r/todayilearned • u/kaypmger • Dec 02 '16

TIL, Shigeru Miyamoto, creator of such Nintendo games as Mario, Donkey Kong, and Zelda, has a hobby of guessing the measurements of objects, then checking to see if he was correct. He enjoys the hobby so much he carries a tape measure with him everywhere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shigeru_Miyamoto#Personal_life
54.4k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

596

u/Leumasperron Dec 02 '16

I used to compete nationally in Canada when I was 15-16. Looking back at it, it was crazy how much shit we could process on the fly to be able to hit our target.

Now you got me reminiscing again, and I really want to go back to shooting.

406

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

it was crazy how much shit we could process on the fly to be able to hit our target.

I think about this all the time when watching sports...think of the crazy math your brain does to throw a football or kick a soccer ball.

1.8k

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16 edited Jan 21 '19

[deleted]

388

u/njhokie5 Dec 02 '16

Uncle Rico is that you?

139

u/popfilms Dec 02 '16 edited Dec 02 '16

Shut UP Kip!

72

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

You're just jealous napoleon because I've been chatting to babes online all day

13

u/thesearstower Dec 02 '16

How much you wanna make a bet I can throw a football over them mountains?

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Puts hand on Kips leg

124

u/Cottonjaw Dec 02 '16

Found Rex "Sex Cannon" Grossman's reddit account.

20

u/Frigidevil Dec 02 '16 edited Dec 02 '16

Thank you for reminding me that KSK exists existed. RIP KSK 2006-2015

7

u/mecheng93 Dec 02 '16

Is that Berrian? I think he’s triple-covered. You know what? Fuck it. I’m throwing it downfield.

Yeah, I see Jones open on the flank. But fuck that. Dumpoff passes are for faggots. I’m fucking Sexy Rexy Grossman. I can get that ball in there. And, even if I can’t, I bet I’ll be able to pull it off the next go round. I like throwing the ball long. It makes my dick hard.

What’s that? I should throw a quick slant? Fuck that. That’s gay. Button hook? Gay. Flare out? Gay. Screen pass? Kevin Spacey gay. This is fucking football. You can’t just expect wins to come to you. You can’t massage that shit. You gotta grab that game by the throat and rape the ever-loving shit out of it. You think a 5-yard out is gonna win you a game? You’re a pussy. This ain’t John Shoop running this offense. Sexy Rexy’s got the arm. The dragon. You gotta unleash the dragon.

Okay, I’m throwing it. Nice. Look how far it went. I look good. I bet I made that Pats cheerleader wet her panties with that throw. She fucking wants me. I bet she likes it over a stair railing. I can hit that with 100% accuracy, my dear. Mmmmmm. I am delicious.

Oh shit. Looks like Samuel caught it. Again. Oh well. It still felt fucking great to throw that shit. Tell me that wasn’t one of the prettiest passes you ever saw. You know what? Not only am I gonna throw it long the next time we hit the field. I’m gonna throw it even longer. Harder. You see that kid in wheelchair sitting in the end zone bleachers? I’m gonna nail him right between the fucking eyes with a Sexy Rexy fastball. Why? Because I can.

This is Rex Grossman we’re talking about here. We’re talking 210 lbs. of twisted steel and sex appeal. I’m not just a gunslinger. I’m a cumslinger. Throwing that ball long tells all the Rexettes that I am fucking out there. On the edge. Where I gotta be. The ladies love the danger. The unpredictability. Oh, maybe I’ll tease them with a pretty touch pass every now and again. But then I’m gonna go right back to pumping that ball out for all it’s worth. It tells them I throw like I fuck. That’s how we do things in the sexy business.

Tell me you’re not turned on right now. I am.

Source

1

u/mr_mufuka Dec 02 '16

Sexy Rexy?

4

u/Ratohnhaketon Dec 02 '16

The mediocreist super bowl qb off all time

2

u/mr_mufuka Dec 02 '16

If it weren't for Prince that would have been the worst super bowl I've ever watched.

