MovieChat Forums > MythBusters (2003) Discussion > My thoughts about S14E08 - Bizarre myths...

My thoughts about S14E08 - Bizarre myths / a reddit commercial


I think it's safe to say most people agree that Mythbusters have been on a downward spiral for the last years, but this episode might just be among the worst of the worst?

It seems like an outright commercial for a website (I had actually never heard of it before but apparently it's pretty popular).

Just a few opinions about this episode (SPOILER ALERT)

There are only really testing two minor untested myth in the the entire episode.

First one is: Is it easy to punch yourself out of a paper bag? Which turns out to be rather difficult which would imply the myth is BUSTED since it's an idiom to suggest something that is always ridiculously easy. They somehow draw the conclusion that the myth is confirmed. Yet another time they draw a bizarre verdict based on their tests.

Second one is: Can infra-red cameras detect farts?

Not exactly the most debated claim of all time perhaps. Anyway how they go about to test this is a good indication of what's has been wrong with the show over the last years. Instead of trying to replicate the circumstances like this =>

Eat lots of onions or other fart inducing food. Fart in front of infrared camera and see what happens.

Oh no that would be to easy so instead they seem to make a lot of efforts into pretending they tried to get themselves to fart but couldn't do it, only to justify to build a "fart machine". It's seems like they are too much in love of creating fancy machines and explosions and a little bit to uninterested in testing the actual myths.

The hamster ball drop is not really a new myth. It's essentially a minor twist to similar myths they have tested earlier. Sort of a combination of the life raft fall/bubble boy fall. It's clear from the get go that it's busted in terms of a solely mean to survive from a very high drop due to the softness of the walls of the ball and speed simply being to high.

Normally a larger object has a higher terminal velocity than a smaller object of the same type. And yes an empty large hamster ball with the same proportions will have a higher terminal velocity as a small hamster ball. BUT in this scenario it's NOT a case of identical average object density as there is a person inside that constitutes a significant portion of the mass (and after all Buster does not increase in mass just because the ball increases in size). So a larger ball would, perhaps somewhat counter-intuitive, actually lead to a slower terminal velocity.

So if the radius of the ball is large enough it could very well work as the mass would almost without any doubt grow faster than what the surface area does if the ball radius is increased (keep in mind Buster is heavy yet not heavier just because the ball is larger). So if they used a ball with double the radius, the terminal velocity would most likely go down significantly (see calculations below) from 56mph to something more survivable (and not increase as the square root of 2 (1.42ish) to 79mph as it normally does if the average density is not reduced and the aerodynamic properties stay the same).

If you combine that with wrapping Buster up the same way Adam was wrapped up in the Bubble Pack Plunge episode, and not the sloppy way they did it in this episode, it might have worked, especially if a larger ball has thicker walls and better yet, done on a freezing day for a higher air density and thus slower terminal velocity. In fact as they didn't even test dropping Buster inside the ball wrapped up properly in Bubble Pack like Adam was, we cannot even rule out that it could have worked with the normal size ball.

Of course the myth is still busted as the myth is about the ball as a sole tool for surviving a long fall, but I find it sloppy of them to not point out how the idea is not really that far out of the realm of possibility. It seems like they don't care about physics at all.

But I guess since the myth did not involve any explosion they couldn't care less to put an effort in trying and replicate what would be needed for the circumstances to make it survivable...

reply

OK let's make a mathematical example.

I make the assumption they made their calculations on something like this:

Ball radius: 1.3m
Sphere: 0.47 Drag Coefficient
Air density: 1.25 kg/m³
Total mass: 100kg (20kg ball, 80kg Buster)

this would equate to sqrt((2*100*9,81)/(1.3*1.3*PI*0.47*1.25)) = 25 m/s = 56mph

OK so let's double the ball size without increasing the wall thickness. That would equate to a total mass for the ball of 80kg.

