Quote:
Originally Posted by tony20009
Presumably "the math" to which you refer is that pertaining to the Ideal Gas Law. That law and and it's application to the footballs in the game in question is very exhaustively discussed beginning on page 38 of the Wells report appendix.
Had you bothered to educate yourself on what the Wells report actually says, rather than reading the comments of sports editorialists and parroting them here, you might have a different view? Had you read the report rather than relying on the soundbites you see or hear, you'd know that Exponent used the scientific method to empirically analyze the balls and the gauges. The nature of the questions they addressed include but are not limited to: - Needles
- Gauge stems
- Gauge bodies
- Gauge GUI
- Gauge-to-gauge variability and accuracy
- Gauge accuracy in the measured pressure range
- Balls: Physical factors including game use, natural leak rates, rubbing, multiple gaugings, humidity, temperature and the impact of changes.
They did other tests too. Their data, their methods, all of it is shown right there in the report. There are no secrets. It's there for anyone to see if they but bother to actually read it. Hell, even the science and math parts even are explained in layman's terms.
I'm not going to list out all the testing they did. I'm not going to explain to you what approaches they used or how they incorporated into their testing the stuff you claim they didn't. If you "educate yourself" by reading the damn report, you too would quite likely be considerably more skeptical about what you've read that various sports editors have written about the impact of temperature and the allegedly overlooked role it played in the 2015 AFC Championship game between the Colts and Pats.
All the best. |
Read the links i posted, then re-evaluate where you stand in the science. I know you will dismiss those reports, but the evidence in them is hard to deny.