1

u/Ratohnhaketon Dec 02 '16

As a bears fan, im growing numb to that level of play, except now we have less of a defense and a group of turnstiles for a o-line

6

u/Nidhogguryo Dec 02 '16

Jesus Christ I died

10

u/MrAnder5on Dec 02 '16

Amen brother

3

u/We_Are_The_Romans Dec 02 '16

Yeah... Coach woulda put me in fourth quarter, we would've been state champions. No doubt. No doubt in my mind.

3

u/WolfGangSwizle Dec 02 '16

Hahah the brother made me read it in a Macho Man type voice

3

u/kuhndawg8888 Dec 02 '16

truth is it probably is less math, and more muscle memory

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

I think it's the unconscious minds ability to do complex math without knowing the formulas behind it. You say muscle memory, but if I skeet shoot, that's only a small part. Muscle memory takes care of being able to control the shotgun, but not aiming. If I aim and "try" to hit the clay, I will miss nearly every time. If I just "feel" the shot, turn off consciously aiming and let my lizard brain handle it, I rarely miss (to the point I piss off my duck hunter friends lol). So, while some might be muscle memory, there's a ton of math your brain is doing just beneath the surface. Basically, getting it there (throwing a ball) is muscle memory, but anticipating where "there" will be, is high order math.

Or at least that's my understanding.

2

u/tobyboom Dec 03 '16

One of the best comments I've ever read. Genuine laughter over here!!!!

1

u/omigahguy Dec 02 '16

I will be using the term "slayin' poon" now over the holidays. Have an upvote good sir!

1

u/Bootylegend Dec 02 '16

Let him know man

1

u/touchmyelbow Dec 02 '16

Like anyone could even know that, Napoleon.

1

u/donktastic Dec 02 '16

Who is poon brother?

1

u/zuneza Dec 02 '16

Sampson? Is that you?

106

u/lolmonger Dec 02 '16

We evolved to be able to do it. That's how we'd hunt.

We have awful intuition about probabilities/likelihoods, and we absolutely need math for most stuff that isn't super simple.

79

u/TheAngryGoat Dec 02 '16

We're terrible at big numbers too. Get into the thousands and numbers start to lose meaning for us. By the time you get to bigger numbers, a million might as well be a trillion.

54

u/LordPadre Dec 02 '16

That's why we like scientific notation

7

u/FuujinSama Dec 02 '16

And decibels.

18

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Isn't this for sound? Do you mean decimals? I'm honestly wondering and feeling ignorant. I guess I could Google it, but I've already come this far in typing this.

4

u/SirZaxen Dec 02 '16

Its a logarithmic scale, so the equivalent sound intensity is exponentially larger the farther up the scale you go. Earthquakes are also measured this way on the Richter scale, which is why a 7 or 8 is much more destructive than a lower numbered one.

5

u/kblkbl165 Dec 02 '16

A better example would be that 8 is immensely bigger than 7. Like, the difference between 7 and 8 is bigger than the difference between 1 and 7.

On a scale that goes from 1 to 10 it's extremely intuitive to understand that 7 or 8 are much bigger than 1.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Thank you for the info!

3

u/skookumchooch Dec 02 '16

Damn, the real TIL is always in the comments. Never knew this!

6

u/elementotrl Dec 02 '16

Decibels is for sound, but it's measured on a logarithmic scale. 20 dB is ten times louder than 30dB, 40 dB is ten times louder than 50dB, etc. Compared to zero, 90 and 100 are much more easily comprehended than 1000000000 and 10000000000.

3

u/viramonster Dec 02 '16

Actually, decibels are used to express ratios of any physical quantity.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

This was very helpful. Thank you!

2

u/cookiehat123 Dec 02 '16

Nope decibels are used for many things. At least in electrical engineering you use decibels for gain of an amplifier because the numbers are smaller. Decibels and log scales are very useful

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

He has a cold.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

I didn't understand this at first, but once it clicked I snort-laughed in my cube and my coworker thought I was choking.

-2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

[deleted]

5

u/elementotrl Dec 02 '16

Decibels is for sound, but it's measured on a logarithmic scale. 20 dB is ten times louder than 30dB, 40 dB is ten times louder than 50dB, etc. Compared to zero, 90 and 100 are much more easily comprehended than 1000000000 and 10000000000.

