3 ms·

I remember learning that humans trying to catch a ball are not actually able to predict where the ball will land, but rather, will move in a way that maintains

I remember learning that humans trying to catch a ball are not actually able to predict where the ball will land, but rather, will move in a way that maintains the angle of movement constant. As a result a human running to catch the ball over some distance (eg during a baseball game) runs along a curved path, not linearly to the point where the ball will drop (which would be evidence of having an intuition of the ball's destination).

01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
Sounds a bit like proportional navigation from missile guidance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_navigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_navigation
eszed 2y ago
This hypothesis could be tested, now that major league baseball tracks the positions of players in games. In the MLB app they show animations of good outfield plays with "catch difficulty" scores assigned, based (in part) on the straight-line distance from the fielder's initial position to the position of the catch. The "routes" on the best catches are always nearly-straight lines, which suggests that high-level players have developed exactly this intuitive sense. Certainly what I was coached to do, what outfielders say they do, and what I see watching the game, is to "read" the ball, run towards where you think the ball is going, and then track the ball on the way. I was and am a shitty outfielder, in part because I never developed a fast-enough intuitive sense of where the ball is going (and because, well, I'm damn slow), but watch the most famous Catch[1] caught on film, and it sure looks like Mays knew right away that ball was hit over his head. [1] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7bLt2xKaNH0 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7bLt2xKaNH0
spiderfarmer 2y ago
Humans are definitely able to predict where a ball wil land. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoScYO2osb0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoScYO2osb0
- pests 2y ago
  Agreed. Reminds me of juggling, while learning I noticed that as long as I could see each ball for at least a split second on its upwards trajectory I could "tell" if it would be a good throw or not. In order to keep both hands/paths in my view I would stare basically straight forward and not look at the top of the arc and could do it at any height. Now I can do it much more with feel and the motion is muscle memory but the visual cues were my main teacher.
- aredox 2y ago
  It makes sense that there are several heuristics. After all, "Thinking: Fast and Slow" already makes the point that human brains have several layers of processing with different advantages and drawbacks depending on situations.
jampekka 2y ago
There are a few that kind of theories. You are probably referring to the Optical Acceleration Cancellation theory[1]. There are some similar later so called "direct perception" theories too. The problem with these is that they don't really work, often even in theory. People do seem to predict at least some aspects of the trajectory, although not necessarily the whole trajectory [2]. [1] https://pubs.aip.org/aapt/ajp/article-abstract/36/10/868/1041138/Catching-a-Baseball https://pubs.aip.org/aapt/ajp/article-abstract/36/10/868/104... [2] https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.241291 https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.241291

01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago

Sounds a bit like proportional navigation from missile guidance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_navigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_navigation

eszed 2y ago

This hypothesis could be tested, now that major league baseball tracks the positions of players in games. In the MLB app they show animations of good outfield plays with "catch difficulty" scores assigned, based (in part) on the straight-line distance from the fielder's initial position to the position of the catch. The "routes" on the best catches are always nearly-straight lines, which suggests that high-level players have developed exactly this intuitive sense. Certainly what I was coached to do, what outfielders say they do, and what I see watching the game, is to "read" the ball, run towards where you think the ball is going, and then track the ball on the way. I was and am a shitty outfielder, in part because I never developed a fast-enough intuitive sense of where the ball is going (and because, well, I'm damn slow), but watch the most famous Catch[1] caught on film, and it sure looks like Mays knew right away that ball was hit over his head. [1] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7bLt2xKaNH0 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7bLt2xKaNH0

spiderfarmer 2y ago

Humans are definitely able to predict where a ball wil land. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoScYO2osb0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoScYO2osb0

pests 2y ago
Agreed. Reminds me of juggling, while learning I noticed that as long as I could see each ball for at least a split second on its upwards trajectory I could "tell" if it would be a good throw or not. In order to keep both hands/paths in my view I would stare basically straight forward and not look at the top of the arc and could do it at any height. Now I can do it much more with feel and the motion is muscle memory but the visual cues were my main teacher.
aredox 2y ago
It makes sense that there are several heuristics. After all, "Thinking: Fast and Slow" already makes the point that human brains have several layers of processing with different advantages and drawbacks depending on situations.

jampekka 2y ago

There are a few that kind of theories. You are probably referring to the Optical Acceleration Cancellation theory[1]. There are some similar later so called "direct perception" theories too. The problem with these is that they don't really work, often even in theory. People do seem to predict at least some aspects of the trajectory, although not necessarily the whole trajectory [2]. [1] https://pubs.aip.org/aapt/ajp/article-abstract/36/10/868/1041138/Catching-a-Baseball https://pubs.aip.org/aapt/ajp/article-abstract/36/10/868/104... [2] https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.241291 https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.241291