Slashdot Mirror
Speed of Sound Is Too Slow For the Olympics
Hugh Pickens "For decades sports-event organizers have placed speakers behind athletes to convey the sound of an actual pistol but they found that even though the noise came through the speakers all at once, athletes continued to wait for the 'real' sound, ignoring the sounds that came through the speakers ever-so-slightly slowing down the farthest athlete from the gun. Now Rebecca Rosen writes that when the Olympic runners take to their positions on the track later this week, they'll crouch on the ground, ears pricked, and wait for the starting beep played by a 'pistol' that's not a pistol at all, but something more akin to an electronic instrument with only one key. The pistol itself is silent."
Read on for a bit more about the difficulties of timing people with superhuman reaction times.
"A conversation with sprinter Michael Johnson at the Sydney Olympics caused Peter Hürzeler of OMEGA Timing to realize that even with speakers, the speed of sound was still slowing down the farthest athletes. Johnson's reaction time, Hurzeler said, 'was 440 thousandths of a second. Normally athletes leave between 130 and 140 thousandths of a second. ... I asked him, why did you have such a bad starting time?' Turned out, Johnson was in the ninth position, and the sound of the gun was reaching him too slowly.
"In addition after a four year developmental process, a new false start detection system is being introduced this year that will abandon movement in exchange for 'measurement' of pound-force against the back block to determine sprinters reaction times. 'We are measuring the time between the starting gun and when the athlete is moving because to leave the starting block they had to push against and this power is very high' says Hurzeler. 'We did a test last year with Asafa Powell and he was pushing 240 kilograms (529 lbs.) [so] as soon as he gives the time to push against the starting block, it means he will like to leave and we are measuring this in thousandths of seconds and if somebody is leaving before one hundredth thousandth of second, it's automatically a recall, it's a false start.' In track every event is timed to 1/10,000th of a second, and Omega takes 2,000 pictures per second from right before the start of a race to its finish, as backup.
"New touch pads, starting blocks, and timers have also been introduced for swimming."
"In addition after a four year developmental process, a new false start detection system is being introduced this year that will abandon movement in exchange for 'measurement' of pound-force against the back block to determine sprinters reaction times. 'We are measuring the time between the starting gun and when the athlete is moving because to leave the starting block they had to push against and this power is very high' says Hurzeler. 'We did a test last year with Asafa Powell and he was pushing 240 kilograms (529 lbs.) [so] as soon as he gives the time to push against the starting block, it means he will like to leave and we are measuring this in thousandths of seconds and if somebody is leaving before one hundredth thousandth of second, it's automatically a recall, it's a false start.' In track every event is timed to 1/10,000th of a second, and Omega takes 2,000 pictures per second from right before the start of a race to its finish, as backup.
"New touch pads, starting blocks, and timers have also been introduced for swimming."
Speed of sound is 330 m/s. That's a kilometer in a third of a second.
440 thousandths of a second = 0.44 of a second.
140 thousandths of a second = 0.14 of a second.
The difference: let's call it a third of a second.
So what they are claiming is that the starting pistol is 1km away from the athlete in the last lane but right next to the one in the first lane.
Over and above that - the reaction time is not the factor, so much as the fact that the RACE is measured to within hundredths of a second making the difference between 1st and 3rd sometimes. Thus even a slightly more "gravellyness" on the track in one lane or a tiny, tiny breeze might affect it.
good
Not sure if real pistol fired next to the athletes is too easy or not geek enough...
0.44s - 0.135s = 0.305s. Speed of sound is 343m/s. Are we supposed to believe that the farthest starting position is about 343m/s * 0.305s = 104m further away from the pistol than the nearest? The guy's just slow.
They should just use a light instead of sound. Even at school we waved a flag to start because if we went by sound it would introduce an error into the timing.
Why not use lights? Some LEDs embedded into the track or something would work just as well, no?
Appropriate, for once...
So... don't use sound, use light.
Use lights - something like Formula 1. A series of lights that all go off when it is time to start. This is also advantageous to those who may be a deaf.
