It does, but I also said that the mass only effects the required force, the part you quoted was turning a bit of a blind eye to that - the fact air resistance causes a force is pretty meaningless in a theoretical (and tedius) sense - between the ball hitting each particle of air the mass would have no effect on the speed, direction, or path. A force causing balls of different masses to decelerate at different rates is not contrary to what I intially stated - indeed it is Newton's 2nd law.

Essentially, air resistance is a force and so mass would effect that. I said that.

The mass of the player is thoroughly irrelevant. If, for example, the player dropped the ball vertically as he ran forward, the ball would have gained its forward velocity due to the initial force required to accelerate the player (and ball) to that velocity. Once at that velocity it will maintain it forever unless other forces are applied.

Right, so what we've learned here is that...

Momentum, i.e. mass x velocity, isn't relevant to why the ball travels forward.

Mass is only relevant in relation to the ball, and that only matters in relation to forces acting upon it (i.e. the player, air resistance and gravity).

Velocity is the only important factor in why the ball travels forward. That is, the velocity of the player in a given direction is transferred to the ball at the time of release, and it's path will be defined by that in conjunction with: the angle of release and the force applied to the ball at that angle of release (as well as the forces of gravity and air resistance).

So really, momentum appears to have absolutely nothing to do it. Stevo should rename it to a more accurate "transferable velocity" rule!

Seriously though, you all need to get laid.

Or have a damn good monkey spank.

What Wellsy said on the last page was actually correct:



But you didn't think so:



I just pointed out that your refutation was only valid in the case of no air resistance. Your references to the force required was purely i the context of getting the ball up to that velocity as you passed it, not what happened afterwards:



Which is not true in the case of air resistance being present.

And I suppose you're getting it as you type!



Did nobody tell you that chicks dig an educated bloke

Absolutely, momentum would only really apply in a perfect elastic reaction - whereby the momentum of the player is transferred to the ball. Considering the player has about 500 kgm/s, that would mean a player would need to throw the ball at about mach 3 for momentum to have any application.

I'm in post-coital internet mode. As in, she's up earlier than me so she's asleep.


I'm educated. I can count to 120 before I finish, roll over and go to sleep.

That's quite impressive! I get bored after about 22

Not true, I actually changed my wording so that that would not be the case - "mass would only effect the required force to get it to that speed and in that direction".

Just because I didn't make clear what was applying the force doesn't change the fact I didn't exclude air resistance.

Can you work out the path of the ball then (other forces acting on it like air resistance and gravity) using trigonometry then?

i.e. If a static player passes a ball backwards at a 45degree angle at 10m/s, then using trigonometry it's velocity in a directly backwards direction is 7m/s.

If then a second player makes the exact same pass but is running forwards at 10m/s, then it would travel forward at 3m/s? (10m/s forwards - 7m/s backwards = 3m/s forwards).

Using Newtonian physics you can, yes.

To your example, then yes, the ball would travel forward at approximately 3m/s. At such slow speeds air resistance wouldn't have too much of an effect anyway.