushions effect where angle of incidence is no more equal to angle of reflection.
The mirror 'table' is also used as shorthand when playing squash - to play into an adjacent court thereby using a couple of the court's walls. It can be quicker to imagine 'mirror' courts when playing off a couple of the walls, than try to work out the ball's bounces in the actual and single and real court.
Fun vid.
OK WHEN DID GRANT GET MUSCLES 3blue1built
This comment actually made me laugh out loud! also his arm veins!?!?
3buff1built
😂
dude looks great!
Now do pool players vs mathematicians on a maths test
23:30 Oh. I just realized that if you have to bounce off two walls, it's basically a retro-reflector (in 2d) and so that singular point should work for anywhere along that side of the table...
In the vacuum maybe, in a pool table, where balls roll and there are frictions, not even close. For example, the shot angle that they are showing, would be completely different if the cue ball was on the same line, but closer to the rail. If you shoot from a short distance from the rail, the cue ball has not started rolling yet, and it's still flying (not touching the table), so the reaction with the rail is completely different. Math or geometry don't explain that, physics kind of does, years of practice absolutely do.
It's always amazing to see a pro at work.
First thought: Can professional pool players do math better by playing pool than math professionals? 😂
We need a chess-boxing like event with maths and pool to really figure it out.
I'm sure some high level pool players possess better geometric and trigonometric intuitions in certain situations. Heck, maybe some calculus intuition too. Having such an inbuilt model of this kind of game would be interesting. Like chess players and certain kinds of pattern recognition.
@@kruksog I think they mostly just hit a million balls and get a sense for it...
I don't think anyone thinks pool is just geometry (any more than basketball), but some people believe it's just geometry and execution (ie hitting the ball straight in the computed direction). And it kind of is, but the way pool players compute the direction is different than you would expect, and the strength and spin matter a lot on every shot that hits two banks. Not everyone knows that.
@@DomenG33KThat's how the overwhelming majority of calculations are done... Train those handy neural networks to produce good enough approximate solutions ;)
Rollie, Grant, and Matt in one video is the summer solstice present I didn't know I needed.
Proper force and proper hit on the face of the ball is also needed
I liked the visual comparison between the add-to-80 method and the radial fan at the end. I wonder if the amount of english that a pro pool player would intuitively know to use would reduce the error between the add-to-80 lines and the purely mathematical ones.
The angle you come into the cushion at will change how much spin the cushion imparts, which changes what the correction from the mathematical approximation needs to be.
The special effects guys outdid themselves on this one making Matt look like he was really in the US, and the dot on the wall at least 4 ft away trick worked perfectly to calculate sight lines for impressively convincing acting.
(if you don't know this is a joke then go watch the Climate Town collab)
Using Let's Play: Bar Billiards as my other data point, see you in 10 years.
Wow I remember that video
extrapolation hasn't let me down so far.
Matt Parker: regular billiards player.
The lady is absolitely awesome at explaining and an amazing player too
There’s an old Disney cartoon, _Donald Duck in Mathmagic Land,_ that has a segment explaining how to use the diamonds on a pool table.
bingo!!
I knew someone was going to make this comment.
I saw it when I was a child and this video also brought it to my mind.
Is that the one where he met Plato and learnt how harmonic scale works?
@@Laurabeck329 Pythagoras, not Plato.
Really enjoyed this. I'm into ten pin bowling and there are very similar rule of thumbs derived from geometry which we use. Similarly, "feel" and sensing the playing environment is more important because it is impossible to account for every single variable.
If you were doing this on a snooker table you’d have to factor in the Higgins Boss particle
I don't get this, but I imagine it's an incredibly clever joke
@@apmcx Alex Higgins was a world champion snooker player back in the day
Now I want to name a boson the Boss Boson
@@snafu2350 Ah, I didn't even notice he spelt Higgs and Boson as Higgins and Boss, I think I literally just read the letters I expected to see and was confused about the joke without ever actually having noticed the joke.
@@apmcxIt's a play on the "Higgs boson" particle and Alex Higgins, the "boss" of snooker.