I say have a computerized gun set up directly behind each athlete and program it to shoot them all at once. That will get them running, and will actually make watching it fun :p
Monstar L
Why not just lights? Works for F1.
When acting as a timing judge for swim team events, we have always been told to watch for the strobe flash from the start signal. It is supposed to be much more consistent.
Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
Highest bidder gets to hear the starting gun first
...had it right? Would this also fall under space-time maybe?
Why not just move the starting gun to behind the athletes? The further back it is placed, the more equal the distance to each athlete. It doesn't get as much media attention though.
This reminds me of my time in the navy. There was a minimum requirement for everything, including 60 meter sprint. I ran it once, and got clocked in 1/10th of a second to late. Fearing I would have to run 60 meters once more, I protested because the starter gun was at the finish line! The sound would take almost exactly 1/10th of a second to reach the starting line from the finish line, I argued. They had to accept the protest, of course, and I made the requirement exactly.
...so why not give runners a time bonus if they are in a later lane ? Start 30 m from the gun, get a 100ms bonus. Sounds simple enough, no ?
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
How about placing runners in some kind of human-sized hamster wheels with clutch mechanisms, so that all runners can already be running at top speed for some short period prior to the actual start of the race, at which time all of the clutches are simultaneously disengaged, so all runners start at full their full stride and their full speed at the same time? This would change the dynamics of racing because it would remove reaction time as a competitive element from the race. But what is a race? Is it to see who has the fastest reaction time, or who runs the fastest, or both?
The Admin and the Engineer
There are 8 lanes on a track, each of which are 1.27 meters wide. There are 7 lane widths between a head in lane 1 and a head in lane 8. This works out to 8.89 meters. The speed of sound is 340.29 meter/sec. The leads to a worst case difference of .026 seconds between lane 1 and lane 8. The difference between bronze and gold in the 2008 Olympics Men's 100 Meters is 0.22 seconds. So at first it seems to not be an issue, but the difference between bronze and 4th place was .02 seconds. This indicates that lane position and the speed of sound could have an effect on the outcome of an event.
So. Rather than have the pistol in line with the row at one side, how about having it in the middle halving the dis-advantage at the extreme(s). Even better, have the pistol central but step back 10 - 20 foot or so and that reduces the differential even further. Seems more practical and a lot more inexpensive than a super dooper electronic system.
What confuses me is that the story says they're using speakers, meaning every player hears the sound at the same time. So where's the issue?
It seems that the speakers convey the sound of a guy with an actual gun further behind. But why aren't the players training themselves to react to the first sound, disregarding the real noise. More importantly, why the hell is there even a real gun out there if they've got the speakers? They couldn't have started using a prerecorded sound years ago?
It appears to me that the real story here is that these officials are so slavish to hopelessly outdated traditions that they'll continue sticking to them even long after it's become evident that it's detrimental. It reminds me of FIFA's long time refusal to accept replays or goal line technology.
If the speed of sound would be a potential factor in determining who wins, it counts as a tie.
When I ran track in high school one of the first we were taught is not to wait for the sound but go as soon as you see the smoke from the starting gun.
What a non-story. It says in the article that they began using this technology in the 2010 Vancouver Games.
" Beginning at the Vancouver Olympics in 2010, OMEGA switched to the current "silent" pistol technology, erasing the thousandths of of a second that stood between runner nine and runner one."
... 0.03 sec is not very much ...
0.03 sec is enormous in the context of the Olympics. The difference between Gold and Silver medals is sometimes 0.01 sec.
Not sure if real pistol fired next to the athletes is too easy or not geek enough...
Just try getting a real pistol through the Olympic secure zone.
"Instead of raising your hand to ask a question in class, how about individual push buttons on each desk. That way, when you want to ask a question, you just push the button and it lights up a corresponding number on a tote board at the front of the class. Then all the professor has to do is check the lighted number against a master sheet of names and numbers to see who is asking the question."
Simple!
The speed of sound is 340.29 meter/sec
If you're going to be that precise and definite about the speed of sound you'd better state what temperature/pressure/moisture level you're talking about... In short - it varies.
