3 ms·
>Like who counted the dimples and how many are there in reality? Assuming the dimples and placement of them is uniform across the ball, and across all manufact
by setr 10y ago
>Like who counted the dimples and how many are there in reality?
Assuming the dimples and placement of them is uniform across the ball, and across all manufactured balls,
Then it shouls be pretty simple to get the size of a ball, the size of a dimple, and the spacing between two dimples, and then extrapolate the actual coverage
- tedunangst 10y agoYeah, sure, it's pretty simple. But why won't anybody tell me what those numbers are? I'm not going out to Costco to buy a set of balls they no longer sell to find out. It seems so obvious that the easiest way to convince me X != Y is to tell me X and Y. Is that weird?
- gervase 10y agoGive 5 interns 5 balls each, and a black sharpie. Have them count the dimples on each ball by putting a dot in the ones they have counted. If there were more than 500 per ball I would be shocked - the group could be done in under an hour. Not sure how many you'd have to do to get a legally-valid "representative sample", but I imagine as a supportive factor to other methods of determination, it's not the worst option. It also has the advantage of being dead-simple to explain.
- chrisbennet 10y agoAs a data point, the dimples aren't all the same size on the same golf ball. (I'm not a golfer but I looked at a lot of them for a machine vision project.)