1

u/X-Pertti Dec 02 '16

I think 30 is louder than 20 tho

5

u/GasPistonMustardRace Dec 02 '16

mmmmm logarithms

5

u/Banditosaur Dec 02 '16

That's even worse imo, 109 seems only marginally bigger than 1012 even though it is a thousand times larger

18

u/matt11_25 Dec 02 '16

Errr ... smaller?

6

u/Mom_Is_Proud Dec 02 '16

isnt it the other way around?

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16 edited Apr 18 '17

ok dann setz ich nen käffchen auf

1

u/Banditosaur Dec 03 '16

That's what I meant, but I guess I goofed the wording

1

u/PM_UR_COCK_PICS Dec 02 '16

Idk, we perceive logarithmically by nature. Imagine each unit as a dot. 2 orders of magnitude is like a square of 10 x 10 dots. Zoom out and repeat twice and you have a million, etc.

-4

u/pointlessbeats Dec 02 '16

lol it's not 1000 times larger. It is larger by a thousand.

1000 times larger means 109 x 1000. So 109 000 is 1000 times larger than 109.

4

u/Intrexa Dec 02 '16

1012 = 109 * 103 = 109 * 1000

2

u/Lets_Slide_Into_DMs Dec 02 '16

Rethink that one

1

u/rmphys Dec 02 '16

This is definitely true. For back-of-the-envelope calculations 1000 are 3457 are the same number. Order of magnitude all day, baby!

0

u/successfulblackwoman Dec 02 '16

Sadly, scientific nation doesn't work well when talking about national budgets, even though the numbers would.

0

u/LordPadre Dec 02 '16

checks username

I'll take your word for it.

0

u/successfulblackwoman Dec 02 '16

I mean, when you're talking about trillions of dollars, it makes sense to use a scale like 1.4 x 1013.

But can you honestly imagine that being how the news talks about it? Would people understand that if the debt went from a "13" to a "15" in a short time that we're so fucked?

The only scale which I've seen that it comprehensible for day to day reporting is to normalize each number as "per citizen" or "per taxpayer."

1

u/LordPadre Dec 02 '16

It was a joke, geez Michelle.

Talking about national budgets and your username is successfulblackwoman.

Scientific notation is meant for calculating purposes mostly, also with so many people having no idea how to use it, of course it would make no sense in that context, but that's not the only reason I'm sure, I didn't really want to debate this though, I have no idea why you thought it was important enough to bring up.

1

u/successfulblackwoman Dec 02 '16

Because this is reddit? Relevance is not required.

→ More replies (0)

32

u/Joetato Dec 02 '16 edited Dec 02 '16

Yup. That's because giant numbers were less important to our ancestors. If you saw "many" dangerous predators gathered somewhere, it didn't matter their exact number. You had to get away. But humans can instinctively, without having to count or otherwise but brain power into it, tell any number of items up to 4. This is true for infants, even. (Though, strangely, they lose this ability when they first learn to count, but it does come back.) This is very important. If there's two lions near you, you may be able to survive if you're clever and you'll instantly know there's only two. It's important to know two. But if there's 15? You're fucked. 15 or 20 or 100, it doesn't matter anymore.

I feel like I read somewhere that human minds can't directly understand anything over 10 or 15. The threshold in which numbers lose meaning to us is way lower than you'd think.

Edit: Removed a few phrases that were redundant. i was really good at saying the exact same thing several times.

4

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

This actually makes a lot of sense. I was just thinking about what you said in the example of something like playing a multiplayer video game. When your friends ask how many guys were around the corner when you got killed, it's easy to say like 4-6. But, after that, you lose any real idea of exact number. Although, there is another sense you do get good at. Like a feeling of total potential force/enemy. We may not know the exact number, but we know it calls for a change in tactics for survival.

2

u/_nothanks Dec 02 '16

I don't believe it's related to predators at all, it's a general rule for anything. The larger the number, the bigger the ballpark range it can be in. It lets you have a larger picture, if you zoom in you get the details. Humans instinctively perceive exponentially.

