Assuming a human being/robotic pool cue arm with perfect reflexes, strength, and hand eye coordination, a perfect rack (of the balls, not on the human), perfectly regulation table, balls without defect, etc. - is it physically possible to pocket every ball on the break (excepting the cue ball) in nine ball or 15 ball pool/billiards?
One sees it in movies and cartoons as a sort of joke. I’m curious as to whether it can be done under the laws of physics.
I’ve seen it done [TV stunts show] with both of the pool racks. In one of the 9 ball stunt shots, the player shot the ball of one table, landed it on another table about 3 feet away, and then caused a perfect break.
Im sure its theoretically possible in billiards as well. It would just be a matter of applying the exact power at the exact point on the ball and hitting a precise point that would trigger the chain of connections needed to sink all the balls. Whether such a combination is humanly possible is another question.
I two have seen a video of a man shoot from one pool table to another and get a perfect break, he filmed it but I think it took him either hundreds, if not thousands of tries.
IANAPSOAP, but if you apply sufficent energy to the cue ball, won’t that make all the other balls move until they hit a pocket? If so, how much energy would the cue ball need to do this consistently?
I am not a pool shark or a physicist?
The only problem with this is that balls tend to fly off the table very easily if too much power is applied. But theoretically I do think youre right that with enough repeated bounces of the cushions, all balls would end up in a pocket. The other problem I can think of is that if a ball continues to bounce exactly parrallel to a cushion, then there would never be the varying force that would send it towards a pocket in the end.
I think if you put enough spin on the cue ball for that to catch on the rack, at least to some degree, that problem could be solved…
Are you talking like one set up and one shot, or let it try like a million times.
I really really doubt that the guys seen by posters above were genuine, especially if they were shot from a second table. The fact is that if something were doable, and doable before a camera, then one should see that pretty often in tournaments. In fact, if it were possible to consistently pocket the eight on the break, then you would expect to see pros doing 8-ball break after 8-ball break. And you don’t see anything close to that.
Not sure what you mean. If you mean could a person expect to be able to do it every so often, no, that’s not the question. It’s all physics - the question is whether under the laws of physics, there is a perfect spot to hit the rack, speed to strike it at, etc. that would cause all the balls to be pocketed.
Really, this could be two questions; one, is it possible under the laws of physics, with a machine, or whatever, capable of making the cue ball strike the rack with the appropriate metrics.
Two, could a human being accomplish it, given an infinite number of tries.
[QUOTE=SlyFrog]
Not sure what you mean. If you mean could a person expect to be able to do it every so often, no, that’s not the question. It’s all physics - the question is whether under the laws of physics, there is a perfect spot to hit the rack, speed to strike it at, etc. that would cause all the balls to be pocketed.
QUOTE]
Yeah, but the shooter puts follow-english on the ball which then plows through the rack scattering the balls very well. I think it is possible but not at all predictable. The problem is that the balls are round and just the slightest miss of the crucial spot even with ‘follow’ on the ball results in a trajectory through the rack that diverges more and more from that required.
Based upon this question,
the answer is no.
It is not possible for a single cue ball to transmit sufficient kinetic energy to a 9 or 15 group of balls such that they all find a pocket.
Maybe if you fire the pool cue out of a railgun…
You might be right but the thing I was thinking of was I didin;t really understand the question.
Part A. Set up a robot Arm that can apply 'ike 400 pounds(or whatever) of force at the que ball and let it go at a manualy set tournament rack. Now I’m sure that there are microns of difference in those racks. If it hit it enough times would it happen. But my million was a pulled out of my ass number. It become somewhat of a randomsness question. If you really lookid into the equations I’m sure you could come up with an approximation of the probibilty. You could figure out the chance of a ball on a random path being sunk. It would be figuring out the math. For example, if the ball was in the exact center of the table, then there are(pulling numbers out of my ass again) 8 degrees or so of a dropping shot in each of the side pockets, and 6 degrees maybe in each of the corners. then you have to figure the percentages for banks, and double banks and so on. Then apply the average distance traveled on each of the balls for a 400 pound break. Then figure in the position for each of the probable starting positions of each ball, pluss factoring in the collisions. Anyway assuming that there is a random path(which admittedly is a big assumption since the starting position might counter act randomness) And you might be able to figure out within a magnitude or two the number of hits it would take to pocked all the balls. Non trivial but I believe possible to approximate, but does it approch a esentially unreachable number like hitting powerball 100,000 times in a row.
Part B. You have a system set up to take advantage of our best technology. A laser accurate racking system, sub-micron level detail of ball sizing and polishing, fancy weighting, exact cushionsing bounce, etc. Could we create a situation where the perfect break hit every time. That is a situation where I really have to regurgitate the question, because I really don’t know. How complex is the system. Can we perfect it, or even at our best tries is there an error factor we cannot predict, or is there a detail factor with the system that is beyond our current sophistication. (Chaos math, Butterfly causing the hurricane stuff) Simply is the physical pool system somthing we can predict exacty in our technology.
Either way I don’t really know, but I found the question very interesting, and did a lot of thinking. I was just wnondering which way the OP was asked.
You mean to say that it is physically impossible?
Cite?
So then, do the “Rules of Billiard” cover a situation where one or more balls shatter?
I doubt that the balls and rails possess the necessary structural integrity to transmit the large amount of energy needed to scatter the balls in such a way. I could be wrong though.
Gads, I hate people to do this, but with such a dismissive simple answer to a factual question I’m going to add to the “cite?” chorus.
Except that pocketing the 8-ball on a break is NOT a win in any tournament following anything remotely resembling official rules. Pocketing the 8 on a break calls for a re-rack or respotting the 8. Most bar games in the area will have an 8-ball break win house rule (since you can’t respot any balls on a quarter table.) But if you’re playing on a regular table where respotting is possible, you have to ask, since even casual players are more and more aware of the official rules.
As for the OP, I’ve seen every ball except one potted on the break in a game of 7-ball. However, I just don’t think it’s possible to deliver enough kinetic energy to make all the balls go in in any game requiring more than 7 balls. Definitely not in any 15-ball game.
Let’s see, in 8-ball there are some rules about the 1-ball and the 15-ball going in different side pockets aren’t there? And you also have to call the pocket for the 8-ball. If all of those conditions are met on the break would it win? I’m aware that I will have to wait quite a while to see that happen.