Running Head: MYTHBUSTERS ANALYSIS
1
Mythbusters Analysis
Chris Eberhart
Ivy Tech Community College of Central Indiana
MYTHBUSTERS ANALYLSIS
2
For my Mythbusters assignment, I chose the episode Ping Pong Rescue, which first
aired on the Discovery channel on November 3, 2004 (Hyneman & Savage, 2004). The
Mythbusters are a group of scientists who test urban legends, common myths, and user
submitted ideas. Combined, the group has more than 50 years of special-effects experience,
allowing each to bring experience and knowledge to the table when planning an experiment
(Hyneman & Savage, 2004). The Mythbusters work to educate through the experiments and
show whether well-known, preconceived notions about an idea could be right or wrong entirely.
After watching the show, I chose a few of the main scientific concepts and asked my own
questions about the myth. I conducted my own experiments and investigation to get the
answers. I learned the need for inquiry and experimenting through my own tests and understand
the Mythbusters want to raise awareness in science alongside being an entertaining show. Ping
Pong Rescue was a topic with many important scientific concepts and more information than a
viewer may normally think of during a television show.
The myth chosen was called Ping Pong Salvage and was selected from an old Donald
Duck comic story. The Myth busters started out by discussing how plausible using ping pong
balls to salvage a boat would be and whether the idea has ever been completed before. Jamie
and Adam start out by noting how boats are salvaged in the real-world and using Jamie’s
personal experience, as he salvaged a craft with garbage bags of air (Hyneman & Savage,
2004). After discussing the plausibility of the myth, the team then goes to find out what numbers
are needed to see if the myth is even remotely possible. Using small-scale experiments to
research and collect data, Adam does the initial research of finding out how many ping pong
balls are needed to lift a single pound while Jamie voices skepticism at the possibility given the
amount of balls required and Adam then wonders how possible the myth is after “finding the
packing efficiency of the ping pong balls, how well they stack together was only 51%” (Hyneman
2
MYTHBUSTERS ANALYLSIS
3
& Savage, 2004). Adam and Jamie then test to see how durable the balls are, Jamie designed a
pressure chamber to replicate the pressure experimented under so many feet of water but
managed to reuse the equipment from a previous experiment to save time and expense. Jamie
finds the balls will hold up and then the team discusses going full scale with the myth. The
research completed by Adam shows a small boat should be salvageable with only 60,000 ping
pong balls and the team gets a donation from a Japanese study involving avalanches
(Zimmerman & Zimmerman, 113, 2005). Adam and Jamie then move on to experimenting with
the real boat, discovering a fiberglass sailboat weighing a fraction of the original ship. Jamie had
to design a way to get the ping pong balls down to the ship and experimented with a funnel
where he would pour water and balls, allowing the gravity to pull both down to the ship. Since
everything was in place, the crew headed to Monterey Bay and prepared for the experiment by
improving their safety awareness (Zimmerman & Zimmerman, 114, 2005). Plastic tubing was
laid around the wreckage to capture stray balls so the wildlife could not get to them and the
crew looked at the possibility of the ship breaking apart. Though the team prepared for wildlife
protection, a sea otter got within their plastic tubing, halting the experiment. Another minor
setback was a small rupture in the boat which was quickly repaired. After nine hours of work,
the ship surfaced after using only 27,000 balls instead of the original 60,000. The team
discussed the plausibility of the myth, noting the inefficiency and a risk to the wildlife, reaching
the conclusion, the myth is only plausible.
The Mythbusters use inquiry to solve the problem but it is not like the inquiry in our class.
The Mythbusters need to get a single, definitive answer to the question or myth, instead of just
using inference to have a possible answer. A myth is busted, plausible, or confirmed and no
myth can fall into multiple categories; though some myths have been revisited and then found to
be in a different category. The show is based on finding out if a scenario is impossible, plausible
3
MYTHBUSTERS ANALYLSIS
4
with no recorded occurrences, or confirmed with known occurrences. As an educational show, it
is based around using science to test how plausible urban legends or myths are and the show
uses inquiry to facilitate the experiments. Mythbusters use discussion to discover and plan the
process of the myth, but after that the class and show diverge from their similarities. Our
Education 224 class has been about the process of inquiry rather than finding solid answers
with inquiry. In week two, we hypothesized what was on the bottom of the cube using the clues
from the other sides without verifying our results by lifting up the cube. The class also focuses
on how to teach inquiry, whereas the Myth busters want to make science interesting for the
show. Education 224 also tries to make the class think with inquiry and get interested in the
learning process, instead of having the process already completed for us, unlike the show.
Though our processes and goals may be different, both the show and the Education 224 class
want to use inquiry to increase interest in science.
