Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Mathematicians Solve the Topological Mystery Behind the "Brazuca" Soccer Ball

timothy posted about 4 months ago | from the nature-is-scrambling-to-keep-up dept.

Math 144

KentuckyFC (1144503) writes "In the 1970 World Cup in Mexico, teams used a new kind of ball called the Telstar made from 12 black pentagonal panels and 20 white hexagonal panels. This ball has icosahedral symmetry and its own molecular analogue in the form of C60, the famous soccer ball-shaped fullerene. In 2006, a new ball called the TeamGeist was introduced at the World Cup in Germany. This was made of 14 curved panels that together gave it tetrahedral symmetry. This also had a molecular analogue with tetrahedral symmetry among the fullerenes. Now teams at the current World Cup in Brazil are playing with yet another design: the Brazuca, a ball constructed from six panels each with a four-leaf clover shape that knit together like a jigsaw to form a sphere. This has octahedral symmetry. But here's question that has been puzzling chemists, topologists and..errr...soccer fans: is there a molecular analogue of the Brazuca? Or put another way, can fullerenes have octahedral symmetry? Now a pair of mathematicians have finally solved this problem. They've shown that fullerenes can indeed have octahedral symmetry just like the Brazuca, although in addition to hexagonal and pentagonal carbon rings, the ball-shaped molecules must also have rings of 4 and 8 carbon atoms. The next stage is to actually synthesis one of these fullerenes, perhaps something to keep chemists occupied until the 2018 World Cup in Russia."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

And another question (4, Insightful)

Z00L00K (682162) | about 4 months ago | (#47423635)

Which ball is the best for the players?

Personally I prefer the Telstar.

Re:And another question (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423729)

SO I was reading a online Dilbert comic. Funny shit. A good comic and I like it. except ... doesn't the author/drawer of Dilbert understand that women have breasts and its OK to represent this like every other drawing/comic does? All the DIlbert female characters - flat as a board. I could use their chests to iron my shirt! Is that some kind of anti Feminist message?! does something about the female form intimidate him?

Re:And another question (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423955)

Successful authors have a target audience. You don't really iron your t-shirts. Do you. You don't really have a dilbert-pr0n collection. Do you. Notice i am not using question marks because i am not really asking you questions. You aren't gay. Are you. You sound like you might be gay. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I'm more worried about your dilbert-pr0n. Nobody does that.

Re:And another question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425295)

doesn't the author/drawer of Dilbert understand that women have breasts and its OK to represent this like every other drawing/comic does? All the DIlbert female characters - flat as a board.

http://ilovethinsmallchestedwo... [tumblr.com] [NSFW]

Re:And another question (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423863)

Which ball is the best for the players?

Personally I prefer the Telstar.

The one in the back of the net.

Re:And another question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423991)

No no... you've got it wrong... you're not supposed to score! That Germany-Brazil game was a fluke!

Re:And another question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425293)

That is why you are no longer our goalie

Re:And another question (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424035)

the black and white ball is also what i picture as being a 'soccer ball'.. its what we had as kids, what schools had years later...

the other newer designs are just gimmicks to sell 'official' merchandise. dont see much real improvement in the physics of the ball itself. at least we aren't watching a bunch of sweaty guys running around for 90 minutes in some space-aged skin tight spandex-y body suit.

Re:And another question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424515)

Obligatory movie quote:

Cyclops to Wolverine: "So what would you have preferred, yellow spandex???" (from the first X-Men movie)

Re:And another question (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 4 months ago | (#47424157)

The Telstar is the only one that says "soccer" to me.

Re:And another question (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424661)

The Telstar is the only one that says "soccer" to me.

That's likely because you're looking at a knockoff. A real Telstar, made by Adidas AG, would say "football", not "soccer" ^^

Re:And another question (1)

Bazman (4849) | about 4 months ago | (#47424303)

I do wonder what Bobby Charlton could have done with a modern ball considering he did this [youtube.com] with a ball made of inch-thick cowhide with a concrete core that absorbed half its weight in water on a typical English match day.

