ETA: I did see the post of Chronos on the failure point of the ball, but couldn’t see his reference on my iPhone at the moment to see how the info supplements my suggested above.
And since he’s around: Chronos: neutrino baseball? What’s the highest possible energy with single-particle collisions theoretically releasable short of a Big Bang?
There is no known upper limit to the energy of a single particle. Now, how you get it that energy, that’s the question.
Since the bat is swinging, if he keeps contact with it for very much past the center of that 5 meters, he’s going to hit a foul ball. OK, the OP (is he still around to read this thread?) didn’t say it couldn’t be a foul ball, but I think it would be uh… fair to say we’re not looking for long strikes.
And the chance of imparting any energy at all to a neutrino by swinging a bat at it is very very low.
Have you tried calling in Superman?
In Chronos’s model, Superman isn’t swinging the bat with a traditional style. Instead he’s holding it perpendicular to the throw of the ball, and precisely moving it backwards to catch the ball on the bat, then smoothly accelerating the bat forward and upward at whatever maximum that won’t destroy either the bat or the ball. He’s also calculated the optimum upward angle for the arc with the farthest distance, taking wind resistance into account.
This is only possible for Superman with his Kryptonian reflexes. If you’re going real world Robot Leagues with a machine designed to hit blerns, like Wireless Joe Jackson who was nothing but a programmable bat on wheels, then you’ve gotta go with a more traditional design.
Superman has an invulnerale aura that extends around any object he picks up. No matter how hard he hits the ball, the bat isn’t going to break.
Are you saying that no matter how hard Superman hits a bad guy he can’t do any damage because the aura would protect the surface of whoever he hit?
If someone with super-strength hit my head it’s not necessarily the surface that’s the biggest concern. 
Honestly you can’t rationalize what is in a story written about a character whose limits frequently are “whatever the writer feels like”, and the writer has very little knowledge of physical science and/or couldn’t care less.
Fantastic link, CWatsonJr: welcome aboard!
The researcher assumed that the strength of the wooden bat was the limiting factor, along with air resistance and ignoring aura invulnerability effects:
I’m gonna pull a quote:
[INDENT] If you factor in air resistance at sea level, launching the baseball at 672 m/s at an angle of 45 degrees, the ball comes down after about 50 seconds, and lands “only” about 900 meters away from where it started, or about 3,000 feet away. Although that’s a titanic home run no matter how you slice it, that isn’t even a kilometer away! Still it’s maybe some six times as long as any home run hit in any recent season (see 2011’s home runs, below and left), and some five times as distant as Mickey Mantle’s legendary (and perhaps apocryphal) 1953 home run (below, right). [/INDENT] Lowering the angle to 10-15 degrees gives you 1.3 km. Add 50% if Supes is playing in Denver, where the air is thinner.
Historical correction: the catching the ball on the bat (matching their motions) was suggested initially by Hari way back in post #88 and reformulated by sage in post #90.
I’m an off and on American baseball fan (NY), but I’ve never heard the word “blern.” History/etymology? Hell, even check my understanding…I read it as a synonym for “hitting fungoes,” just easy long drive whacks. (Although I’m not sure now if hitting fungoes only applies when the batter himself tosses the ball in air.)
Now that is menti9n it, I have no idea where “fungoes” comes from, or they even still say it.
Superman thereads never disappoint in their driftiness…
I’m not the one that brought up an invisible aura.
OK, I got off the bench and found these, each an individual PDF from ASTM’s Sports Standards and Recreations Standards (the link is to the page as a whole, scroll down the alphabetical list for these)
Baseball and Softball Equipment
Standard Test Method for Measuring the Coefficient of Restitution (COR) of Baseballs and Softballs
Standard Test Method for Compression- Displacement of Baseballs and Softballs
Standard Test Method for Measuring Softball and Baseball Bat Performance Factor
Standard Test Methods for Measuring High-Speed Bat Performance
Standard Test Method for Measuring Moment of Inertia and Center of Percussion of a Baseball or Softball Bat
Standard Test Method for Displacement
I haven’t looked at these, and of course it’s likely they do only exactly what they say, provide baselines (heh) for universal testing for the industry but not the resulting numbers demanded by MLB.
ETA: I, for one, am following the physics and engineering factors of real and otherwise factors in this thread only as a spectator. So, the more the merrier for the lay explanations of physics and engineering in the real world (we remember OP) despite my own posts, which these standards and other posters are comfortable with.
Plus: What’s “Peformance” for balls and bats? Is that word used as normally and understandably as, eg, COR and moment of inertia?
Interesting image. Which raises an interesting rules-related question.
If the ball were to be successfully hit into fair territory with such force that it embedded itself into the ground, would it be considered to remain in play until such time as the defense was able to extract it and complete the play?
Most likely be ruled a ground-rule double. That’s what happens when a ball gets stuck under the padding on the outfield wall at Safeco Field.
Missed it by that much.
“Ground Rules” are about the particular issues of that stadium/field (although a fair ball bouncing over the fence being a double is pretty universal), not about a ball in the, uh, ground.
I think, by the rules, there’s nothing that says a ball embedded deep in the ground is anything but in play.
Now my guess is that it’s near impossible to seriously embed the ball in any normal part of a baseball field, even with super-strength (some combination of a big bounce and the ball breaking apart seems more likely), except for some freak case like burrowing under the edge of newly-laid sod, or foam padding that had a chemical reaction to become hard and brittle.
This would be more interesting to me if the question were how far the ball would go if someone twice as ‘powerful’, whatever that means, as the most ‘powerful’ person to ever swing a bat, whatever that means, laid his wood on the ball.
I suspect we should limit the size of the batter to seven feet or so. I also suspect that the dimensions of the diamond and the heat with which the pitchers can bring it won’t allow the beast to get everything out of it he could if, say, we were playing slow-pitch softball.
I suspect that in the end it’s more about speed than it is about power.