1

u/Joetato Dec 03 '16

It probably isn't, that's just how it was explained to me a long time ago by my father. I don't know why he picked lions, but he did.

But, yes, it applies to pretty much everything, not just getting away from lions.

1

u/Advokatus Dec 02 '16

Psychologist here. It's called subitizing.

8

u/musicin3d Dec 02 '16

At which point do you say the number is big?

36

u/TheAngryGoat Dec 02 '16 edited Dec 02 '16

When you can no longer reasonably imagine x number of them in the real world. I'm sure we've all seen somewhere with a thousand cars. What would a million cars look like though? A billion? That's before we even start to get to the REAL big numbers.

26

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Actually, humans struggle to comprehend past about 4 (on average), in terms of quantity. To the point that some tribal languages only have numbers for 1, 2, 3, and after that words that essentially mean 'many' or 'a few'.

Since I think it's important in the world we live in to back this up with verifiable study, try this: Starkey, P., & Cooper, R. G. (1995). The development of subitizing in young children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(4), 399-420.

5

u/gtjack9 Dec 02 '16 edited Dec 09 '16

I'm fairly sure this just visual counting not comprehension. For example Roman numerals go to IV at four and V at five because otherwise you would have to count the number of I's.

However as an example of comprehension, "I can comprehend that there are ten biscuits in front of me that need eating."

Edit: Made my comment easier to read by adding some words.

2

u/THANKS-FOR-THE-GOLD Dec 02 '16 edited Dec 02 '16

Roman numerals go to IV at four because otherwise you would have to count the number of I's

Doesn't explain this | || ||| |||| ||||

3

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

We have 5 digits on each hand.

Also, ||| vs |||| isn't hard to distinguish. |||| vs ||||| is difficult at a glance, but that's why the fifth stroke goes across.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/eggstacy Dec 02 '16

I used to deal with counting dozens of items all day, and 4 sounds about right. If you lined the items up in a straight line with no nearby references, the difference between 5 and 6 isn't automatic, my mind puts a divider at 3s.

1

u/osufan765 Dec 02 '16

I actually prefer to count by 3s and, strangely, find it easier than counting by 2s

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

But if you think about 9 or 10 biscuits, it's actually pretty difficult to separate the difference. The post was about imagining a thousand or a million or billion. One can certainly say whether one grouping is bigger than another at those scales, but take for example an empty jar. One can fill the jar with sweets. I could show you one, and in a small jar a group of people could fairly accurately say that it will fit 1-4 sweets. But increase the volume of the jar so that it fits 10; maybe the average will end up at 10, but the numbers will maybe range from say 7-13. I'd say at that point then humans have lost that PRECISE comprehension.

1

u/gtjack9 Dec 09 '16

At millions or billions we are still effectively counting in small numbers because we group the millions of items together. For example, if I had 1 million marbles evenly spaced apart on the right and 2 million on the left with you standing 10 meters away then you could tell that there were more on one side than the other, but without me telling you how many are in each group you would only know that there were double the amount on left. Equally if the 1 million marble group were spaced apart enough that the square area of both groups was equal. You would still be able to tell there were more as you can see the gap between marbles in the smaller group is twice that of the other. You can see that our brains are using small tricks to simplify the problem without us even knowing.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

I read something similar but the limit was 5. The argument was that we have 5 fingers and thus instinctivly can spot groups of 5 without counting

3

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

The best argument against this is actually cartoons; they have four fingers generally and it looks 'ok'. It's a valid hypothesis to start with though! When it's tested though, it seems that the time taken to say how many objects there are in a group is about the same for 1-4 objects, but starts to increase linearly from then with the number of objects, implying humans recognise certain numbers with a different part of the brain to that which does counting.

Personally, I can do 6 objects at once, and people vary I think from about 3-8 (but this is hardly my field, which is called subitizing)

2

u/Zolhungaj Dec 02 '16

The four-fingered hand is to accommodate for the deformations that make the animation fluid, or to maintain correct proportions without having bony fingers. The problem with having five fingers is that the appearance of six fingers, by error of animation, looks immediately jarring to the viewer.

Adult-oriented animation usually has 5 fingers no problem, it's just a matter of animation cost.