Re:And another question (1)

sexconker (1179573) | about 4 months ago | (#47425081)

I do wonder what Bobby Charlton could have done with a modern ball considering he did this [youtube.com] with a ball made of inch-thick cowhide with a concrete core that absorbed half its weight in water on a typical English match day.

Jesus fuck. That's your go-to amazing moment for soccer? Don't waste your time watching the video, kids. The dude kicks the ball from a moderate distance at moderate speed and it goes into the net.

Re:And another question (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47425483)

Jesus fuck. That's your go-to amazing moment for soccer? Don't waste your time watching the video, kids. The dude kicks the ball from a moderate distance at moderate speed and it goes into the net.

On behalf of those of us who didn't do so well in gym class ... that would be somewhat amazing. Even if the net was empty. ;-)

Re:And another question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424905)

As a flamingly gay man known for my skill at sucking men off, I have to say I think the Brazuca ball looks FAAAABULOUS!

if it's good enough for carbon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425457)

if it's good enough for 60 atom complexes of carbon, it's good enough for me.

The new one is plastic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425663)

The 2014 ball is plastic. Someone I know just got one. Playing on grass in the back yard, it got a puncture in it -- not enough to deflate it, but the plastic gets dented, or whatever, very easily. Suckage...

fristy Germany vs. Brazil ps9ts (-1, Offtopic)

electrosoccertux (874415) | about 4 months ago | (#47423639)

and it still won't help Brazil HUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUE JAJAJAJAJAJAAJAJAAJAJAAJ LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

(for you old farts out there, those are all "lol" in different ... languages ...)

Re:fristy Germany vs. Brazil ps9ts (0)

szmccauley (667273) | about 4 months ago | (#47423705)

MDRMDRMDRMDRMDR pour les francais

Re:fristy Germany vs. Brazil ps9ts (1)

laie_techie (883464) | about 4 months ago | (#47424561)

and it still won't help Brazil HUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUE JAJAJAJAJAJAAJAJAAJAJAAJ LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

(for you old farts out there, those are all "lol" in different ... languages ...)

You forgot the all important kkkkkkkkkkkkkkk that Brazilians use

Re:fristy Germany vs. Brazil ps9ts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424873)

kekekekekekekekeke ^_^

But how many busses will it burn... (-1, Flamebait)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 4 months ago | (#47423649)

...when the opponent puts it in your country's net seven times?

Re:But how many busses will it burn... (1)

narcc (412956) | about 4 months ago | (#47424941)

Most appropriate Flamebait mod ever?

why new balls (4, Interesting)

ILongForDarkness (1134931) | about 4 months ago | (#47423695)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F... [wikipedia.org]

It looks like every world cup but perhaps a couple has had a different stitch pattern on the ball. Is there really that much need for innovation? I think it might be cool to have a "better ball" but doesn't the sport at some point lose something from the equipment changing so frequently? Comparing stats when the balls have different characteristics like how smoothly they'll roll, air resistance etc must be the explanation for soccer riots.

Re:why new balls (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423817)

Comparing stats when the balls have different characteristics like how smoothly they'll roll, air resistance etc must be the explanation for soccer riots.

No, the lack of any sort of concept of what's really important and what isn't causes ALL sports related riots.

Seems most of the point of team sports is for the mediocre to identify with something bigger and more glorious than their own lives and then to cling to that constructed image fiercely, as though the effort they expend in doing so is proof of its reality. Hence they say "WE won" when they themselves were not out on that field because it has become an extension of their ego. Fighting and rioting over it also provides the assumption that something important must be going on. Something worth fighting and rioting over. It's false of course. It appeals to people who have no concept of the profound, the sacred, or the meaningful.

Re:why new balls (1)

leftover (210560) | about 4 months ago | (#47423877)

Very well said, Sir or Madame AC!

Re:why new balls (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423987)

A few hundred years ago, that was the point of religion. Some people still aren't over that, so I imagine sports are here to stay.