Hand-eye coordination is part of the equation. And the tolerances are in micrometers.
Now, I’m back to watching snooker.
I am fairly good at putting the cue ball where I want it to go, but not so good at calculating where that should be. I have a friend who is the opposite. We made a killer team the few times we played.
Now I'd love to see both teams solving differential equations. At the end of the day, pool is just maths!
Grant's voice and accent though.. Ugghh, my heart 😍
This is LITERALLY how I've always seen pool. But I never knew that humidity mattered, nor did I factor in Running English. I always assumed I simply miscalculated in my head on my mentally projected mirror table.
Back to the drawing board!
as a decent pool player, and a maths fan, this was a treat. i have a few systems that i use in pool, but it is mostly done on feel for me. i think somewhere in my head there is maths being done that are at the subconscious level, but i cant prove that
Inches?!?!
Great cover of this song Zoe, perfect singing, great acoustic playing and love the enthusiasm of the drummer
Whaaat
In a way, the problem you had was that you were assuming an inelastic collision, where the ball just immediately bounces off the surface.
But because the edge compresses a bit and the ball rolls while pressing it, the "elastic" nature of the edge makes the collision act as if the contact point is further back
That effect is small though, millimeter work (or 1/16ths of inches perhaps).
The bigger "problem" is that the contact with the cushion is long enough for friction to impose a no slip condition, whereby angular momentum and momentum are exchanged, resulting in a different angle of reflection.
even if you could calculate everything perfectly on paper, it's a whole new challenge to hit it correctly on the pool table.
I haven't played Pool in a long time, but back in my 20's I was quite good at it! I could run the table quite often.
This is why elliptical pool tables were invented.
I’ve been playing billiards for most of my life, and I think my enjoyment of it is the combination of physics, muscle memory, experience, experimentation, competition, social interaction, and yes, mathematics. 😊
1:23 Nice typo, mister mathmematician.
I mean, are they not math-meme-aticians?
Who said it is a typo?
🎶MathMem, MathMem, MathMem Mem Mem.
@@jonathanrichards593 "Ohhhh, it's a python"
The math guys are also not taking into account the compression of the rails, which changes the rebound angle as well, and is dependent on speed of the cue ball. Also, they scored every pocketed 8-ball as a win, when in reality different attempts struck different sides of the 8-ball. So the variance of cue ball path between "wins" was quite different.
"You're such an imperialist"
said the one using the IMPERIAL system 😂
Inches are the Imperial system. The Americans carried it over from their British background. Long afterwards, the metric system was devised. Most countries adopted it, but the USA still uses the old Imperial system for most measurements. As an aside, the metric system is the informal name for the International System of Units, also named SI units (from its French origins).
Yes. That's why 3B1B calling Matt an imperialist for mocking inches was so funny to me.
I learned a lot from this video. I played a lot online 8 Ball, but I don't know about diamonds before.
Thank you.😊
I really love the Matt and Grant duo! Please more collab videos in the future.
When I saw climate town labeled as a professional pool player I couldn't resist
Ahh, mathematically simple function approximations to save time calculating, neat.
Magicians knowledge, cushion spin compensation. "you dont want it to open on the second rail. " Beautiful. Does a wider pupil baseline help with pool, so can you use mirror glasses to improve accyracy. Great vide and impressive experts.
the calculations required to predict the ball's motion must surely be a solved problem, via some complex system of equations, lest computer simulated pool games wouldn't be possible.
They do, but there's three issues. One is that there is no exact analytic solution is known for the general equations of motion, so physics simulations use numerical methods instead, which introduces error. In addition, any real computer can only calculate to a finite degree of precision. Finally, physical systems are often extremely sensitive to their initial conditions, so getting one measurement even a tiny bit off can have an enormous "butterfly effect". These combined sources of error mean that if you set up a physical experiment and run an equivalent physics simulation, they'll only stay in sync for a few seconds at best before the accumulated error causes them to drift wildly apart. The upshot of this is that while it's possible to simulate physics well enough to get useful insight into how a system behaves, it's next to impossible to make predictions about how a specific, real system will evolve. This is especially true if you were making the calculations by hand, as you would have to toss out even more precision just to get an answer in a reasonable amount of time.
