New size paintballs?

[Chicago]

Hah, I actually thought 'plastic' deformation was just something I had not heard of before - I was all ready with a defense of how just because I didn't know the definition of a particular word didn't mean I didn't understand the concept. But glad to see you were just making words up.

I meant there was no contention between Buddha, myself, and others with regards to deformation and spin. With regards to deformation, there is contention - you and Buddha think paintballs deform in the barrel, and others do not.

And I don't know how much the 'eyewitness account' of the guy who didn't remember that it was elastic deformation instead of plastic deformation is worth....


I'm still going with no deformation though. An additional Tom Kaye experiment was putting a thin powder coating the interior of the barrel, then firing a paintball down it, and noting that the powder was only distrubed in 2 lines along the barrel where the paintball actually touched the barrel interior - which would also indicate no deformation. (Although, I'm basing that on 2nd hand accounts as I have not seen the results of that experiment personally.)

 

[Lucky_Tech]

some cool info and pics by the man himself.

http://www.automags.org/forums/showthread.php?t=34429

 

[Buddha 3]

Hah, I actually thought 'plastic' deformation was just something I had not heard of before - I was all ready with a defense of how just because I didn't know the definition of a particular word didn't mean I didn't understand the concept. But glad to see you were just making words up.

I meant there was no contention between Buddha, myself, and others with regards to deformation and spin. With regards to deformation, there is contention - you and Buddha think paintballs deform in the barrel, and others do not.

And I don't know how much the 'eyewitness account' of the guy who didn't remember that it was elastic deformation instead of plastic deformation is worth....


I'm still going with no deformation though. An additional Tom Kaye experiment was putting a thin powder coating the interior of the barrel, then firing a paintball down it, and noting that the powder was only distrubed in 2 lines along the barrel where the paintball actually touched the barrel interior - which would also indicate no deformation. (Although, I'm basing that on 2nd hand accounts as I have not seen the results of that experiment personally.)

Those two lines only prove one thing: A paintball isn't round.

If you wanna go with no deformation, that's fine with me. Just know that you have moved into the realm of the people that claim Earth is flat. I don't THINK a paintball deforms, I KNOW a paintball deforms. Simply because everything deformes when pressure/force is applied. Musket balls, howitzer shells, T shirts fired by those people in football stadiums, the wheels on your car when you hit the gas. In fact, the very keys on your keyboard deform when you hit them while typing stuff. If they didn't, you would'nt be able to type. It is in fact this deformation that forces the keys down, they want to regain their original form and they do within an instant. This is the elastic deformation.

Now I haven't seen the pictures you have seen, nor have I seen the ones Pete mentions, so I won't say that I know that a paintball deforms to a great extend. But I know they do deform to some extent. Even when you replace them with stainless steel bearings, those would deform too. If they didn't, they wouldn't move.

And you know this too, so why I'm typing this is beyond me.

 

[Robbo]

Hah, I actually thought 'plastic' deformation was just something I had not heard of before - I was all ready with a defense of how just because I didn't know the definition of a particular word didn't mean I didn't understand the concept. But glad to see you were just making words up.

I think you know me well enough to also know I wouldn't be putting something up on here in a rebuttal to your good self that would have my integrity/intelligence compromised ..... I'm not that silly....however, for some unknown reason I misused the word plastic but I'm sure you realised that it was a misuse and not a misunderstanding.
I mean, far be it from you to jump all over someone on that basis of a misuse, that would be far beneath someone of your intellectual stature surely Chris....isn't it?

I meant there was no contention between Buddha, myself, and others with regards to deformation and spin. With regards to deformation, there is contention - you and Buddha think paintballs deform in the barrel, and others do not.

I'm not really sure as to the rationale you use in determining the fact of deformation or no deformation ... somebody states they have seen proof of it in pictorial form and yet you still deny such a thing happens.
Theoretically, if you apply a force to a material, it either moves, or it deforms; the amount of deformation is all that is in question.

It's hard to imagine a steel ball deforming to the point of 'significant effect' because of its rigidity but when it comes to a paintball filled with gel, it's hardly surprising it deforms and only an idiot would wanna content against theoretical and practical evidence wouldn't they?

...but I know you are not an idiot, far from it.....but.....you do suffer from what we now know as brockdorffiitis .... whereby sufferers undergo feelings of abject arrogance and an inability to admit they are wrong in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
As of yet, there is no known cure for this condition ... we live in hope.

And I don't know how much the 'eyewitness account' of the guy who didn't remember that it was elastic deformation instead of plastic deformation is worth....

.... now that actually made me laugh ...

I'm still going with no deformation though. An additional Tom Kaye experiment was putting a thin powder coating the interior of the barrel, then firing a paintball down it, and noting that the powder was only disturbed in 2 lines along the barrel where the paintball actually touched the barrel interior - which would also indicate no deformation. (Although, I'm basing that on 2nd hand accounts as I have not seen the results of that experiment personally.)

I saw all the pics and do not remember any such pics and this seems to me more like a convenient 'raehl construct' as against an actual experiment conducted by Tom ......

 

[Baca Loco]

I've taken to calling Chris 'raehl faction' or just 'faction' over at VFTD for his penchant for prolific posting (almost invariably of a contradictory nature) and phrasing his assertions as if he were representing some vast, if unnamed, host of like-minded contrarians.