Re:why new balls (1)

sexconker (1179573) | about 4 months ago | (#47425237)

A few hundred years ago, that was the point of religion. Some people still aren't over that, so I imagine sports are here to stay.

Religion is the exact opposite. Religion necessitates the humility of the follower in the face of the divine. You don't go to a Christian church and shout "FUCK YEAH, JESUS! WHOOOO!" for 2 hours.

Religious institutions can become corrupt and seek power and wealth from their followers. When an institution becomes corrupt to the extent that followers are controlled and the leaders claim to be divine or close to divine, we call it a cult.
Religious followers can become blind zealots who seek the spread of their religion and the destruction of other religions. When a group of followers become so zealous that they ignore the core tenets of their religion we call them extremists, separatists, terrorists, etc.
Neither of these things speak to the point of religion, however.

Ah, yes. The no True Religion Fallacy. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425537)

Ah, yes. The no True Religion Fallacy.

None except yours, and a perhaps few select others, I suppose. (The 'humble' christian ones? HaHaHa ...)

These sort of fallacies pop up in every rational discussion of the drawbacks and dangers of belief without reproducible evidence (ie non-anecdotal, like "I've SEEN Jeebus!') or critical thinking. So do erroneous statements about what kind and characteristics of religion exist and which do not. I doubt very much you have the experience or education to declare what is and isn't a religion. Theologians and philosophers have been exploring and debating such questions for millennia.

There are far more religions on earth and in heaven than are dreampt of in your philosophy, sexconker.

Ever been to a Southern Baptist Church? Or a revival tent in Louisiana? Or Maori rituals? I could go on.

Re:why new balls (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425539)

You don't go to a Christian church and shout "FUCK YEAH, JESUS! WHOOOO!" for 2 hours.

I assume you haven't been to many American churches...

Re:why new balls (1)

lgw (121541) | about 4 months ago | (#47425561)

You don't go to a Christian church and shout "FUCK YEAH, JESUS! WHOOOO!" for 2 hours.

Never seen an evangelical mega-church? You don't pass 10k members by without a lot of up-with-people let's-celebrate. But then again, they barely mention Jesus, and certainly don't mention sin - wouldn't want to offend anyone in the audience after all. But then, that's exactly why the fundies hate the evangelicals.

There are a couple of big religions that grew during medieval times, and so are very feudal in their structure, with God as the king-of-kings, and humility and suborning one's will to him are the key to salvation - this was after all the fundamental basis of feudal society. But that's just a handful of religions. Pantheistic religions have a different model. Religions without a deity seem to actually focus the most on humility for some reason, and like support your argument the best. But there sure are a variety of religions out there!

Re:why new balls (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424043)

One theory for the riots I once heard was that many fans simply urinate right there in the stands, and the pheromones in the urine set men off.

.

Re:why new balls (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424493)

This theory sounds like the ramblings of a twenty-something, white, psych/sociology major who's never actually had any real relationship with a man.

Re:why new balls (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424067)

" for the mediocre to identify with something bigger and more glorious than their own lives and then to cling to that constructed image fiercely, a"

Sort of explains Space Nuttery as well. "But but but the Species!" from intellectual midgets who read too much sci-fi and don't even talk to their neighbors.

Re:why new balls (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424547)

"Space nuttery" as you call it, is a simple extension of man's desire to explore. Magellan was an "Earth Nutter" because that's what was available in his time. Exploring is a worthwhile goal with real tangible returns for humanity. Punching people in the face over which color shirt some random asshat was wearing when he kicked a ball into a net is not worthwhile to humanity in any way.

Re:why new balls (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 4 months ago | (#47424123)

Two from Mitchell & Webb:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

Re:why new balls (4, Insightful)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 4 months ago | (#47425023)

>Hence they say "WE won" when they themselves were not out on that field

I agree with most of your post, but when I made that claim to a friend who's into sports, he pointed out that the fans are financing the whole thing.