You would need to model the elastic deformation of the cushion, plus the friction forces associated with it. That sounds like a PhD's worth. If the effect of humidity needs to be accounted for even, a whole tenure. There sure will be approximations derived from empirical observations, but I would not call it "solved" then.
"Well approximated"?
@@landsgevaer not really PhD's worth. All I need is some coffee, my batchmates, a few months and motivation and I probably can come up with some model that *MIGHT* end up working. I hold a bachelors in Mechanical Engineering.
@@RealJackBolt Engineers don't solve. They approximate. 😋
I would bet that a fair amount of simulated pool games just treat the ball as a point so they don't have to even worry about spin.
More complex ones might take more into account, but they're almost certainly using approximations.
Nice to see Rollie Williams back in are screens been a while since whe haven't seen him.
13:54 Camera man just casually refusing to point the camera at the thing everyone’s pointing to and talking about, saying “oh look!”. Well done sir, it takes a true hero to do that bad a job
Also the defocussed shots once every few minutes. 😂
I had to pause a video and make my own comment about it because it was really annoying. You had one job, cameraman.
I'm here for Rollie Williams. I highly, highly recommend his "average pool player" series where he tried to recreate famous pool shots by himself. It's excellent.
Whats interesting is that your mirror method is a way that some pool players have used. Something I have heard/read somewhere is that when you imagine the mirror image of the table, you are supposed to line up the mirror table off the diamonds. So the table reflection should be based on the triangle location rather than the bed like you guys were doing. I would be interested to see you guys make that change and see how that influences the final results. Nonetheless, this was a fantastic and fun video!!
At 12:24 you got the direction of spin wrong. You animated "check" side not "running" side. Running would be in a direction that would open that initial angle. It's called running because it actually imparts more energy to the ball and carries it further.
3:19 "INCHES?!"
that's the only appropriate response Matt.
Imagine every lesson being playfully learned like this. This what science needs..
I learned a lot from this video, THANK YOU! When I was 18 years old I flew to visit my online buddy for his mom's birthday. They rented a cabin, and we'd been friends for like 4 years by this point on skype. So I flew out to the cabin and they had a pool table. My buddy's stepdad came down and challenged us to some 3 player version of billiards, numbers are just sectioned off to them or whatever. And he clears his balls, then our balls without missing a beat. Nails every single shot, my friend and I each had 1 go. it's amazing to think this is how he was playing, especially in that cramped basement.
The video explaining the "running English" compensation was backwards as it showed the cue ball going counterclockwise and it should be clockwise!
In the diagram at 24:00, I notice that the phantom tables are all lined up based on the positions of the *cushions*.
What happens if you instead use slightly larger tables that are the size of the region within the *diamonds* , and align them so that the positions of the *diamonds* match? How does that affect the convergence of the lines on that target pocket?
That changes the point where we would expect the diamond-lines to converge (if they were a perfect approximation), but not the fact that they are not really converging at all. Look at the mirror-mirror-pocket top-left and notice that with the slightly larger table it would be just a bit further outwards, with the yellow lines unchanged.
Also, assuming that the scale in that diagram is roughly correct, we can see that the error of different table sizes is not too big compared to the diamon-approximation itself (and small compared to the non-ideal bounce and spin anyways).
That humidity would make such a difference, that blows my mind!
Do Snooker next! Always been curious how well the colour ball values line up with how difficult they actually are to pot
11:46 - for a moment there I was genuinely expecting you to complement "angle of incidence" with "angle of outcidence"...
Since you didn't, I'm now officially disappointed.
Love mine for driving and removing deck screws for decks and fencing. Switched a few years ago when I got a DeWalt set with drill and impact drill. ymmv if not using Robertson deck screws, but I love it. Screws are usually reusable in my situation as well.