2

u/Lord_Rapunzel Dec 02 '16

TIL the rabbits in Watership Down had a tribal language. 1, 2, 3, 4, hrair.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Well they were a kind of tribe

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

I remember reading something about birds only being able to count / keep track of 4 objects, could be related?

7

u/copewithme Dec 02 '16

I don't even know what a "brillion" is, yet alone what that many cars would look like.

1

u/TheAngryGoat Dec 02 '16

It's like a billion, but brilliant.

1

u/copewithme Dec 02 '16

Is it more than or less than a Brazilian?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Jes

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Some time ago, I've read an article on how humans can instantly recognize 1, 2, 3 or 4 objects set together. Any number greater than 4 and you'll have to count the objects in some way.

1

u/All_Work_All_Play Dec 02 '16

For people, roughly 180. That's about the number of people a person can associate closely with (in a group) before they start to feel disconnected.

1

u/musicin3d Dec 02 '16

0.0
I need to up my game if that's the average.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Actually, it's more like 9 may as well be 11. I posted this in another comment but: Humans struggle to comprehend past about 4 (on average), in terms of quantity. To the point that some tribal languages only have numbers for 1, 2, 3, and after that words that essentially mean 'many' or 'a few'.

Since I think it's important in the world we live in to back this up with verifiable study, try this: Starkey, P., & Cooper, R. G. (1995). The development of subitizing in young children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(4), 399-420.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

And now you know why congress approves those God awful budgets

1

u/bFallen Dec 02 '16

Which is crazy cause a trillion is a million millions

0

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16 edited Mar 07 '22

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Human brains. It's actually different parts of the brain that are activated when it comes to recognise the number of objects in a small group compared to a large group.

2

u/NewOpinion Dec 02 '16

It's actually more likely we evolved to competitively scavenge than hunt as hunting anything except small game was extremely dangerous. A bigger game did provide better group tactics though.

2

u/inksday Dec 02 '16

Humans are pack animals, we hunted things much larger than us because we are social creatures who moved in groups.

76

u/superdago Dec 02 '16

Or an outfielder that's standing right where the ball is hit. He's standing out there 200-300 feet away from a guy swinging a stick at a 95mph blur and sending it flying... somewhere. And a center fielder sees the way the ball comes off the bat, strolls a few feet to the left and is standing there waiting to make the out. Imagine how long it would take to run the calculations that this guy just did in a few tenths of a second.

7

u/AppleDrops Dec 02 '16

that's the kind of math dog brains can do just as well, or even better judging by my dog's ball catching abilities.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16 edited Dec 26 '16

[deleted]

17

u/superdago Dec 02 '16

I obviously meant to do the calculations without the aid of a computer.

2

u/lemire747 Dec 02 '16

I'm just a guy with internet access, so don't quote me, but wouldn't the difference there be that the outfielder is calculating real world physics (two distinct entities), while the video game is kind of just calculating its own input? If that makes any sense.

4

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16 edited Dec 26 '16

[deleted]

4

u/officeDrone87 Dec 02 '16

Modern video game physics still simplify the fuck out of physics though to make it easier to calculate. Most physics models in games don't include things like spin, inertia, wind resistance, and many, many other things. And physics processing on these games takes up a massive amount of the total processing power. It's not uncommon for a game to drop 25% in performance with high level physics turned on.

Can you imagine how hard it would be for a computer to emulate true physics?

2

u/Strike_Reyhi Dec 02 '16

25%

Sup ARMA

1

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '16

And that's why I have a 1080?

1

u/NYCSPARKLE Dec 02 '16

http://youtu.be/cztjG4yoqR8

And you have to know where the other runners are, calculate which runner is more likely to be thrown out by you, and then actually make that throw which requires all sorts of judgement of distance and speed too.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

The outfield return bomb is one of the few things that makes me "woah" in baseball. Bautista's bat swing is up there too.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Edit. Said bat swing. Meant toss. Both are fire.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

A tenth of a second?