Re:why new balls (2)

necro81 (917438) | about 4 months ago | (#47423845)

It looks like every world cup but perhaps a couple has had a different stitch pattern on the ball. Is there really that much need for innovation?

In a word: No. Even to discerning players, there's no practical gameplay difference between this ball and the typical hexagons-and-pentagons design. There is no need for innovation in order to improve the sport - the outcome of the World Cup matches probably would have been the same with a $30 ball. There is that kind of need, however, for Adidas to sell a whole shitload of super-cool-awesome-double-plusgood soccer balls every couple of years at inflated prices.

Re:why new balls (3, Funny)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47423891)

There is that kind of need, however, for Adidas to sell a whole shitload of super-cool-awesome-double-plusgood soccer balls every couple of years at inflated prices.

I see what you did there. ;-)

Re:why new balls (3, Interesting)

Tyler Durden (136036) | about 4 months ago | (#47423911)

But if there is no difference between ball designs then why do we never see shots like these [youtube.com] anymore?

Re:why new balls (3, Informative)

_anomaly_ (127254) | about 4 months ago | (#47424259)

Good question, but I'd argue it's more about shot selection than anything. Most of those goals were well beyond the 18 (the penalty box). If you're comparing to recent games (yeah, I'm in the US, I still call them games, shoot me), like in the World Cup, you see very few shots outside the 18. An extreme example would be the Netherlands-Argentina game where they both played very defensive games. Even in games like Germany-Brazil, it seemed Germany was more about finesse and getting the ball deep inside the box to increase chances of the shot going in the back of the net. Even on free kicks near the 18, not many are even an attempt on goal, but rather crosses.

I used to play, and IMHO shot shaping is more about technique (and shot selection) than the design of the ball. You'll notice in your video a lot of them were hit with the outside of the foot, right or left, and that's the easiest way to get it to curve to the outside. You don't see many players these days even attempting those.

Re:why new balls (1)

_anomaly_ (127254) | about 4 months ago | (#47424273)

I may have not completed my thought and main point, although it may be obvious enough... the shots in the video being further out will end up having much more curve on them by the time they reach the goal. The same shot closer to the goal won't have as much noticeable curve, of course.

Re:why new balls (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423937)

Actually there was a lot of complaints about the one used in South Africa in 2010 because it was said to be "very unpredictable especially over a great distance", by many players. So maybe it doesn't apply to the Brazuca, and maybe the complaints are just anecdotal, but I wouldn't be so categorical about:

There is no need for innovation in order to improve the sport - the outcome of the World Cup matches probably would have been the same with a $30 ball

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adidas_Jabulani and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adidas_Tango_12

Re:why new balls (2)

necro81 (917438) | about 4 months ago | (#47424205)

Actually there was a lot of complaints about the one used in South Africa in 2010 because it was said to be "very unpredictable especially over a great distance", by many players. So maybe it doesn't apply to the Brazuca, and maybe the complaints are just anecdotal, but I wouldn't be so categorical about

Which only serves to further my point: by "innovating" when there was no particular need, Adidas created a f^%$ed up ball in 2010, which they then needed further innovation to fix. Pointless - but they sold a lot of balls. If FIFA had stuck with the traditional ball this whole time, that issue wouldn't have happened.

Re:why new balls (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424171)

Get kicked in the face with a $30 ball vs a $130 ball and come talk to me.

The real balls are fucking amazing. If you think some shit off the shelf from Walmart qualifies as a good enough ball, you've never played a sport in your life.

Re:why new balls (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423893)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F... [wikipedia.org]

It looks like every world cup but perhaps a couple has had a different stitch pattern on the ball. Is there really that much need for innovation? I think it might be cool to have a "better ball" but doesn't the sport at some point lose something from the equipment changing so frequently? Comparing stats when the balls have different characteristics like how smoothly they'll roll, air resistance etc must be the explanation for soccer riots.