I check and review a lot of engineering papers, I see about 3x the rate of order of magnitude type errors like this one with metric units compared to conventional units. Even from "native metric users".
Speaking of calling bullshit on something, the premise of this article is utter BS as well. The difference in time of arrival of the sound based on lane position is on the order of 30 msec, worst-case, not 300-ish.
Time differences of 0.03 seconds, when measuring human activities, is an almost random amount.
Let's just say all of the athletes are special and give everyone a participation trophy.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
Some races are decided by margins on the order of 10 msec. So 30 msec does matter.
Check out some of these times: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_2008_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_100_metres
... is a 12-step program for these folks, (all puns intended).
Their reaction times are not "superhuman". For most Olympians, I doubt they are even anything special genetically. They have just worked very, very hard to develop their quite human abilities to the max.
I'm surprised they are still using a gun, our school was using a PA and starting tone (trigged by a special handheld button) back well before 1996. I'd assumed this was just the normal swimming starting equipment they deployed for the field events. Maybe it's just because starting guns were more difficult to own with the gun laws that were introduced in Australia.
Why bother with a starting signal at all? Since they know exactly when the runners start and cross the finish line they know how long the race took them. I suppose it might make the event a little less exciting watching the finish line when the start times vary, but it could also introduce some other strategy. Would it be better to start early or late?
Right?
..don't panic
For the 200m and 400m, they have staggered starts along the curve so the distance between sprinters is much greater.
---------
There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
There was an article on /. where it was argued that journalists should use more jargon if it helped convey the message. After reading "thousandth of a second" *four* times in the summary, yes, please, just say millisecond!!
Stick an electrode up their arse. When it is time to go, zap them. About 50,000 volts will do nicely.
All joking aside, they really could just use lights. Or is the speed of light too slow as well?
Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
Just attach a "certificate" to those pieces of metal saying something like:
"This piece of metal is unique representation of ___________ nation's glory and superiority over other nations.
Priceless though it may be, we have spent ________________$ to acquire it. It is very valuable. Really."
There. Now it's worth as much as the highest bidder would like to pay for it.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
How about using a light signal instead? Turn a light green for go.
Currently hooked on AMP
When I ran track in the 70s, we were taught to watch for smoke from the starter's pistol rather than wait for the soundwave. So much for technology.
Like this?
Have gnu, will travel.
Some races are decided by margins on the order of 10 msec. So 30 msec does matter.
The solution has already been in use for a long time - in dog and horse races. Put the competitors behind bars, and let them out at the same time. That way there's no time difference, and no false starts.
Or do it the way it's done in alpine sports - let the participant choose when to start within a short interval, and measure when he actually breaks the starting line. That way there would be new tactics at play too.
Most African runners are trained to start running at the sound of gunfire. Now if we could just get them to stop before they reach a refugee camp.
I have a better idea, you know the fireworks that go bang; detonate one 100-1000m in front of the starting line, the difference in sound would be down in the noise, also, the entire stadium would enjoy the start sound. Also, put the start sensor timer trip at the starting line to acoustically fire, and calibrated to match historic delays, so that times remain comparable from 20 years ago.
Not when you're operating at the level that these athletes oftentimes are. The tires on my car being a fraction of a degree out of alignment doesn't matter too much, generally speaking, but if you had the tires on a vehicle attempting to set the land speed record out of alignment by that same fraction of a degree, I shudder to think what might happen. When you push things to their limits, the tolerances become much smaller, and as you understand things more and can account for all of the variables better, the variation tends to get reduced. These athletes have been training for years, had thousands of doctors, scientists, and trainers working with them, and have trained in order to eliminate the elements that you would dismiss as random.
Which isn't to say that you're entirely incorrect, just that I think you're being far too dismissive.
Or do it the way it's done in alpine sports - let the participant choose when to start within a short interval, and measure when he actually breaks the starting line. That way there would be new tactics at play too.
How do you do that when there are multiple people in the race?