The main concept is inquiry itself, as the team plans how to best perform a myth in
regards to accuracy and safety. Jamie and Adam discuss the possibility of testing the myth and
how to proceed before any formal planning takes place, leading to more ideas being brought up
and allowing the exchange of scientific information. The team also has to plan out how to
perform the experiment, a main portion of inquiry to discover knowledge through asking or
experimenting. After the planning of the myth and small-scale experiments, the group works as
a team to set-up the large scale portion of the myth. Though the show wants to achieve a clear
objective in this case, they still fit my definition of inquiry through furthering their knowledge with
discussions, experiments, and working as a group to achieve their goal.
The other scientific principles the Ping Pong Salvage myth had to remember included
buoyancy, density, and pressure as variables in trying to either prove or disprove the Ping Pong
Salvage myth. Each concept has a role in experimenting to see if a boat could truly be salvaged
4
MYTHBUSTERS ANALYLSIS
5
with ping pong balls and without a clear understanding of how each variable works, then the
myth would either have been tested wrong or misunderstood. The first concept the Salvage had
to take into account was buoyancy. According to the Discovery channel site
Howstuffworks.com, “buoyancy is an object’s tendency to rise when immersed in a liquid”
("Buoyancy " 2009). An object’s buoyancy is based on how much water it can displace which is
why a block of metal can sink but a ship can float, due to the weight being spread out over a
larger area, displacing more water than a block of equal weight. The team had to understand
how buoyant the ping pong balls were and then figure out how many it would take to make the
ship buoyant. Adam’s calculation proved to be wrong in the large-scale test, it was estimated it
would take 50,000 ping pong balls to get the ship to float; in reality it took a little less than half
the amount due to the lighter construction of the boat (Zimmerman & Zimmerman, 115, 2005).
The boat was originally able to displace the water but was sunk until forced to rise for the
experiment, so its buoyancy was disregarded until after it was back to the surface floating on its
own. Buoyancy was an integral part of the myth and needed to be fully understood by the
viewers to understand what made the myth difficult to test. Each part of the planning went
through how the team calculated the buoyancy of the ping pong balls or how to use them to
raise an object from a liquid, making the principle the main focus of the myth and experiment.
Though buoyancy was the main scientific principle of the myth, pressure and density played a
role in planning how to complete the myth safely and accurately.
Another variable of the Mythbusters experiment was pressure. An easy to remember
definition of pressure is “the amount of force on a given area” ("Pressure," 2000). The team was
worried the boat would not hold up to the amount of pressure the ping pong balls put on the hull
of the ship as the balls filled the ship and strained the boat trying to rise through the water.
Amazingly, the ping pong balls were found to withstand upwards of 60 psi and up to 90 ft.
5
MYTHBUSTERS ANALYLSIS
6
underwater before cracking and breaking (Hyneman & Savage, 2004). Along with the boat’s
stability due to the balls, water pressure had to be overcome to get the ship to rise, putting
pressure on the ship and worrying the Mythbusters the ship would have a problem and break
apart. The group had no issues with pressure and the boat was salvaged successfully, despite
fears of a broken hull. I was impressed how the Mythbusters used science to almost accurately
predict their results; they planned out each stage and clearly explained the reasoning to avoid
disaster. Though pressure was not as big a factor as seen on-air, density proves to be another
important concept that was not covered in great detail but crucial to the myth.
Density was almost left out of the show but was instrumental in the myth and the attempt
to raise the ship. My old science teacher described density as “the amount of stuff in a given
amount of space” (Lux, 2012). He was right that density is based on the mass of an object
taking up a specific volume and it plays a role in how the myth took off and what needed to be
known to complete the myth successfully. The Mythbusters found out pig pong balls do not have
an efficient amount of stacking area; “they can stack only about 51% efficiency compared to
empty space and the balls” (Hyneman & Savage, 2004). Nearly forgotten was the density of the
sea water and possibly the boat, the miscalculation about the amount of balls could have
partially been due to a lack of understanding how dense the materials used were, as Adam and
Jamie admitted the fiberglass frame was far lighter than expected. Even though the sea water’s
density is largely negligible, I still wonder what affect it had compared to trying to salvage a boat
in a freshwater lake. Though density was almost ignored by the team, I believe it played a major
role in how the experiment ended and more information would have been interesting to hear
about on the show.
My questions include if a different material would hold up underwater, how crucial is the
air in the ping pong ball, would a deflated or damaged ball work in the experiment and if salt or
6
MYTHBUSTERS ANALYLSIS
7
freshwater makes a difference in the experiment. I conducted my own experiments and
questioned my old science teacher to see how my questions could have changed the myth
entirely. Though I experimented with the questions and already had an understanding of the
ideas behind the myth, I still furthered my understanding by trying the experiments myself.
I attempted my own small-scale experiment to test if the Mythbusters’ information was
valid. My test only used a one pound block sealed with polyurethane glue and 15 ping pong
balls. I started by making a block out of Lego bricks, roughly six inches wide, 8 inches long, and
an two inches thick with a hollow center. I used iron shot to add weight to the block until it
weighed one pound, then sealed the block with polyurethane glue to keep the block from filling
with extra water and then put the experiment in the sink. Though the brick sank, I was able to
push 15 ping pong balls under the water and brick to get the “boat” to the surface. I did not try
replicating the use of water and gravity to force the balls under water because of the small-scale
experiment and lack of space. The results seemed slightly skewed, since the Myth busters took
15 ping pong balls to raise a pound but my “boat” started to rapidly rise after adding the 15th
ping pong ball. From what I was told from a plastics/resin engineer, “The block may have started
to float after 14 ping pong balls if given time to rise slowly” (Armentrout, 2012). He further
explained since the block was so massive and the weight spread out, it may have been possible
it was nearly at neutral buoyancy from the start of the experiment. My experiment proved it is
possible to raise small objects with ping pong balls and though it was not a large-scale
experiment, I believe the Mythbusters followed the inquiry process and discovered the best way
to accomplish the experiment. In the end, the myth busters also use inquiry to keep the show
interesting, for example the gravity and water slide to transport the ping pong balls was not
necessary, it merely added to the interest of the show. The Mythbusters even admitted the myth
is only plausible due to the amount of ping pong balls and risks to the environment and my own
7
MYTHBUSTERS ANALYLSIS
8
experiment showed while it may be possible, it is still impractical compared to other modern
salvaging operations.
Along with replicating the original experiment, I decided to change to Styrofoam peanuts
instead of ping pong balls. Though I doubted the experiment would work in the same way as
ping pong balls, the Styrofoam was actually a potential alternative in trying to raise an item.
Though the real-world application of foam peanuts to raise a boat is lacking, they worked
partially because more could be crammed into the same amount of space and are still be
lightweight. A downside to the peanuts is trying to force them down to a boat, the team had a
difficult time with the ping pong balls, just imagine foam peanuts would be more difficult as they
tend to stick together with static or float easily on the water. As an added bit of fun, I used dry
ice to compact the ping pong balls to see how well they would work after being “deflated”; the
idea failed because of the lack of air but was worth a try. For my final question, I asked Mr. Lux
again about how the density of the water could affect the results and he admitted “a slight
difference is possible but anything short of the Great Salt Lake or the Dead Sea will not have a
noticeable impact on the salvage attempt” (Lux, 2012). Though my experiment with the ping
pong balls failed due to the lack of air,, I was still amazed that foam peanuts were able to take
the place of ping pong balls, leaving me to wonder what other cheap materials could be used to
salvage a shipwreck.
After my own investigations and experiments, I now realize the need for actual
experiments in science and to promote inquiry. I experimented to see how the concepts would
work in real-world applications, rather than just taking the definitions out of a textbook. I learned
the most from experimenting with density, as I remembered a former lab activity from my old
science course. It showed how different objects float differently and how the area affects water
displacement. The process of inquiry was another learning experience, as before I probably
8
MYTHBUSTERS ANALYLSIS
9
would have been fine with a textbook definition but now I want to do more hands-on or
kinesthetic activities to learn science and inquiry instead of just reading and memorizing a
concept. Finally, I learned an experiment does not have to have only one answer, even my own
alternative of packing peanuts worked, though it was not necessarily part of the myth, it was a
part of my curiosity to explore alternatives to the myth. The knowledge I learned about alternate
possibilities for inquiry was the most important part of the learning experience, as I will
remember it more than an individual experiment or a definition of the various scientific principles
used to test the myth.
After finishing my own experiments and summarizing the episode, I can now see why
the Mythbusters complete the myths in a specified and controlled way. The episode itself
showed the myth was plausible after moving from a small-scale experiment to the full-sized
boat. I took note of the important scientific concepts to further my understanding, and then
researched how they worked in the myth. I conducted my own small-scale experiments to clear
up a few unanswered questions and then asked an old teacher about potential effects from the
difference in freshwater and saltwater would make. Completing my own experiments, I realized
the need for inquiry and active experimentation to keep science interesting and to keep people
engaged in the subject.
9
MYTHBUSTERS ANALYLSIS
10
References
Armentrout, D. (2012, September 6). Interview by C Eberhart [Personal Interview]. Buoyancy of
plastics.
Buoyancy . (2009, August 24). Retrieved from http://science.howstuffworks.com/buoyancyinfo.htm
Hyneman , J. (Producer), & Savage, A. (Producer) (2004). Ping pong rescue [Television series
episode]. In Mythbusters. San Fransisco Ca: Discovery channel. Retrieved from
http://www.amazon.com/Ping-PongRescue/dp/B001PNZDZS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1347367084&sr=81&keywords=mythbusters ping pong
Lux, C. (2012, August 30). Interview by C Eberhart [Personal Interview]. Physics behind
mythbusters.
Pressure. (2000, August). Retrieved from http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/press.html
Zimmerman, K., & Zimmerman, K. (2005). Mythbusters the explosivetruth behind 30 of the most
perplexing urban legends of all time. (pp. 113-115). New York, NY: Simon Spotlight
Entertainment.
10