Posted by Henry on July 8, 2010, 2:37 pm
Twitbull imagined:
>> I don't think so. A bike must be forced to lean, either by 'body english'
>> or counter-steering.
> Oh dear.
> Note: Left to it's own devices, a non-sidecar bike will fall right
> over. And this is equally true whether said bike is moving or at rest.
Actually, that's dead wrong. An upright, moving bike will continue to
travel upright until friction and/or air resistance reduce its speed
enough that it falls over. Even just 10-15mph is enough to keep it
upright. It's impressive how little you know and understand about
many very basic concepts...
--
"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." --
Albert Einstein.
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
http://www.ae911truth.org
Posted by Vito on July 8, 2010, 5:15 pm
Twibil wrote:
>>
>>
>> I don't think so. A bike must be forced to lean, either by 'body
>> english' or counter-steering.
> Oh dear.
> Note: Left to it's own devices, a non-sidecar bike will fall right
> over. And this is equally true whether said bike is moving or at rest.
> It's only the kickstand when at rest, or the rider's constant
> corrections when moving, that keep it upright.
You're joking? I've seen bikes buck their rider off then proceed to the
next corner just fine on their own. I assume you have too.
Posted by Twibil on July 8, 2010, 8:29 pm
> > Note: Left to it's own devices, a non-sidecar bike will fall right
> > over. And this is equally true whether said bike is moving or at rest.
> > It's only the kickstand when at rest, or the rider's constant
> > corrections when moving, that keep it upright.
> You're joking? I've seen bikes buck their rider off then proceed to the
> next corner just fine on their own. I assume you have too.
Sigh.
Yes, a bike at speed is dynamically stable. But only until (A) some
input such as road camber upsets that stability and starts the bike
leaning towards one side or another, or (B) the bike hits something.
In the real world, neither thing ever takes very long to occur because
the slower the bike is going the less stability it has, and the faster
it's going the more quickly it's likely to laminate itself to an
immovable object.
Posted by Henry on July 9, 2010, 8:52 am
Twitbull timidly backpedaled and weaseled:
>>> Note: Left to it's own devices, a non-sidecar bike will fall right
>>> over. And this is equally true whether said bike is moving or at rest.
>>> It's only the kickstand when at rest, or the rider's constant
>>> corrections when moving, that keep it upright.
>> You're joking? I've seen bikes buck their rider off then proceed to the
>> next corner just fine on their own. I assume you have too.
> Sigh.
> Yes, a bike at speed is dynamically stable.
You said that left to its own devices, a bike will fall right
over, and whether said bike is at speed or at rest makes no
difference. You're backpedaling and weaseling again.
> In the real world, neither thing ever takes very long to occur
> the slower the bike is going the less stability it has, and the faster
> it's going the more quickly it's likely to laminate itself to an
> immovable object.
And of course, "laminating itself into an immovable object"
is a totally different thing than falling right over. As we've
pointed out to you, an upright, moving, riderless bike will
roll along quite nicely for considerable distances. You're
backpedaling and weaseling, again, twit. Here's a clue - when
you say something really silly that's clearly at odds with
reality, and several people correct you, rather than dig yourself
an even deeper hole, find the strength and integrity to admit
that you were wrong....
--
"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." --
Albert Einstein.
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
http://www.ae911truth.org
Posted by tomorrow@erols.com on July 9, 2010, 2:07 pm
> Twitbull timidly backpedaled and weaseled:
> >>> Note: Left to it's own devices, a non-sidecar bike will fall right
> >>> over. And this is equally true whether said bike is moving or at rest.
> >>> It's only the kickstand when at rest, or the rider's constant
> >>> corrections when moving, that keep it upright.
> >> You're joking? I've seen bikes buck their rider off then proceed to the
> >> next corner just fine on their own. I assume you have too.
> > Sigh.
> > Yes, a bike at speed is dynamically stable.
> You said that left to its own devices, a bike will fall right
> over, and whether said bike is at speed or at rest makes no
> difference. You're backpedaling and weaseling again.
Only in HenryWorld does someone who, upon being attacked based on word
choice, EXPANDS and CLARIFIES what was originally meant, get attacked
AGAIN as backpedaling and weaseling.
Only in the fantasy world of Henry Hansteen.
XML Sitemap
>> or counter-steering.
> Oh dear.
> Note: Left to it's own devices, a non-sidecar bike will fall right
> over. And this is equally true whether said bike is moving or at rest.