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
I would have thought that world record times would fall if there was a standard time from "get set" to bang. It seemed like there might have been such a thing in the swimming, the time periods seemed so uniform. Presumably the Olympics could simply send out a CD recording of the message that will be played at the start of a race from speakers behind each athlete, that way false starts would be reduced, the reaction time issue would be replaced by a requirement to be able to judge the delay accurately. It may not be "the sport" but if it causes records to fall it would be welcomed by the event's promoters. I wonder if there is anything in the rules about it.
Nullius in verba
If people care about this, then isn't the spirit of the Olympics dead? I mean, this is obviously a rabbit-hole that has no bottom, and friendly competition is no-where in sight. Once people start counting thousands of a second, the real Olympics is dead, and we are saddled with a sham Olympics that values winning over all other considerations. Real accomplishment is not beating your opponent by 44 thousands of a second, but in fostering in this jaded arena a feeling of friendly competition where winning is not everything. Whoever does that the best, is the true sportsman in my opinion.
How do you do that when there are multiple people in the race?
One gate per participant. That's simple enough with lasers.
0.03 sec is enormous in the context of the Olympics. The difference between Gold and Silver medals is sometimes 0.01 sec. .03 off, that doesn't mean that the Gold winner would now be .04 seconds ahead (or .02 behind). The runners run based in part on what their opponents are doing, and the last bit is likely to be just as close if they all started at the same time or if one started 1/4 second late.
But the end of the race doesn't correlate that closely to the beginning of the race. If the timing was
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
There are loudspeaker horns behind every starting place. Every racer is the same distance from his horn. If they are too stupid to listen to the amplified version, and wait for the real shot to reach them, then they deserve to lose.
Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
One gate per participant. That's simple enough with lasers.
But if the clock starts differently for each of them, then how do they know if they are behind and need to press faster? They aren't racing the clock, they are racing each other.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
I suggest everyone switch to metric. ;-)
ironic captcha: prefers
Also, changes air temperature and humidity will fudge those numbers by seemingly insignificant amounts. But, like you say .02 is a bigger difference that you would think when you are traveling ~20mph.
We already see this in distance events with chipped timing. Guy in front thinks he's won, but doesn't realize there's another guy who crossed the start 10 seconds after him who is actually beating him. I like the idea of a speaker in each starting block. Simple, and nobody gets an advantage.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
...he was pushing 240 kilograms (529 lbs.)...
Ugh.
Once again: pounds are a unit of force, kilograms are a unit of mass. Yes, when talking about someone's weight (and considering it as mass) we often fudge it and use pounds as a mass scale, the pedant in me has accepted this (annoying) reality. But fudging kilograms as a force measure makes me all stabby. It's either 2352 Newtons (240kg * 9.8 m/s^2 at normal gravity) or else the equivalent of 240kg pressing down on the starting block.
tl;dr Force is NOT Mass!
But if the clock starts differently for each of them, then how do they know if they are behind and need to press faster? They aren't racing the clock, they are racing each other.
Did you miss my "That way, there will be tactics at play too"?
Nope, you quoted it.
There will likely be an incentive to start just after the others. It's not too different from tempo biking in that everyone waits for someone else to make a run, and then follows, except that the clocks will start anyhow if everybody delays, so athletes will have to start running quickly.
The main difference is that the timing will be precise for each runner, and not based on when a signal was given, but the actual running time.
In the 2000 Sydney 10000m final, the difference between silver and gold was spectacularly close -- and the win is all about crossing the line first -- it is absolutely not about net time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D56ZAvcxN0
So, we shower someone who is .1% faster (.01 sec / 10 sec) with gold, and the "loser" gets virtually nothing, eh?
Yeah, sounds like today's world: concentrate the reward to the top .1% of people and screw all the rest.
--PM
Check out the stagger for a 4x200m, especially on a 10-lane track.
Why not put the gun 20 m behind the line of runners? Then the distance difference is only .5 m and the time difference is .0015 and you still get to use gunpowder and not a phaser wanabe.
... a nice synchronous kick in the but by 8 referees would be THE optimal solution ... why no one thought about that before?
Illegal drug dealers use imperial because it's easier to cheat on it.