Proof that an autococker shoots further?

[halB]

Originally posted by strongboy2005

yes i know, it's because it said so in the bible. And it's with physics that I am trying to prove this guys point, not with some different type of logic.

hmmmmmmmm not quite actually. the bible doesnt really specify that the earth was at the center of the universe, however, what the church believed was that all the waste of the universe drained into the center of the universe, us. so making the earth the non center kinda elevated teh earths position, out of the cess pool. thats what pissed em off. dont ask me though, just ask discover magazine.

That is beside the fact. What this theory states is that the ball continues to accelerate after leaving the gun on an autococker but in an automag it decelerates immediately afterwards. Thus, giving the autococker an edge on distance. (simple logic really)

cant happen. once ANY porting is encountered or when the barrel ends the ball sloooooooooooooooooooows down. nothing can accelerate it, the air is gone and there is no more force. you cant accelerate it once its main source of power (the air) is gone. therefore, a ball leaving a barrel at 300 fps will continue to slooooooooooow down from there. i mean, if the ball continued to accelerate (which cant happen) then wouldnt the nppl require cocker owners to chrono with their marker held several feet back?

[spantol]

Originally posted by spantol
Once the ball leaves the barrel, for a fraction of a second, I become the queen of England.

See? Told you.

[Dayspring]

Originally posted by halB
I mean, if the ball continued to accelerate (which cant happen) then wouldnt the nppl require cocker owners to chrono with their marker held several feet back?

And there, gentlemen, is checkmate.

[Army]

This silly ignorance is on AO? How can that be? How many times must this be shown to be WRONG?

Once the force that accelerates the projectile no longer influences it, it will immediatly begin to DECELERATE. That force is the push of the gas against the ball. After 10" of movement down the barrel, the gas can no longer expand fast enough to fill the growing void behind the ball. Thus, acceleration has ended, and deceleration has begun.

All chronographing is done outside the barrel, away from ANY AND ALL acceleration value. NOTHING at this point will make the ball go faster. ALL air friction is the same no matter what speed the ball is going, it's expotential.

Final word, and believe it, when two alike objects (paintballs) are going the same speed and traveling at the same angle, they will go the same distance...period.

[Dayspring]

I tried Army... I REALLY did... He just never learns.

But, here's a site that may show that it MAY happen one day. Check it out.

Click here

Originally posted by Army
This silly ignorance is on AO? How can that be? How many times must this be shown to be WRONG?

Once the force that accelerates the projectile no longer influences it, it will immediatly begin to DECELERATE. That force is the push of the gas against the ball. After 10" of movement down the barrel, the gas can no longer expand fast enough to fill the growing void behind the ball. Thus, acceleration has ended, and deceleration has begun.

All chronographing is done outside the barrel, away from ANY AND ALL acceleration value. NOTHING at this point will make the ball go faster. ALL air friction is the same no matter what speed the ball is going, it's expotential.

Final word, and believe it, when two alike objects (paintballs) are going the same speed and traveling at the same angle, they will go the same distance...period.

[spantol]

*IF* acceleration continues after the ball leaves the autococker barrel, *THEN* the autococker would have an edge in distance. This does follow, though I'd say it follows deductively rather than strictly logically.

For that statement to have any relevance, though, you're going to have to show the former, rather than assume the latter (this is called affirming the consequent, and is a no-no). Proof by Repeated Assertion will get you nowhere, as will the oft-used Reductio ad Galileo.

Originally posted by strongboy2005

That is beside the fact. What this theory states is that the ball continues to accelerate after leaving the gun on an autococker but in an automag it decelerates immediately afterwards. Thus, giving the autococker an edge on distance. (simple logic really)

[pbzmag]

Did anyone read his note?

straight from the page:

Note: The following is an untested theory thought up by me, it contains no factual evidence of any source of data with true factual measurments confirming the theory.


He can't backup his theory. He doesn't even explain why the Cocker 25% percent more.


pbzmag

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by Army
This silly ignorance is on AO? How can that be? How many times must this be shown to be WRONG?

Once the force that accelerates the projectile no longer influences it, it will immediatly begin to DECELERATE. That force is the push of the gas against the ball. After 10" of movement down the barrel, the gas can no longer expand fast enough to fill the growing void behind the ball. Thus, acceleration has ended, and deceleration has begun.

All chronographing is done outside the barrel, away from ANY AND ALL acceleration value. NOTHING at this point will make the ball go faster. ALL air friction is the same no matter what speed the ball is going, it's expotential.

Final word, and believe it, when two alike objects (paintballs) are going the same speed and traveling at the same angle, they will go the same distance...period.