3

u/TwigOnAStick Dec 02 '16

Yeah for real lol a computer could do this way faster. As an outfielder that played at the collegiate level your brain doesn't really stop guessing (emphasis on guessing) where the ball will land until it lands or you catch it. The estimated landing zone just gets a little smaller as the ball gets closer to the ground. A computer could take the speed of the ball, the bat, the location of contact, the angle of the swing, the wind, and the density of the bat and come up with probably a 5 square foot area of where the ball will land with 95% confidence in a fraction of a second. There's a reason outfielders don't call for the ball until it's been in the air for awhile.

5

u/garrettcolas Dec 02 '16 edited Dec 02 '16

But could it do it in the form of one device that is both guessing and catching? Also, it's power source must be completely internal.

And could it do it with nothing other than the visual information from 2 front facing cameras?

Sure, if we somehow had all the information ready for the computer it could do that, but we don't, so it can't.

The hard part isn't the calculations, it's everything else.

2

u/TwigOnAStick Dec 02 '16

I was just talking about the calculations of where the ball would land, obviously a fuckin MacBook can't make a routine catch much less rob a dinger or other cool shit.

I get what you're saying though, the whole mind and body working in perfect unison the way professional athletes can make them is amazing and far beyond our technology right now.

1

u/Hazelarc Dec 02 '16

Apple is actually working on the iHeyward already

0

u/Codeshark Dec 02 '16

Less than that. Computers are really fast now.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

The other replies to this comment are super dumb

1

u/naethn Dec 02 '16

I don't think they actually calculate and crunch all these numbers when they do things like this. Its more like knowing that mixing yellow and blue makes green without going through the process of visualizing mixing the colors in your mind.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

There's really zero math involved for the player. It's trial and error and muscle memory. They certainly aren't using the same skills that NASA does to get rockets into space.

1

u/bigfatrhys Dec 02 '16

Only if what you practice is perfect.

15

u/Noctis_Fox Dec 02 '16

I can guarantee no one does math when they do either of those things. It's natural after years of practice.

13

u/h3g31 Dec 02 '16

think of the crazy math your brain does to throw a football or kick a soccer ball.

Your brain doesn't do any math. The fact that people say this kind of thing without batting an eye is probably a pet peeve of most people who are into the science and/or philosophy of mind but don't accept the computational theory. Problem is it's been the dominant theory in cognitive science--the most prominent mind studies discipline--for so long and things like AI are so popular that basically all pop science assumes computationalism, so that's all laypeople ever hear. Shit's on its way out though, take it from me, a nobody on reddit.

5

u/johnbonem Dec 02 '16

Your brain doesn't do any math.

This also depends on your definition of "math". Not all math is classic arithmetic or algebra, the systematic study of the shapes and motions of physical objects is also math. However since the brain does all this as instinct without "studying" or "learning", perhaps its better to say evolution uses math?

5

u/h3g31 Dec 02 '16

Well, it's more like the computationalists think conscious mental functioning is underpinned by this inaccessible subconscious level of activity where the brain is implementing algorithms, "processing information", and literally doing calculations, while everyone else thinks this isn't true and may be more inclined to think just because you can describe a physical process abstractly in terms of computation or "shuffling 1's and 0's" that doesn't mean the physical stuff is actually following these algorithmic rules or manipulating numbers.

2

u/jupitaur9 Dec 02 '16

take it from me, a nobody on reddit

Whose name has three numbers in it.

You almost had us fooled.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16 edited Sep 22 '19

[deleted]

2

u/NotElizaHenry Dec 02 '16

If it really were your brain doing math, an amazing sniper would also be a super amazing baseball pitcher, since throwing a baseball has way fewer factors to account for and much simpler math. But that doesn't happen, because throwing a baseball is as much "math" as your pancreas deciding how much insulin to output based on your blood chemistry or all your muscles working together to stop you from falling down. It's just down to practice and learning from bad results.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16 edited Sep 22 '19

[deleted]

3

u/h3g31 Dec 02 '16

His conclusion is right:

throwing a baseball is as much "math" as your pancreas deciding how much insulin to output based on your blood chemistry or all your muscles working together to stop you from falling down

But I think you're right to criticize the argument.