And just to be clear, this has absolutely nothing to do with the thread topic. Then again I've no idea why faction wishes to contend on the ballistics front when he's already conceded a willingness to wait and see with regards the small ball. It is one of those life mysteries easily solved with a tire iron.

 

[Chicago]

I think you know me well enough to also know I wouldn't be putting something up on here in a rebuttal to your good self that would have my integrity/intelligence compromised ..... I'm not that silly....however, for some unknown reason I misused the word plastic but I'm sure you realised that it was a misuse and not a misunderstanding.
I mean, far be it from you to jump all over someone on that basis of a misuse, that would be far beneath someone of your intellectual stature surely Chris....isn't it?

Hell no!

I'm not really sure as to the rationale you use in determining the fact of deformation or no deformation ... somebody states they have seen proof of it in pictorial form and yet you still deny such a thing happens.

Right, because from what I remember, *I* have seen proof that it doesn't happen (at least not enough to be readily observable in video/photos, nor the powder barrel test.) And given the choice between my recollection and your recollection, I'm going to go with my recollection.

Theoretically, if you apply a force to a material, it either moves, or it deforms; the amount of deformation is all that is in question.

And paintballs do a LOT of moving, as there is very little resisting movement. Lack of anything resisting movement also makes it very hard to get deformation - pressure is applied evenly to the entire hemisphere of the paintball, so what causes a particular part of it to change shape?

It's hard to imagine a steel ball deforming to the point of 'significant effect' because of its rigidity but when it comes to a paintball filled with gel, it's hardly surprising it deforms and only an idiot would wanna content against theoretical and practical evidence wouldn't they?

Indeed. But I'm not contesting against either. The only thing we're contesting against is your recollection. Also, apparently Piper observed the same events and recalls differently.

...but I know you are not an idiot, far from it.....but.....you do suffer from what we now know as brockdorffiitis .... whereby sufferers undergo feelings of abject arrogance and an inability to admit they are wrong in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

I don't like being wrong, so I will very quickly switch my opinion to be right should there be evidence that my original opinion was mistaken. But so far, no such evidence has been provided.

 

[Robbo]

Paul, I've seen this phenomenon before, well a partial example anyway..and it's in the mirror; the only difference being, although I don't like being wrong, I have a limit as to the lengths I will go to that generally correspond to a reluctance to look silly in front of my peer group.

At that point, the white flag goes up and I take it on the chin but Chris seems to assume the skin of a pachyderm when it comes to not minding how he appears.
I can honestly say, I would feel ashamed if I took such a position as Chris's whereby somebody says '2+2= 4 and this is why' and I then declare, 'well I still think it's 5'.

It's all well and good adopting that position on forums such as PBnatoin where the average IQ doesn't venture much past their shoe size and those guys wouldn't know who's right and who's wrong but here on P8ntballer.com, there are some extremely smart and experienced guys who can see through Chris's reluctance to admit he's wrong.
In this case, his peer group tend to lose any respect he may have attained and default to a sneering dismissal.

There is no doubt in my mind, Chris is very smart indeed but he has this brockdorffian flaw that continually undermines his integrity..shame really but hey, his choice I suppose.

 

[Robbo]

Right, because from what I remember, *I* have seen proof that it doesn't happen (at least not enough to be readily observable in video/photos, nor the powder barrel test.) And given the choice between my recollection and your recollection, I'm going to go with my recollection.

..there are two reasons why you may not have recollected any evidence of deformation, there were no vids or....there is no way you could have seen it considering the medium of a video in that it moving in real time.
I saw fast speed photographs which by their very nature will pick up on things you couldn't see...... this is exactly WHY Tom used very fast pics .......

And paintballs do a LOT of moving, as there is very little resisting movement. Lack of anything resisting movement also makes it very hard to get deformation - pressure is applied evenly to the entire hemisphere of the paintball, so what causes a particular part of it to change shape?

...ever heard of inertia? when you have read up on it, come back on here and tell me it won't affect pressure effects on the back of that ball ....if you do that, I'll be laughing all the way back to my A level physics books.

Indeed. But I'm not contesting against either. The only thing we're contesting against is your recollection. Also, apparently Piper observed the same events and recalls differently.

I got no clue how you think Pipes saw anything different from me from what he posted and I hardly think that constitutes any less confidence in what I posted.

I don't like being wrong, so I will very quickly switch my opinion to be right should there be evidence that my original opinion was mistaken. But so far, no such evidence has been provided.

No such evidence as far as you are concerned, I agree ... but ya see, that's the very problem we are talking about Chris, most people who have any intellectual integrity would have at least questioned their own opinion after what I have seen and what has been posted.

 

[Chicago]

Hey look, I found the pictures: (Thanks Lucky)

http://www.automags.org/~tomagd/1 spindata/102.TIF

Where is that "deformation" again?

 

[Buddha 3]

Sorry Chris, but I see no picture that argues against deformation. I only see very tiny pics. So how you can base anything on those pictures as far as deforming when first fired is beyond me...

Just to be clear, I'm talking about the moment the paintball is fired, when force is first applied to its ass, not when it's well on its way, but that split second when it first starts speeding up. Do you honestly think that no deformation at all takes place? Again, you are arguing against the laws of physics. EVERYTHING deforms when force is applied, denying that is in the same range as denying gravity exists. It's elemental physics. The problem is that it's not always easy to see or at all visible to the naked eye or to a camera's lense unless magnified beyond all reason.

And you even at one point dared say I knew nothing about physics...