This is something I have been thinking about since the Olympics... at what point will it not be possible for human beings to swim or run any faster. There has to be a point where the human body just can't go any faster, no matter how much you train, what kind of things you put into your body (legal or not), etc.
I mean it isn't possible to swim a 400 IM, for example, in 2 seconds (at least I don't think it ever will be) so where does it end? And when will that happen?
Originally posted by LindsayNB
If 0.01s corresponds to a distance of about 0.02m then 0.001s would correspond to 0.002m or 2mm. Unless your slow motion video was very high resolution, had a very high frame rate, and zoomed in to a relatively small area, 2mm would be subpixel resolution.
Yes! (Unfortunately, I had to modify my post, because you beat me to this.)
Originally posted by newmastersswimmer
it's how they can tell "almost" exactly when a ball hits the ground on a serve to see if it is actually in or out. There is absolutely NO doubt that there exists video technology that can determine who touched the wall first between two swimmers in the same heat whose times are no less than 0.001 seconds apart.
Wrong! (My opinion :D) I've watched those tennis matches as well. For most balls, I agree, they do a better job than a human observer could. But I noticed that you said "almost", because there are cases where you can't tell. (The commentators run the footage backwards and forwards several times, and disagree with each other what the right call was.) That is why in tennis, you rule the ball "in", unless you clearly see it out.
(I remember reading a tennis magazine article, where they placed a ball about an inch from the line, and took pictures from around the court. The line-persons vantage point could see the ball out. All other viewpoints, including the chair umpire, player, and TV camera view, the ball looked good. And this was without ball compression.)
There is significant doubt for a 2mm difference in swimming... For cameras mounted overhead, water distortion will make it difficult see a difference that small. Also, do you count the fingernail, or the (soft) pad of your middle finger? It is also a touch pad, so a small amount of compression is needed to detect contact. One swimmer might have zero separation between their finger and the surface of the touch pad, but another swimmer (who touched 0.001 seconds later) who is moving faster could cause their pad to trigger first.
Just because the clock electronics can report times to a thousandth of a second (or smaller), does not indicate how reliable (repeatable) those measurements will be.
Originally posted by LindsayNB
If 0.01s corresponds to a distance of about 0.02m then 0.001s would correspond to 0.002m or 2mm. Unless your slow motion video was very high resolution, had a very high frame rate, and zoomed in to a relatively small area, 2mm would be subpixel resolution.
Yes! (Unfortunately, I had to modify my post, because you beat me to this.)
Originally posted by newmastersswimmer
it's how they can tell "almost" exactly when a ball hits the ground on a serve to see if it is actually in or out. There is absolutely NO doubt that there exists video technology that can determine who touched the wall first between two swimmers in the same heat whose times are no less than 0.001 seconds apart.
Wrong! (My opinion :D) I've watched those tennis matches as well. For most balls, I agree, they do a better job than a human observer could. But I noticed that you said "almost", because there are cases where you can't tell. (The commentators run the footage backwards and forwards several times, and disagree with each other what the right call was.) That is why in tennis, you rule the ball "in", unless you clearly see it out.
(I remember reading a tennis magazine article, where they placed a ball about an inch from the line, and took pictures from around the court. The line-persons vantage point could see the ball out. All other viewpoints, including the chair umpire, player, and TV camera view, the ball looked good. And this was without ball compression.)
There is significant doubt for a 2mm difference in swimming... For cameras mounted overhead, water distortion will make it difficult see a difference that small. Also, do you count the fingernail, or the (soft) pad of your middle finger? It is also a touch pad, so a small amount of compression is needed to detect contact. One swimmer might have zero separation between their finger and the surface of the touch pad, but another swimmer (who touched 0.001 seconds later) who is moving faster could cause their pad to trigger first.
Just because the clock electronics can report times to a thousandth of a second (or smaller), does not indicate how reliable (repeatable) those measurements will be.
