If you're floating in the middle of a sphere in 0 gravity, you can throw a tennis ball in any direction and it will bounce straight back to you.
:D
>>8678473
Almost. You can throw a tennis ball radially in any direction and it will bounce straight back to where it was released.
The differences are, your center of gravity may be at the center of the sphere, but your arm would not be, and the line of direction would not point back to the sphere's true center. And, the release of the ball would amount to a small amount f thrust, so you would drift way from the center. So the ball would return but you may not be there (depending on the masses and size of sphere involved).
I know, I know... nitpick.
>>8678473
True, also if you have an empty glass sphere and add ferro fluid along with a solvent you can view a holographic magnetic field using a magnet and a light source.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tklcucbsaXY
>>8678496
That's all true. I think the negative effects would be minimized if the sphere was really large compared to the thrower.
>>8678501
The bounce/return accuracy would improve, but the added flight time would give you more time to drift away.
>>8678500
That's really cool!
>>8678508
So let thew radius -> infinity and the mass of the ball -> 0, problem solved.
>>8678473
There will also be zero gravity at any point inside the sphere, no matter how massive the shell is. Even the sphere is made out of neutronium or black hole.
>>8678473
>If you're floating in the middle of a sphere
Middle? Center? Center seems a "little" better. Middle sounds 2d to me.
If you're in the [perfect] center of a sphere (0x0x0 point), how's your arm going to fit? How would the tennis ball fit inside?
Have you ever seen a "perfect" rebound? In Reality, it's always going to be "some" degree off so it'd never bounce and return to the [exact] same throw point.
As someone else pointed out, you would move away from center (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction). But maybe the imperfect rebound would return to your new position (are you allowed to reach out to grab it?). So many variables need to be defined.
>>8678473
What if you impart angular momentum on the ball?
>>8678473
I assume there is air in the sphere. It's difficult to throw a ball with no spin, so the Magnus effect would throw off the trajectory.
>>8678496
the thrower would be dragged back to the center as well, and at the exactly same time
Sphere faggots BTFO.
Parabola are much better. When will YOU make the move ?
>>8679802
>kek
>>8678500
>paying attention to anything theoria apophasis says
>>8679570
It will take longer.
>>8678473
You can do a similar trick with right angle corners, hence radar reflectors.
I was playing the game space engineers and had a bug where I fell through the planet. Normally I would reset, but I realized gravity was still working.
It took a long time of waiting and I was curious if I was going to shoot out the other side of the planet or not. Then suddenly my speed went to zero and increased again. I realized that the center of the planet had zero gravity. So I became a yo-yo, speeding up, slowing down, speeding up. The distance though kept decreasing everytime until I was totally stopped at zero gravity, the centre of the planet.
>>8679812
>only having an algebraic degree of 2
>not having an algebraic degree of 228318856
How does it feel being a foci-let?
>>8679906
>I fell through the planet.
Can you recreate the bug? I'd be curious to see that.
Wouldn't spin on the ball cause it to reflect off the walls at an angle? It's not like it's possible to throw a ball perfectly without any rotation