I agree. After a certain point, innovation becomes rather pointless, but that wouldn't feed the massive revenue streams that rely on selling "new and improved" every 6-12 months.

The same could be said for running or basketball shoes. The biggest "innovation" those products have had in the last 5 years is puking neon colors all over them in an attempt to find fashion and style.

Re:why new balls (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424451)

>>> It looks like every world cup but perhaps a couple has had a different stitch pattern on the ball. Is there really that much need for innovation?

From the article, it seems they're reducing the number of panels from 32 to 14 to 6. This is probably for cost reasons in the manufacturing process -- and I suppose they consider not only the ball assembly but also how to economically cut panels from the original raw sheet.

>>> I think it might be cool to have a "better ball" but doesn't the sport at some point lose something from the equipment changing so frequently?

I don't know, but think it's improbable, given that a few requirements are fulfilled (weight, spherical aspect, among others). Actually, though I don't know if it's feasible, a ball without stitches would do ok. I wonder if we can mimic leather properties and create such a ball.

> After a certain point, innovation becomes rather pointless, but that wouldn't feed the massive revenue streams that rely on selling "new and improved" every 6-12 months.

Apart from cost reductions and the marketing reasons you cite, there's an aspect of human activity called art: we need to create new things; "conservative" is reassuring but it is also tedious. And tedium is an enemy of happiness for some; hence the will to have new things. IMHO everyone should be conscious about that and try to make life different every day, while keeping a record of what did look improved and what didn't.

Re:why new balls (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424189)

Because everyone wants to brag [youtube.com] about their balls.

Ahhhh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423731)

I always knew Math was a load of balls... ;-)

And it can't be unseen... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423733)

https://twitter.com/MeredithFrost/status/477222276866142210/photo/1 [twitter.com]

Best mockery of the 2014 World Cup logo - EVER!

Also quite accurate for the Brazil-Germany, errr, match.

Brasil futbol is national disgrace. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423765)

They join NFL! Stupids.

Re:Brasil futbol is national disgrace. (0)

halivar (535827) | about 4 months ago | (#47423855)

Dude. I don't wanna see what happens when one of those guys gets steamrolled by 300 pound refrigerator in a jetpack. Because that's what it's going to be like.

Ok, I lied; I do want to see what happens.

Re:Brasil futbol is national disgrace. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423885)

Simple. He'll run around the lumbering heart attack who won't be able to move as fast thanks to inertia. Besides, the "play", such as it is, in American "football" stops every 5 seconds, I doubt your 300 pound piece of spray cheese can run much longer than that.

Re:Brasil futbol is national disgrace. (1, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 4 months ago | (#47424023)

Besides, the "play", such as it is, in American "football" stops every 5 seconds, I doubt your 300 pound piece of spray cheese can run much longer than that.

Even though they never actually run for very long on the field, they still have to be able to pass a fairly strict standard in training. They want guys that they don't have to worry about, because what they're doing is strenuous and dangerous, and they will still have to worry about them — if only as assets. If you put futbol players in a handegg game they would be fucking evaporated. If you put handegg players in a futbol game most of them would be fairly cumbersome, but any "accidental" contact would still be likely to result in a futbol player injury.

Don't get it twisted, handegg players are amazing athletes, even the ones shaped like a brick.

Bra-zooka (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423789)

Anti-tank lingerie from Victoria Secret.

Adidas (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423791)

Anyone else notice that all the designs were done by Adidas?

And here I thought they only made Russian gangster suits...

stanbul Nakliyat (-1, Troll)

Hakan Çelik (3740983) | about 4 months ago | (#47423799)

Kartal Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Pendik Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] dealtepe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Samandra Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Sargazi Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Fenerbahçe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Kadköy Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Beykoz Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] ili Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Osmanbey Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Taksim Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Saryer Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Avclar Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Adalar Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Maltepe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Sultanbeyli Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Sancaktepe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Tadelen Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] stanbul Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Evden Eve Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Aratrma irketi [cozumarastirma.com.tr] Medyum [medyumgabriel.com] Medyumlar [medyumgabriel.com]

Oh great. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423805)

More medium.com crap spam.

