Jump to content

ulukinatme

Full Members
  • Content Count

    497
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

279 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks, no need for a cup, I'll just get mine straight from the tap.
  2. Started off strong, lost the appeal after a bit, but the TV hit got a chuckle again.
  3. I agree with this, the hammer is denser at the point of impact to allow for the greater transfer of energy. I'm not saying wind resistance is the only factor, it's just one factor (however small) that would result in a lower velocity. A 5 pound hammer will travel at a greater velocity than a 5 pound snow shovel, causing more force, but I agree that the greater factor in this is the dimensions of the hammer to allow for a more concentrated transfer of energy..
  4. The force between the two cars is equal, but you're bringing a different variable to the equation. The bumpers help absorb the force. It would be like setting up a test where you hit someone with a hammer and then hit him again while he has a helmet on and you ask me which caused more damage. That's not the argument at all. The comment was that a hammer weighing the same as a helmet would cause the same damage assuming that the same person is swinging both, which is false. The two objects can't have the same velocity if swung by the same person for a variety of reasons, one of which is wind resistance. With any reduction in velocity you get a smaller amount of force. It goes behind that though. A hammer is more dense at the point of impact to allow for a greater transfer of energy. The force from the side of a helmet displaces the energy over a greater area, which results in a less damaging injury.
  5. Tell me how the tensile strength of bamboo factors into the force it can apply to an object? Bamboo is an incredibly strong material, there's no doubt, but given a stalk of bamboo at equal length to a steel pipe....which is going to apply a greater force given the same velocity? The steel applies more force because of it's mass. You could argue that the greater mass of the steel could result in a slower velocity, but honestly this whole bamboo argument is pointless. How does a bullet relate to Garrett's dumb ass swinging a helmet? Is he going to swing the helmet at the same velocity of a bullet? Does a bullet have the same wind resistance as a helmet? Does the bullet have the same mass as the helmet, and even if it did is that mass less dense than the helmet? I've never said that a small object can't have force, in fact I've said the opposite. A hammer may way the same as a helmet, but it has smaller dimensions and can cause greater damage for a variety of reasons. If the velocity is very high of course a small object can cause a lot of damage. What if you slow a bullet down to the speed of a helmet swing? You probably aren't even reaching the second layer of the epidermis.
  6. It looks to be that way (edge of the helmet vs. the side), but the dispute was a hammer vs. a helmet. The hammer will still do more damage, even if the mass is the same because there's less wind resistance which leads to greater velocity (among other factors). I'll not dispute that the edge of a helmet could cause more damage than the side of it, you and I are in agreement.
  7. Force = mass x acceleration, not stiffness. The force can be more damaging depending on the object though and how that force is applied/concentrated into a small area. Get a gelatin ballistics head, hit it with a hammer, then hit it with the side of a helmet and tell me which does more damage. Even if the same person is swinging both items with the same strength you're going to have more damage from the hammer for a variety of reasons. For one the molecules/mass in the hammer is packed in more densely which results in less air resistance and greater velocity. Another reason would be that the force of the hammer is being focused to a small point to maximize it's energy transfer, while a helmet is broader and the force is spread out more evenly. Think of it as a slap vs. a punch. The hand's mass doesn't change, but the velocity changes because of wind resistance of the open palm and arm vs. a punch coming like a tightly packed cylinder straight ahead. You wind up with more force from the punch.
  8. If Garrett connects with Rudolph's head while swinging a hammer with a solid, steel head he's going to get a major contusion and some serious damage. Instead he's hit with a hard plastic helmet and he's throwing his hands up in disbelief instead of being knocked out on the ground. The two aren't comparable. While I haven't taken a hit from a hammer, the steel rod at the end of a dumpster would be pretty close and I've experienced that. I've experienced the helmet hit too, and the result isn't remotely the same.
  9. I'm glad you didn't miss that softball I tossed up for some levity, especially since two other posters already swung at it. Bless your heart.
  10. He didn't take a hit with the crown of the helmet though, he was hit with the side of the helmet, the part of the helmet with the most give. I haven't taken a hit from Miles Garrett, but I have taken a hit with a helmet. Hurt like hell, but it wasn't anything like taking a shot to the forehead from the end of a dumpster. The helmet left a small bruise, the dumpster created a giant goose egg that left me concussed and sipping broth for a few days afterwards. Again, Rudolph was not doubled over in pain after the shot, he was throwing his hands up in disbelief. I agree, the injury doesn't take away from Garrett's guiltiness, and I think he shouldn't be back on a field until 2020 at the earliest, I'm just arguing that a lot of people are throwing around death as a strong possibility when it's more likely a freak chance with one hit. The Haynesworth cleat stomp was more dangerous, and yet he too should have been suspended more games.
  11. A helmet is hard, for sure, but the plastic shell is thin and has some give to it. More so on the sides and definitely less so on the crown, but it was the side or edge of the helmet that hit Rudolph and not the top of it. Science says power = mass x velocity. Garrett can certainly generate a lot of velocity with the helmet, but there's far more mass with velocity behind a player coming full speed with a helmet to helmet hit. He's putting his whole body into it, and there can be no give with the helmet while the head is inside. Garrett can certainly hurt a man with a helmet, of that there can be no doubt, especially if he had used the top of it. I'm still advocating he miss the entire season as well as games next season, which would be more than what Haynesworth got for cleats to the unprotected head of Guronde. I just think it's unlikely that death would have resulted from one swing, especially given Rudolph's reaction to it and the fact I've taken a swing like that.
  12. Hey, I probably have some brain damage, that's a given. You guys are the ones arguing with someone who has first hand experience though 😏
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...