We get:

Ball radius: 2.6m
Sphere: 0.47 Drag Coefficient
Air density: 1.25 kg/m³
Total mass: 160kg (80kg ball, 80kg Buster)

this would equate to sqrt((2*160*9,81)/(2.6*2.6*PI*0.47*1.25)) = 15,9 m/s = 35,5mph

Yes the assumption that the ball mass only grow as squared to the radius is somewhat optimistic due to more requirement of structural integrity but even saying the ball mass grows at the power of say 2.5 of the radius it yields:

Ball radius: 2.6m
Sphere: 0.47 Drag Coefficient
Air density: 1.25 kg/m³
Total mass: 193kg (113kg ball, 80kg Buster)

this would equate to sqrt((2*193*9,81)/(2.6*2.6*PI*0.47*1.25)) = 17,4 m/s = 39mph

Even with the assumption that the ball mass would grow as the cube of it's radius (which would imply much thicker material walls and much more cushion), to be honest not really that realistic and probably and overrating of how fast the mass of the ball would grow, the equation still gives a reduction of terminal velocity as this would equate to

Ball radius: 2.6m
Sphere: 0.47 Drag Coefficient
Air density: 1.25 kg/m³
Total mass: 240kg (160kg ball, 80kg Buster)

sqrt((2*240*9,81)/(2.6*2.6*PI*0.47*1.25)) = 19,4 m/s = 43,5mph



Just for the fun of it, let's assume the radius is quadrupled and the true exponential mass growth exponent with regards to the radius is 2.3 (hard to really estimate well but if I had to guesstimate, might be a bit low and perhaps cause a not so solid ball for rolling around but I think it's realistic). A quadrupled radius ball would then yield:

Ball radius: 5.2m
Sphere: 0.47 Drag Coefficient
Air density: 1.25 kg/m³
Total mass: 565kg (485kg ball, 80kg Buster)

sqrt((2*565*9,81)/(5.2*5.2*PI*0.47*1.25)) = 14,9 m/s = 33,3mph

reply

Not only would it be a slower fall, but it could contain a much larger air pocket between the layers, cushioning the fall more. This episode convinced me that it would be fairly easily doable to make a ball large and cushioning enough to pull it off

Death to shakeycam directors!

reply

You're overcomplicating basic physics with the Zorb ball drop. What ultimately makes it survivable is the rate of deceleration. There is only what, 14-16 inches between the inside ball and outside? Even if Buster was optimally packed just dense enough with insulation, decelerating from ~56mph in 14 inches is unsurvivable.

This is the core of the myth: padding the drop. If you want to upscale the ball until it basically becomes a parachute, you've changed the myth altogether.

_______
When logic and science aren't on your side, you always lose.

reply

The average G for your proposal of 56mph would be about 80G for a 16inch distance, which is usually, but not necessarily lethal if the force is in the axis of stomach to back or vice versa.

Actually a retardation from 15m/s (which was the terminal velocity in one of my calculations) to zero over 0.4m equals an average G-force of about 29G, which is very survivable, especially if landing on the back or flat on the stomach which could most likely only cause minor injuries. With a 0.6m distance that could give a stable retardation it could get down to 19G only.

Just to be clear, I never considered the Zorb ball to be the main contributor to a steady retardation, although it might help somewhat. Instead I considered the bubble wrap (which they did somewhat attempt to try afterwards) to be what could cause a smooth enough retardation.

So no doubt the myth itself is busted, I just think they did far to little to replicate what circumstances that would be needed to make it survivable. It seemed a bit rushed.

Hence I stand by my claim that it could very well be survivable if wrapped properly in lots of layers of bubble wrap like Adam was in one episode, especially if they use one of the larger Zorb ball with higher radius which would cause a maximum velocity significantly lower than 56mph.

The zorb ball is therefore primarily a cause of reduced terminal velocity and that combined with lots of bubble wrap and you have a likely Buster without having to make the scenarios completely over-the-top.

So yeah it would be like a very ineffective parachute, due to the drag coefficient being over 3 times lower than most regular parachutes and the zorb ball weighing a lot compared to a parachute.

reply

[deleted]

I think what they needed was a Zorb ball surrounded by more Zorb balls, or perhaps, clustered beachballs or car air-bags. Then it would land a bit like some of the newer mars-lander designs I've seen that don't even bother with a parachute.

Also I wonder if lateral inertia could have affected the impact in any considerable way. If Buster was thrown into any other side of the ball besides straight-down, he would have suffered much less shock.

I kept wondering if they could have somehow produced the Elevator of Death myth along with this one, that would have been neat.

Crash test dummies + Zorb balls + helicopters = endless fun.

reply

I agree. They hurt their credibility by pandering to that site and its losers... I mean users.

reply

Stone, glass houses, etc. This board sure isn't a great place.

reply