But if the ball is accelerating slower will it not decelerate at that same speed? If you throw a ball up 10 feet and measure the acceleration from the peak of the throw until you catch it, it will be less time than if you throw the ball up 100 feet and measure the acceleration. The ball, after being thrown, would come down at the same speed. Therefore the ball with the faster acceleration would decelerate more quickly.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by pbzmag
Did anyone read his note?

straight from the page:

Note: The following is an untested theory thought up by me, it contains no factual evidence of any source of data with true factual measurments confirming the theory.


He can't backup his theory.


pbzmag

well, no one can back up a theory. LOL.

[Cypres0099]

Even If this was true, it wouldn't mean that an Autococker has more range, it would just mean that it shoots faster...

Just get a consistant cocker and keep backing away from a chronograph as you fire. I think you will see the velocity dropping, not going up.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by halB

cant happen. once ANY porting is encountered or when the barrel ends the ball sloooooooooooooooooooows down. nothing can accelerate it, the air is gone and there is no more force. you cant accelerate it once its main source of power (the air) is gone. therefore, a ball leaving a barrel at 300 fps will continue to slooooooooooow down from there. i mean, if the ball continued to accelerate (which cant happen) then wouldnt the nppl require cocker owners to chrono with their marker held several feet back?

well first of all the ball would decelerate slower if it was accelerated slower. If there was no more force then the ball would immediately stop after it leaves the barrel (and we all know this doesn't happen). And on the NPPL thing, they should make all the gun owners stand 40 feet back and shoot into the chono IMO. Then there would be no question (except at close ranges). the thing is, the chonos are great for testing the velocity at close ranges. but hardly ever do you point blank someone so why chrono at that point?

[spantol]

Yup, Sir Isaac Newton was an amazing guy. Accomplished quite a bit in his lifetime, including enumerating three laws of motion. The second one is quite relevant here: Force equals mass times acceleration. F=MA.

Or, stated differently, Acceleration equals Force divided by mass. Apply this to the horizontal motion of a paintball leaving a barrel, any barrel. Once it has left the barrel, Force equals zero.

Solving for Acceleration is left as an exercise for the reader.

Originally posted by strongboy2005

rules were made to be broken. in the 16th century the entire world KNEW that the world was the center of the universe, and if you thought otherwise then you were a heretic and you were burned at the stake. Sir Isaac Newton (and some others) changed that at the beginning of the Renaissance. I'm saying that no one has PROVEN that an autococker doesn't shoot furthur.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by Cypres0099
Even If this was true, it wouldn't mean that an Autococker has more range, it would just mean that it shoots faster...

Just get a consistant cocker and keep backing away from a chronograph as you fire. I think you will see the velocity dropping, not going up.

well, it would shoot farthur, if it were shooting faster, which is what i'm trying to prove is the case.

sure, it will lose velocity but do the same with a mag and I'll bet you the mag will lose velocity faster. I think that's a great idea for an experiment. If it can be proven that a cocker decelerated slower then a mag then it could be said that it would shoot furthur because of the velocity influence. Again, back to the backspin thing, the backspin allows the ball to continue travel without a lot of deceleration, therefore the velocity of a backspun ball would be greater at a longer distance.

[spantol]

I don't believe that this is correct. Once the ball leaves one set of conditions (the confines of the barrel, and the associated friction and whatnot) and moves into another (open air), this no longer holds. This is a much more complicated situation than simply tossing a ball up in the air.

Consider what happens when a ball leaves a barrel after accelerating at rate A and immediately encounters a brick wall. Clearly, the rate of deceleration in this case is far, far greater than the original rate of acceleration. Different conditions exist inside and outside of the barrel, leading to this discrepency.

Originally posted by strongboy2005

But if the ball is accelerating slower will it not decelerate at that same speed? If you throw a ball up 10 feet and measure the acceleration from the peak of the throw until you catch it, it will be less time than if you throw the ball up 100 feet and measure the acceleration. The ball, after being thrown, would come down at the same speed. Therefore the ball with the faster acceleration would decelerate more quickly.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by spantol
Yup, Sir Isaac Newton was an amazing guy. Accomplished quite a bit in his lifetime, including enumerating three laws of motion. The second one is quite relevant here: Force equals mass times acceleration. F=MA.

Or, stated differently, Acceleration equals Force divided by mass. Apply this to the horizontal motion of a paintball leaving a barrel, any barrel. Once it has left the barrel, Force equals zero.

Solving for Acceleration is left as an exercise for the reader.

So A=F/M ? If the F = 0 then the A = 0. This actually proves an entirely different point. This proves that once a paintball is fired the ball continues the same velocity that it left the barrel. Essentially this shows that once a paintball is fired it will never stop. EVER. OK so now we can all dispell this argument and move on to the next.