johan wrote on Aug 13
th, 2017 at 4:17pm:
Since you throw very dense projectiles we can do the hypothesis that it is like you throw it in a vacuum.
Thats not correct. The density of a ball of tungsten is in relation to "profile", respectivley in relation to "drag" exactly twice as high as in natural stones. In other words: The drag of tungsten is only 50% of the drag of stones, and so its "range" is (as) tiwce as high too.
If you can throw a stone for 370 m, than you can throw a ball of tungsten (same mass) for 740 m ... "automatically" (while using lead - same mass - this factor is only 1,6 instead - not 2,0).
So if you had to be a Hulk for this, so you had to be too the same Hulk for throwing stones for only 370 m, but this was done already long ago and "allways" (and by Bray, Yurek, Engvall, etc. ...).
So in any point of theory you made a thinking error. Length of my sling was 1,32 m only (+ 15 cm maximum from the radius of a slinging hand). And I can't remember (or imagine) to have rotated with much more than 3 rps (4 rps I hold for absolutley undoable).
The only one possibility that I can imagine would be an even higher "factor", because Keplers second law counts on interplanetry ellipses (of gravity) and is a little bit tricky to "transfer" for acclerations in slinging. Also keep in mind, that comparisons with "hulkish conditions" can not be done if the "energy" is not known, because to throw 77 g (with 82 m/s) is not the same as to throw 150 g (with the same speed or for the same distance).
Relative drags (in relation to drag of stone):Tungsten - 50 % (factor of range = 2,0)
Lead - 60 % (factor of range = 1,6)
Brass / Gunmetal - 66 % (factor of range = 1,57)
Steel - 67 % (factor of range = 1,48)
Stone - 100 % (factor of range = 1,0)
A ball of stone with 150 g has diameter 50 mm
A ball of tungsten with 150 g has diameter 25 mm
Thats exactly the half (50%) and therefore the ball of tungsten flies twice as far as a ball of stone.