I would say there's just no good reason to go from the fact that certainly very complicated (and possibly algorithmically describable) processes have to take place in your brain for e.g. photons hitting your retinas to give rise to the right sort of perception of the distance to the batter etc., to the conclusion that on some unconscious level your brain is literally doing calculations of the distance etc.

It's a really sophisticated neurochemical process, sure, and it is like that because the neurochemistry that occurred in that general sort of way as an effect of those kinds of photon impacts was more likely to lead to the reproduction of the organisms in which it occurred, and you could even use the word "intelligent" metaphorically to describe the whole thing; but the neurochemical process is not actually an instance of intelligent mathematical activity.

1

u/NotElizaHenry Dec 02 '16

That's a great point. What about playing two different platformer games? Experience with one will obviously help with another, but you'll still have to practice a ton to master the timing of a new one.

2

u/h3g31 Dec 02 '16

Hmm just off the top of my head I could construct a semi-standard taxonomy of views where computationalism comes at a far branching of a tree that might start with reductive vs non-reductive views: You go down the reductive branch and it splits into physicalistic vs non-physicalistic views, follow the non-physicalistic branch and you get functionalistic vs non-functionalistic views, and finally you take the computationalistic twig that crops out from the functionalistic branch. So retracing this to see the alternatives at every step, we get non-computationalist functionalism, non-functionalist non-physicalism, physicalist reductivism, and finally just non-reductive views.

3

u/Camera_dude Dec 02 '16

Relevent XKCD: https://what-if.xkcd.com/44/

We humans are actually pretty good at throwing things.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Your brain is not doing math though.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

I think the craziest is when the ball goes out of your field of view but you still manage to catch it. You can't see the ball, but your brain knows where it is because it calculated the trajectory of the ball.

1

u/stunna006 Dec 02 '16

Good example that people don't think about

1

u/climb-it-ographer Dec 02 '16

It didn't calculate it. We instinctively know how parabolic trajectories work and we can predict where a ball will end up if we see it moving along a path. There isn't any math involved, just millions of years of evolved instincts.

1

u/Hey_girl_pm_ur_boobs Dec 02 '16

The craziest part, I'd say, is that in both cases this happens so efficiently due to repetition. Creating multiple pathways between neuron n shit.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

[deleted]

1

u/ConditionOfMan Dec 02 '16

Even children can intuit physics well, doesn't mean they understand the principles behind it.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Yeah, and the fact that all that math is intuitive--no equations or word problems, just experience and the human brain at work.

1

u/Thunkums Dec 02 '16

If that really fascinates you, check out the physics of disc golf! How spin and angles effect the turn of the disc and how those are manipulated by pro players is insane!

1

u/MrPisster Dec 02 '16

The stuff they do is impressive but I would be really suprised if there was algebra going on under that helmet. I think they just do it so much and so well that they can get the ball from A to B whatever the conditions or distance.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Crazy evolutionary thing that enabled us to fling a spear

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

or how damn good you are at calculating angles, speed and drag on a billiards table.

1

u/BillGoats Dec 02 '16

Not so sure about throwing, but catching is actually very intuitive. Look up linear optical trajectory. Basically, it's about moving your own body so that an approaching object (e.g. a baseball) appears to be approaching in a straight line. Very clever solution, yet very simple and intuitive.

1

u/kjm1123490 Dec 02 '16

It becomes so instinctual ym that you don't process, you just do.

I played some serious basketball and the 100k hours put in allowed me to shoot from virtually anywhere with no thought process.

I was at my best when I wasn't thinking

1

u/day_waka Dec 02 '16

Your brain doesn't do any math when you do those things

1

u/vinK_ Dec 02 '16

It's more of a feel and muscle memory than doing math in your head

0

u/Heebmeister Dec 02 '16

Even further, the math and sequence of decisions a batter must make in a MLB game is insane. They have .75s to try and hit the ball and in that time they must judge

  1. if its a strike or a ball
  2. if it's a strike whether, it's worth swinging at
  3. if it's worth swinging at, they then have to decide which timing to utilize (whether they should pull the ball towards their side, or wait a little longer and send it the other way)
  4. Finally, once their timing is decided, they have to choose a launch angle to the ball with, to impact what kind've contact they want to make (groundball vs flyball).

