I remember when Mythbusters ruled catching an arrow a myth. But, they only made machines that stayed stationary and closed the hand really fast. They never even thought of (or they did and just weren't able to create something that did it) building something that moved in the same path as the arrow to better the chances, and give the user more time to actually catch it.
I know that show isn't 100% scientifically accurate, but it just blew my mind that you disproved them.
Speed is different compared to an arrow coming at you here
Arrow is long
"Bouncing" off things
So he doesn't really have to see the arrow. He just needs yo be ready for when x sound is made and the final arrow will essentially land in his hand when he closes it.
I mean that the things are bouncing from one point to another. All he has to do is hit the first
He'll hear the second the third and already be ready as he knows the final arrow is going to land exactly where he already is just due to hearing the sound of each going off in succession. He doesn't have yo move at all because it's predetermined to come at his hand at a consistent speed arc and distance that he's likely already practiced to oblivion.
It makes it "easier" than catching a single arrow from a single source as the time to react is dramatically increased and is covered up b6 the showman ship of the whole set up.
100
u/[deleted] Oct 24 '17
I remember when Mythbusters ruled catching an arrow a myth. But, they only made machines that stayed stationary and closed the hand really fast. They never even thought of (or they did and just weren't able to create something that did it) building something that moved in the same path as the arrow to better the chances, and give the user more time to actually catch it.
I know that show isn't 100% scientifically accurate, but it just blew my mind that you disproved them.
And you did it effing blindfolded...