Worlds Tiniest Violin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423809)

.. might have competition

Whats the dif between a brazuca and a brazillian (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423833)

There will be a brazuca in the finals at the world cup. Go Germany!

Re:Whats the dif between a brazuca and a brazillia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424183)

"Brazuca" is a kind of a joking word to convey an informal tone. It means Brazilian, but carries a mix of feelings, from friendly to folk to simpleton to lame.

FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47423873)

The game is called FOOTBALL, not "soccer". Now that you -in the USA (you were good enough in the Mundial, as my national team Greece was, congratulations)- start to learn about it and realize that it's played mostly with the ball in the foot... stop calling your rugby "football" (change it to something like, e.g., American rugby) and start calling football by it's name: FOOTBALL
(and it's time to adopt the metric system...)

Re:FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (1, Troll)

coinreturn (617535) | about 4 months ago | (#47424039)

Different languages use different words. Get over it.

Re:FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424923)

Different languages use different words. Get over it.

Football is English which is mostly spoken in USA. Not sure what you are trying to point out. What I hated the most during this World Cup is the American commercials (I'm an European living in USA [long story]) used "Futbol" instead.

American Football is not Football no matter what language used. It is a rugby type of game. So if you want to use the language mostly used in USA for what type of game it really is, then Rugby is the correct word to use.

Re:FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424983)

Different countries use different words. Get over it.

How's that for ya?

Re:FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425113)

Different countries use different words. Get over it.

How's that for ya?

Makes no difference. "Cooking" is cooking in any country. If one country calls it "Flying" instead, then that is the wrong usage. Calling it "American Football" is the wrong usage for what the game really is. But Americans are stubborn, we get it. Only their ideas matters in the world, right? (yes, flamebait, live with it)

Re:FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (0)

Grantbridge (1377621) | about 4 months ago | (#47424059)

Football can mean either Rugby or Soccer. Since Rugby is short for Rugby Football, and Soccer is short for Association Football.

Re: FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424081)

Please look up the history of association football and the origins of the term soccer before you flame anyone else please.

It is soccer, deal with it.

Re:FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424537)

Go learn the history of the word before you berate people for using it.

English AC

Re:FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424641)

There are several codes of football. Different codes are dominant in different countries. The dominant one in a given country is typically called "football" there.
The really funny thing is that you wrote your comment in English, tried to correct the use of English by native English speakers, but referred to "the Mundial", which isn't an English term. It's the World Cup.

Re:FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424965)

The game is called FOOTBALL, not "soccer". Now that you -in the USA (you were good enough in the Mundial, as my national team Greece was, congratulations)- start to learn about it and realize that it's played mostly with the ball in the foot... stop calling your rugby "football" (change it to something like, e.g., American rugby) and start calling football by it's name: FOOTBALL
(and it's time to adopt the metric system...)

Renaming "soccer" to "football": NO
Renaming "football" to "rugby": NO
Switching to metric: NO

Clear enough for you?

Re:FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425249)

The game is called FOOTBALL, not "soccer". Now that you -in the USA (you were good enough in the Mundial, as my national team Greece was, congratulations)- start to learn about it and realize that it's played mostly with the ball in the foot... stop calling your rugby "football" (change it to something like, e.g., American rugby) and start calling football by it's name: FOOTBALL
(and it's time to adopt the metric system...)

Renaming "soccer" to "football": NO
Renaming "football" to "rugby": NO
Switching to metric: NO

Clear enough for you?

You forgot one: Renaming "World Series" to "American Series": NO

We get it: Americans think they only matter.

Re:FOOTBALL... NOT "SOCCER"!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425447)

The game is called FOOTBALL, not "soccer". Now that you -in the USA (you were good enough in the Mundial, as my national team Greece was, congratulations)- start to learn about it and realize that it's played mostly with the ball in the foot... stop calling your rugby "football" (change it to something like, e.g., American rugby) and start calling football by it's name: FOOTBALL
(and it's time to adopt the metric system...)

