Sujet : Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious
De : am (at) *nospam* yellowjersey.org (AMuzi)
Groupes : rec.bicycles.techDate : 21. May 2025, 19:54:06
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Yellow Jersey, Ltd.
Message-ID : <100l7ge$2vsoj$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 5/21/2025 12:56 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Wed, 21 May 2025 12:58:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 5/21/2025 11:47 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Tue May 20 16:43:34 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/20/2025 1:38 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 20 May 2025 11:44:29 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
"Science of cycling still largely mysterious"
>
This article from 2016 recently popped up again:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/science-of-cycling-still-mysterious-1.3699012
>
As is the case with most issues, if I think I need to know something I
go about trying to learn it. I've little time for learning about stuff
I have no need to know.
>
Yep. So much for curiosity, so much for education... Ignorance is bliss!
>
What is unknown about bicycling? Even you know that balancing on a bicycle is based upon balancing on two feet...
>
Tom, you have no idea how much there is that you don't know. Try reading
some of the work done by Jim Papadopoulos, who's probably the most
prominent researcher on bicycle dynamics. People have been studying
bicycle dynamics for many decades, trying to get precise understanding.
Science is not there yet.
>
Obviously, we can build bikes of roughly conventional geometry and have
them work well; but that's not due to precise engineering analysis. It's
been done through a long history of trial and error leading to rules of
thumb.
Unless a person is designing bicycles, that information is not worth
bothering with.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
While it's true that literally billions of people have purchased a bicycle and ridden it (to some extent or another) with no thought whatsoever about the magic dynamic physics of keeping the thing upright, some, as I, do find that area of inquiry intriguing. Some, like you and the great majority of riders, do not. Makes no difference to riding a bicycle, and in fact there's not a consensus on why bicycles work at all.(Personally, I think the research into no-rider bicycle stability may be a red herring of sorts. If it were dispositive, then 3 year olds could ride two wheelers. Which they cannot, as their motor skills and reaction times are insufficient until around age five, give or take a few months.)-- Andrew Muziam@yellowjersey.orgOpen every day since 1 April, 1971
Science of cycling still largely mysterious
Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious