Investigators to consult Columbia Univ physicist

Oswlek · Jan 28, 2015

Doesn't this belong in the Deflategate forum?

Sciz · Jan 28, 2015

One scientist made a bunch of assumptions and concluded that it'd take about 12 minutes of rubbing the ball to get it hot enough to increase the pressure 1 PSI like Belichick said. The ball-preparation process takes an hour per ball. Is it absurd to think that there could be 12 minutes of rubbing within an hour span?

I have a feeling that the NFL's "expert" is going to omit this possibility, not unlike what Bill Nye did.

juny · Jan 28, 2015

Cramden said:
Still this proves they have zero evidence of the Pats cheating. No need to go this route if they did.

Not necessarily. they could do this to discredit the patriots argument.

but i have a tough team seeing that happen, unless they say at most environment conditions would do 1 psi instead of 1.5 or 2 or whatever the latest leak says the football pressure went down by.

mosi · Jan 28, 2015

The most important thing is to test everything experimentally! Do all the math you want but test it experimentally!

kennyb · Jan 28, 2015

It gets crazier and crazier. Suppose he comes out and says it would go down 1.2PSI at most. And the balls were deflated by 1.8 PSI.

SO now the pats tampered with the balls to remove .6 PSI? Which would be about 2% of the air in the ball? Seems a stretch that someone would bother removing 2% of the air from a ball.

Or is it more likely the rain added to the ball's volume slightly. Even a 1% increase in Volume would decrease pressure by 1% of absolute pressure or about .25PSI.

Key numbers are what did the balls measure at halftime.

And where and at what temperature/pressure were the colts balls filled?

pork3 · Jan 28, 2015

The fix is in.
Of course they'll hire a physicist from a New York university.
And what if he says this is all hogwash without performing any experimentation?
The investigation will claim that any prior reports that proved the Patriots claim as true were misguided.

This is a clear and strategic attempt at disseminating misinformation to weaken the Patriots defence.

Well played Goodell, Well played.

-Jamman

wolverinejoe80 · Jan 28, 2015

i demand foreign physicist from foreign country to do the experiment! how about from korea or japan? i'm sure they have zero interest in american football.

karguy85 · Jan 28, 2015

pork3 said:
The fix is in.
Of course they'll hire a physicist from a New York university.
And what if he says this is all hogwash without performing any experimentation?
The investigation will claim that any prior reports that proved the Patriots claim as true were misguided.

This is a clear and strategic attempt at disseminating misinformation to weaken the Patriots defence.

Well played Goodell, Well played.

-Jamman

I think Carnegie Mellon already did a good job of explaining the issue. And they were unbiased, not on the payroll of the Patriots or the NFL. I have yet to see anyone who conducted experiments, have the experiments come out in contradiction to the Patriots'/weather explanation.

Big-T · Jan 28, 2015

If they actually test this properly, like Carnegie Mellon this is a big W for the Patriots.

To me this shows Wells is actually doing his job properly too - exhausted all the "did the Patriots tamper with the Footballs?" options (i.e. no video evidence, confessions etc) so now go onto the more logicial route of physics.

BradyManny · Jan 28, 2015

Folks, this is great news. Don't worry about it being from NYC - scientists are unbiased and unlike the media, their reputations are at stake with their work.

Besides - I guarantee the physicists at Columbia come from all over the world. They could care less about Patriots vs. anybody.

Like many other physicists, they may make initial assumptions based on a cursory view of PV = nRT, but as the more robust calculations show, there is more going on in this case. And if they take an experimental approach, I expect we'll be vindicated.

the Patriot · Jan 28, 2015

This is great news. Just because a Columbia physicist told the media he is doubtful of the Patriot's story does not mean he will conduct a biased study or is incapable of changing his view. A Columbia physicist will detail his methodology so his experiment can be reproduced.

pork3 · Jan 28, 2015

karguy85 said:
I think Carnegie Mellon already did a good job of explaining the issue. And they were unbiased, not on the payroll of the Patriots or the NFL. I have yet to see anyone who conducted experiments, have the experiments come out in contradiction to the Patriots'/weather explanation.

When science is politicized, it can easily be warped to acquire the numbers that one wants.
One would think this would be incredibly straightforward, as the calculations involving the Ideal Gas Laws aren't exactly complicated to perform.
But in this day and age, where the average education level of many of those interested in seeing us fall is below the high school level, one can easily manipulate public opinion.

-Jamman

karguy85 · Jan 28, 2015

BradyManny said:
Folks, this is great news. Don't worry about it being from NYC - scientists are unbiased and unlike the media, their reputations are at stake with their work.

Besides - I guarantee the physicists at Columbia come from all over the world. They could care less about Patriots vs. anybody.

Like many other physicists, they may make initial assumptions based on a cursory view of PV = nRT, but as the more robust calculations show, there is more going on in this case. And if they take an experimental approach, I expect we'll be vindicated.

I guess I'm just concerned that a few seemingly credible physicists have so quickly dismissed that the notion that weather/ball prep can and will cause a loss of pressure. Shouldn't they know better. Dismissing it so rashly and being proven wrong is also a hit to ones credibility.

Bobsyouruncle · Jan 28, 2015

In a vague and scientifically confounding news conference on Saturday, Bill Belichick, the Patriots’ coach, appeared to suggest that some mysterious element of preparing the balls for use in the game could provide an innocent explanation for the deflation based on simple physics.

I expect this level of snark from a reporter in the deathstar. I also don't find it surprising for him to be scientifically confounded by an experiment.

Zajc said he believed there was little chance that atmospheric effects alone could account for the discrepancies in the football pressure.

I agree, congratulations on making a scientifically correct statement based on your expertise.

“I think it’s more likely than not that they were manipulated,” Zajc said.

Ughh, logical fallacy of false dilemma. Believing only two options are available. It's either "atmospheric effects alone" or manipulation.

“I think Belichick is better at keeping pressure on the passer than passing a physics test,” Kirshner said.

I don't expect this level of snark from a scientist asked to use his professional expertise. It's very childish, and tries to paint a false picture that Belichick claimed scientific expertise. Let me quote "I am not a scientist."

However, it doesn't take a scientist to do some tests and report his observations. And there's really nothing he said that is anti-physics. Friction and heat most certainly could effect footballs. Now you could make the case his observations were flawed for some reason, but just dismissing them is not engaging in looking for a conclusion that fits the evidence. It's looking for evidence that fits the conclusion.

SVN · Jan 28, 2015

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story...iversity-physics-department-deflategate-probe

whats more annoying is that there are still leaks coming out

The Times, in a story published Tuesday that cited notes from an administrative manager, reported that a partner at the law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison made the call to the physics department Monday. Ted Wells, who along with NFL executive vice president Jeff Pash is leading the investigation, is co-chair of the litigation department at the law firm.

"He would like to consult with a physicist on matters relating to gas physics," the notes said, according to the newspaper, referring to the partner, Lorin L. Reisner, who initiated the contact with the Ivy League university.

Records obtained by the Times showed that Reisner also emailed Columbia's physics department.

"Just to confirm our call, we represent the N.F.L. in connection with the investigation into the footballs used during the A.F.C. championship game and would like to discuss engaging a professor of physics to consult on matters relating to gas physics and environmental impacts on inflated footballs," Reisner said. "Please let me know whether there is a Columbia professor who may be interested in and appropriate for this assignment."

dannydyn · Jan 28, 2015

Just further debunks the theory that the league has a “person of interest”…. ********! They can’t find an explanation or a suspect…. Physics is the only logical theory left on the table.

PatsWickedPissah · Jan 28, 2015

mosi said:
The most important thing is to test everything experimentally! Do all the math you want but test it experimentally!

Spot on!
Actual experiments, wet footballs, footballs that actually get measured for pressure are necessary because of unforeseen variables no accounted for in the basic calculation.

I'd hope they'd repeat with footballs that also get "rubbed" per Patriots procedure, although I'm skeptical about that having a measurable effect. Yes, I know the Pats ran that experiment but they're not a test lab. That's why I love the simple CMU video, which needs to be replicated.

In any case I want to read the specific report issued by any scientific consultant to the NFL just to assure myself that agenda science and confirmation bias aren't in play.

mosi · Jan 28, 2015

I also think that Kraft saying that unless they have un-refutable proof of wrong-doing, he expects an apology. Taken at his word, I assume he is not going to pay any fine, take any punishment unless there is basically a smoking gun.

PatsWickedPissah · Jan 28, 2015

What we're seeing here is that scientists just like "real" people (Heh!) can have preconceived strong opinions, may be reluctant to modify previous public statements unless really wrong (partial credit to NDGT here) and may suffer from confirmation bias.
Actual experiment if thorough trumps calculation because of unforeseen variables.

FrodoBagginz · Jan 28, 2015

I don't need a physicist to tell me what I already know. I have seen the Youtube videos. Apparently, nobody in the NFL has ever heard of Youtube.

I wonder how much money the league is wasting on this. News flash to the NFL: You can get the information the Physicists are going to tell you for FREE on Youtube.

Investigators to consult Columbia Univ physicist

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

PatsFans.com Supporter

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

In the Starting Line-Up

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Pro Bowl Player

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

Similar threads