Renaming "soccer" to "football": NO
Renaming "football" to "rugby": NO
Switching to metric: NO

Clear enough for you?

You forgot one: Renaming "World Series" to "American Series": NO

We get it: Americans think they only matter.

I dont see Americans asking the world to change to Imperial units or to use the term Soccer.

But I do see people from many nations wanting to dictate to Americans what units they should use or what they should call things.

You pick your units and names and we pick ours. Isnt that easy?

stanbul Nakliyat (0)

Hakan Çelik (3740983) | about 4 months ago | (#47423883)

Kartal Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Pendik Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] dealtepe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Samandra Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Sargazi Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Fenerbahçe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Kadköy Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Beykoz Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] ili Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Osmanbey Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Taksim Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Saryer Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Avclar Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Adalar Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Maltepe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Sultanbeyli Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Sancaktepe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Tadelen Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] stanbul Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Evden Eve Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Aratrma irketi [cozumarastirma.com.tr] Medyum [medyumgabriel.com] Medyumlar [medyumgabriel.com]

Istanbul Nakliyat (0)

Hakan Çelik (3740983) | about 4 months ago | (#47423899)

Kartal Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Pendik Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] dealtepe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Samandra Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Sargazi Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Fenerbahçe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Kadköy Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Beykoz Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] ili Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Osmanbey Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Taksim Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Saryer Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Avclar Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Adalar Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Maltepe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Sultanbeyli Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Sancaktepe Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Tadelen Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] stanbul Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Evden Eve Nakliyat [unkarevden...kliyat.com] Aratrma irketi [cozumarastirma.com.tr] Medyum [medyumgabriel.com] Medyumlar [medyumgabriel.com]

Brazillian Balls..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424017)

....are smoother.

Re:Brazillian Balls..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424029)

Where's the Burma-shave guy?

Bra Bazooka? (1)

coinreturn (617535) | about 4 months ago | (#47424031)

Damn, I was hoping this was about a bra bazooka.

Chemcially feasible? (1)

Grantbridge (1377621) | about 4 months ago | (#47424079)

I can't see those 8 member flat rings being at all chemically feasible. I really don't think this is possible to make as a carbon molecule.

Aromatic rings need to have 6 or 10 electrons in the delocalised orbitals, so an 8 member ring is going to need to have some other elements/groups to be at all stable...

Re:Chemcially feasible? (1)

madboson (649658) | about 4 months ago | (#47424583)

The rings themselves are perfectly reasonable (Cyclooctatetraene) non-aromatic hydrocarbons. Stitching together the mosaic the mathematicians propose is some serious work to be sure though.

Re:Chemcially feasible? (3, Interesting)

Grantbridge (1377621) | about 4 months ago | (#47424753)

Yeah, you can make the ring, but how do you get it to be flat so they will fit into a sphere?

Re:Chemcially feasible? (1)

madboson (649658) | about 4 months ago | (#47425059)

The flat conformer is a simple transition state so I would imagine a catalysis kind of approach where you shift the energetics around as you stitch things would be one way. Then again I am not a bench chemist so there are probably many strategies for that which I know nothing about.

Re:Chemcially feasible? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47425615)

I really with I could follow this part better ... it sounds like you guys are the only ones talking about the chemistry, and that's the part that I'm most baffled by. :-P

'Soccer ball'! (1)

BigZee (769371) | about 4 months ago | (#47424193)

The article quite correctly calls the ball a football and never mentions the word 'soccer'.

Re:'Soccer ball'! (1)

Trepidity (597) | about 4 months ago | (#47424491)

But a football is the ball used to play Gaelic. A soccer ball is what you use to play soccer.

Re:'Soccer ball'! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425285)

But a football is the ball used to play Gaelic. A soccer ball is what you use to play soccer.

Incorrect on your assumption of the usage of the word "soccer": A football [wikipedia.org]

That post was as boring as a Soccer Game... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424209)

I love math and all, and I love the science behind games. How they construct the sports gear can be very important...but this is a soccer ball...kick it...it bounces a mm higher because of chemical coating xyz....ugh...Be glad when this shindig is over.

