Re: Here's your freakin equation (Re: [CR]The canard of lightweight - Simplification)

Example: Framebuilders:Alberto Masi

Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 18:57:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Bruce Krueger <>
Subject: Re: Here's your freakin equation (Re: [CR]The canard of lightweight - Simplification)
To: Louis Schulman <>, "" <>
In-Reply-To: <>

--- Louis Schulman wrote:

*snip* ...among other things***
> Riding a bicycle on Earth, you are accelerating most
> of the time, to
> counter the deceleration caused by gravity and air
> resistance. You
> wouldn't be accelerating all the time, if you were
> bicycling in space. *** 'most of the time', huh? you mean like except when you're not??? are you confusing the concepts of 'exerting effort' and 'accelerating' maybe?

'..on earth' indeed.... *sheesh*

and you're, what, an engineer?
> So, if we are going to drag science and facts(!)
> into the argument, it
> gets more complicated. The deceleration caused by
> gravity is related
> to mass, but not linearly, since the force of
> gravity is generally
> perpendicular to the motion of a bicycle. *** hey, and I suppose you're hysterical about hysteresis, too..

facts *always* complicate things; moreso if they're incorrect, or ineptly/inappropriately applied.

> The more important consideration is that the mass of
> the bicycle is
> small compared to the mass of the rider. Go on a
> diet, and this
> argument is moot. *** or vary the number of waterbottles to cancel out the thousands you've spent/wasted chasing the asymptotic weasel of weight minimization...

I don't
> know how anyone can
> live where it snows) *** rather have the opportunity to chuck a few snowballs (on a seasonally available basis) than have to worry 'bout grandma having her arm amputated by a gator in the backyard..

bruce beautiful snowy urbana IL (sadly, not enough to ski on, though -- biking's fine, and has been all winter)