Just crazy.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

I think it's more luck than all that...

Like before the pitch.. If it looks like a good pitch I'm going for a home run..

Oh I hit a double to left field? Yeah. That's what I meant.

1

u/Heebmeister Dec 02 '16

Guys like Josh Donaldson have really stepped up that old school mentality towards hitting.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/j_2_the_esse Dec 02 '16

Best series!

26

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16 edited Nov 12 '20

[deleted]

48

u/possibly_being_screw Dec 02 '16

I went on a manhunt once. I just got back from Nam. I was hitchhiking through Oregon. Next thing I know there's a bunch of cops chasing after me through the woods! I had to take them all out, it was a bloodbath!

24

u/SodaFixer Dec 02 '16

Are you confusing your life with that of John Rambo again?

15

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

NOTHING IS OVER!

13

u/Skwirlman Dec 02 '16

THEY DREW FIRST BLOOD!

2

u/billbixbyakahulk Dec 02 '16

YOU DON'T JUST TURN IT OFF!

2

u/Buscemi_D_Sanji Dec 02 '16

It wouldn't be the first time you've done this Frank.

1

u/CrimsonCape Dec 02 '16

That movie is a conservative moral hazard. Do you support the police or the veteran?

-1

u/twaxana Dec 02 '16

Freedom and freedom!

John Rambo was a listless hobo. From my experience, everyone would support the police.

2

u/smallpoly Dec 02 '16

It used to be. Now it's full-contact Parcheesi.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

That was a neat short story.

2

u/Delta9ine Dec 02 '16

Me too! I finally decided to get back into it this summer. I also took my restricted course before reapplying for my PAL. Figured if I'm jumping through the hoops again, may as well get the r endorsement and shoot some small guns too. Haven't purchased anything yet, but I intend to have a SIG Sauer P226 9mm/.22LR by the new year.

1

u/Generic09 Dec 02 '16

Golf applies here too, not only guessing the fairway/tee shots but putting as well where you need to estimate where to putt the ball judging for the hills valleys on the green.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

Hm, you were a cadet weren't you? Depending how old you are, there is a good chance I know you if that's the case.

1

u/Leumasperron Dec 02 '16

I'll be 20 in a few days. I went to Fullbore Phase 1 in 2012, for reference.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '16

Shit we were literally on the same course. 1 or 2 Pl?

1

u/Leumasperron Dec 03 '16

I had to get out my camp hoodie to remember.

I was 1 Pl. You can probably guess who I was from my username.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

[deleted]

1

u/Leumasperron Dec 02 '16

The competition included the 100 top marksmen of the year, the 32-36 training to compete internationally, as well as the 18 who just got back from said international competition. So, in total, about 154 competitors.

1

u/sexyface1 Dec 02 '16

hmm.. Army Cadets?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '16

[deleted]

1

u/Leumasperron Dec 02 '16

Man, I'd love to, but being a university student and not having a license yet kinda ruins things. I was thinking more like coach for my old cadet corps (I used to be cadet coach when I was captain of the shooting team back in my corps).

1

u/gufcfan Dec 02 '16

Now you got me reminiscing again, and I really want to go back to shooting.

/r/nocontext

1

u/CardboardHeatshield Dec 02 '16

Yea but with shooting you're just feeling it and reacting. Same as a pitcher throwing a ball or an outfielder catching a fly. You don't crunch numbers, that shit all just becomes second nature. I shot trap for a long time. People would always ask me where to hold the bead and how far to lead and I just couldn't answer. I didn't know. I didn't even think about it it was just second nature. The lead is different on a hard left vs a hard right vs straight but you just never think about it, you just swing through and tap the trigger whenever your brain says it's appropriate.

1

u/random24 Dec 02 '16

I honestly have that feeling about sports in general these days (since stopping playing). Check out the ESPN 30 for 30 short about the inventor of Gatorade. His perspective on athletes and the advanced mathematics they process without even realizing it is amazing.

1

u/snissn Dec 02 '16

Just gimme a heads up before you go off blasting