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424341)

Who cares if there's a molecule with the same geometry as the ball stitches?

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425603)

!Nerds!!

it's a f---ing ball, who gives a shit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424443)

this is the kind of shit news I expect to hear from some butthole news channel.

In colIege, I knew a girl who had TWO of these! (0)

Dripdry (1062282) | about 4 months ago | (#47424605)

In colIege, I knew a girl who had TWO of these! Woo, mama! She helped me with my Calculus, alright....

Is it too much to ask... (4, Insightful)

hendrips (2722525) | about 4 months ago | (#47424653)

In an article about a breakthrough in molecular topology, I'm currently seeing, while browsing at 2,

-7 comments about the relative merits of the soccer balls that inspired this discovery,
-6 comments condemning sports fans in general and soccer ball buyers in particular,
-4 comments whining about the fact that the U.S. doesn't have the same regional dialect as the commenter,
-1 terrible almost-pun,
-1 comment that is completely incoherent and incomprehensible,
-1 complaint about religion,

and a grand total of 1 comment about molecular topology. Is is too much to ask that we could have some comments from posters who are interested in, you know, math and science? Here I was getting ready to dredge up all that symmetry and topology that got drilled in to me in grad school. Oh well.

Re: Is it too much to ask... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47424853)

This is not an article about molecular topology. It's about as interesting as hearing that someone base-4 encoded the Star Spangled Banner and encoded it on a strand of DNA.

Re:Is it too much to ask... (1)

Rashdot (845549) | about 4 months ago | (#47425219)

Maybe Slashdot could use an on/off topic moderation level.

(I wasn't going to post on the subject, but now I can write an off topic post too :-)

Re:Is it too much to ask... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425533)

You must be new around here...

Innovation is bad? (1)

Milgrams37 (2628411) | about 4 months ago | (#47424837)

I can appreciate that being a US-based board, /. isn't filled with soccer fans, but still, why all the poo-pooing on innovation? Does the newest iPod really do anything predominantly different than its predecessors? How about that Galaxy V versus the III? Saying the Brazuca and Telestar are the same is like equating the 15-inch CRT that came with your Hewlett-Packard to the current 32" flatscreen you're sitting in front of. They both let you see what your surfing, right?

As a fan and recreational player who spends about six hours on the pitch every week here in Soccer City, USA, I'm impressed with the Brazuca. The ball flies truer (or at least more consistently), reacts livelier off the foot, and, as a previous poster noted, feels much different when you get hit by it. I know this is anecdotal, but I'd argue these things matter to those that play/are interested/care. Just because you're not interested or it doesn't impact you, doesn't mean the innovation and change is bad. I don't see the value of an iPad/tablet, but I can appreciate that it's an approach that others appreciate and an approach that continues to be refined.

Count again (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425259)

"In the 1970 World Cup in Mexico, teams used a new kind of ball called the Telstar made from 12 black pentagonal panels and 20 white hexagonal panels". Wasn't it 12 pentagons and 18 hexagons?-Ignacio Agulló

And that means? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47425465)

But here's question that has been puzzling chemists, topologists and..errr...soccer fans: is there a molecular analogue of the Brazuca?

OK ... so mathematicians proved you could have molecules with a symmetry similar to a new fangled soccer ball.

Is this good? Is it not good? Is it useful in any way? Or it this purely an intellectual exercise?

I'm afraid I don't grok chemistry with fullness, so I don't know if different symmetries give us different materials, or prettier chemicals.

I know shape usually defines the other kinds of bonds it can make, but I have no idea if this specific thing is of any benefit to anybody.

Can anybody give a lay summary for what the practical applications of this tidbit of knowledge actually are? Because I've got nothing solid here.

Re:And that means? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47425607)

The science gives people something to think about while watching another boring 0-0 soccer game.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?