Slashdot Mirror
Bicycling Science, Third Edition
Released this April, David Gordon Wilson's updated Bicycling Science fills the gap between, on the one hand, shop manuals and training guides, and on the other the contemporary literature on human powered vehicles. Wilson, Professor Emeritus at MIT, navigates physics and physiology to produce a hefty source of insight.
Wilson splits his book into three broad sections -- the biology of human power generation, the physics of turning complicated muscle motions into linear velocity, and radical redesigns of the standard diamond bicycle frame.
The first section explains, among other things, the role of oxygen uptake and distribution, and gives empirical and theoretical backing to some, but not all, of the conventional wisdom surrounding cycling. The curious will find a detailed explanation of why high pedal cadence allows for long-term, low-intensity, high-efficiency power generation. Modifications to the standard choices -- from elliptical chain-wheels to hand-powered cranks -- are analyzed critically.
The second section might be jokingly termed "extreme high school physics." Wilson explains how people intuitively balance and steer on two wheels, and the design of braking systems to avoid flip-over. He gets down-and-dirty in the metallurgical literature to explain the role of metal fatigue in frame failure, and into fluid dynamics to discuss air drag in laminar and turbulent air flows.
Wilson manages to give a sense of how the different demands physics makes on all aspects of bike design cohere into the more-or-less efficient system that we recognize today as the road and mountain bike. Wilson is an innovator, but he has a healthy respect for current designs along with a good deal of skepticism for passing fads such as that for ultralight components.
The final section covers Wilson's love: the radical redesigns of human powered vehicles to enable people to not only cover vast distances or reach high speeds, but also to swim, submarine, fly and even hover or flap on the power -- between 100 and 700 W -- the "NASA standard" man or woman can provide on timescales between hours and seconds.
The text occasionally jumps into a wider historical and social context to provide lighter relief, such as the diagrams that compare cycling's efficiency to other modes of of transportation (cyclists handily undercut a fully loaded diesel commuter train for calories expended per rider.) Wilson is not amused by those who would compare cyclists to dolphins or hawks in terms of efficiency, distance, or speed -- too bad. A brief rant against cars near the end is the exception to the rule of Wilson's professional, honest style.
Bicycling Science can be used as a handbook for the armchair designer of human powered vehicles. Or, if you prefer, as a way to answer the nagging science questions that arise after a thoughtful bike ride. Perhaps its most inspiring use, however, is as a bed-table compendium of stand-alone investigations into what engineers have come up with on a device that has been perfected, again and again, for decades longer than the internal combustion engine.
You can purchase the Bicycling Science, Third Edition from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, carefully read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
I have to say they've changed a lot about the book, more than is noted above. It's more accuruate now, but it's kind of unnerving how many incorrect explanations of fluid dynamics and quantum mechanics slipped by last time.
BLING BLING. Meet the architecture that's changing everything.
Forget bikes! Real geeks use the Segway!
Or in my case, watching the hands-on tinkering of the guy up the street at the bicycle shop. Seriously, after fiddling with the guts of the insides of various PCs all day, the last thing I want to do is rip the back tire off my bike and fix a flat (which is something I currently need to do).
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
Is there any sort of data to back up the claim that either rock climbing or bicycling is a popular among geeks? Among the geeks I know some sort of martial arts is far more common that rock climbing or cycling (i.e. I don't know anyone who climbs or cycles, but many who do martial arts).
Just remember: wear a helmet! All it takes is one particularly hard cranial impact with cement, and you'll "go *BSD".
Just wait until they motorize these bicycles. Imagine the possibilities of riding a bicycle without a helmet at 90 mph. They could form entire gangs of people riding these motorized bicycles.
And geeks could look down on them for using a higher-tech solution than their regular bicycles. Ironic how they see nothing wrong with a Linux Users group, but as soon as it's a Motorcycle Users Group, they're some kind of lower life form.
click here for a non-gonad-manging bicycle seat. It is one of many different types available.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
From now on, on top of being linux and Open Source fanatics,as well as hardcore matrix and lotr freaks, you will now also enjoy the wonderfully awarding activities of rock climbing and cycling, and will promote them as such. That is all.
Boy, I can't pass that up. If the windows NT server next to me were a bicycle, it would be nice and shiney, have one gear (slow), and the wheels would fly off every now and then for no apparent reason, with the random luckiness that it attracts meteorites(i.e. worms and virii) from the sky. But hey I can upgrade to the new even shiner M$ bicycle, which has pretty much all of the features mentioned above, except it is faster because it would be running on brand new hardware (but mostly just attracts meteorites faster too).
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
this is the cry of someone who doesn't want to think about the fact that his car is helping choke the planet to death, or that his OS was written by assholes and for assholes (and reached its target audience).
But the bicycle from a broad design perspective has not changed much since its invention, save from a departure from amusingly large front (or is it back) wheels. So it seems to me that the bicycle is far from optimised in terms of muscle use. I've seen various contraptions over the years that I suppose attempt to imrove on this. One that I saw just a few days ago appeared to be powered like a rowing machine. Another more popular variation on the cycle has the rider sit much lower to the ground. But I believe this one only serves to have the rider in a more upright position. So does this book point out the "best" design for the cycle?
Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
Africus aut Europaeus?
Fixing a flat is ridiculously easy, it's the equivalent of opening up Word using Windows. If you don't cycle much, fine, take it to the shop, but if you do, you'd be far better learning the basics. There aren't many 'guys up the street' to be found when you are out touring 25k from the nearest civilisation. (I speak from experience and now know how to fix a flat.)
I commute by bike. I have found that it is a great way to burn off the stress of the day. On my ride home, I can think about all the things that pissed my off that day (or in general) and get them out of mind by the time I get home. If I drive, I really notice a difference in how I feel when I get home. Plus it's good excerise as well as I can get a good laugh when I pass a gas station sell regular for $2.40 a gallon.
You'll fit in real good at the scientist loony bin in the "She Blinded me with Science" music video. If it looks out of place there (like a regular bike would), it is not "real geek".
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
There's a possible psychological explanation: I'm too impatient and competitive to relax and let the gears do the work. But I think there's something more, maybe the force is distributed over the pedal cycle in a way that's less efficient....
The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
Interesting side note... Microsoft Windows was almost replaced with Microsoft "Pintos", because a man in a pinto could basically blow up faster than any other species on foot... AMAZING coincidence eh??
Cycling science has really come on in the past few years. I remember the bicycles of my youth resembling drainpipes welded together - heavy and clunky with all the response and verve of a coffee table.
Now I was somewhat suprised to find that more modern bikes are superb machines. Cheap. Reliable. Light and really really fun to ride.
The added benefit of being a) ecologically sustainable and b) acutually *quicker* in the city is just a bonus.....
This one goes out to all those car luvin' geeks. Borrow a high quality bike and see what the rest of us are a raving about.....Do this now.
Remember kids! Guns don't kill people - Americans kill people.
Wilson is an innovator, but he has a healthy respect for current designs along with a good deal of skepticism for passing fads such as that for ultralight components.
Hardly a passing fad. People have been drilling their chainrings (and everything else) for as long as there have been hills to climb.
Every day I ride home to the top of my hill I'm glad to be hauling 17 pounds of bike versus 25.
Fromt he article: "You know, the computer that is now taking over the planet thanks to the iPod"
Ok, come on, maybe the iPod is a pretty successful device but apple has never been further away from world market share in terms of desktop computers than it is now. With cheapo Windows machines and Linux on the other side they had to come up with a success. The iPod might have saved their lives but world domination is waaaay out of reach.
Long ago Specialized (a bicycle and bike components manufacturer) did some really really really shitty analysis of a really really really poorly done study that claimed normal bicycle saddles cause impotence. Problem was, they didn't correct for age, and did a study of older men on bicycle saddles vs. younger men who were joggers/runners and, rather than recognizing a well known fact that impotence increases with age, claimed it was the saddles. As luck would have it, they introduced a new saddle that would "cure" this non-existing problem at the same time. How convenient!
Hint: The Chinese and Indians primarily get around by bicycle, and how many countries have 1 billion or more people?
Try riding one of those things, and you'll see why a normal bike seat is shaped like it is.
To avoid numbnuts, adjust the height correctly, wear padded bike shorts, and ride a correct width saddle.
Oh, and harder is usually better than softer. The seat doesn't break in, your ass does.
Amazing. Four responses, and not one lame "cycling unix" joke about rebooting a computer yet.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Did you know she was a second cousin to Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda?
Malda points at guys dicks and laughs too.
cos its gets me out in the country side and fresh air after way too many hours slumped in front of a computer in a stuffy office. It does eat time out of your day but I really consider it relaxation so I dont mind.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
please...There is enough junk science floating around about helmets to make your head spin.
research and understand the construction and testing of current style bike helmets, and the serious crash types that lead to blue-screening yourself.
You'll be surprised as to what a foamie can and can't do.
Not saying that a helmet isn't a good idea, but it's assuredly not a panacea, either.
In a never ending qwest to be the second geekiest guy in the world after the Tron guy, I use and love my Brompton bike. Its expensive, but it folds up for carrying -- an elegant engineering feat.
Juggling, surely the *real* canonical geeky 'sport' ?
Cheers & God bless
Sam "SammyTheSnake" Penny
The canonical geek sport is volleyball. Always has been.
Recumbent bicycles (random links plucked from Google) have an advantage because above about 15mph the key issue is wind resistance, which they reduce significantly, while also improving comfort.
Recumbents are great on the flat but don't climb so well, so they wouldn't necessarily make a great all-rounder but could suit your circumstances. The low position is not the greatest in traffic either.
One of the issues holding back bike evolution is that the racing organisations have strict restrictions on design regarding what is permitted in races.
I've never, EVER met a geek who rock climbed. In fact, I'd wager that most rock climbers are the jock type. Furious masturbation is just not enough to build up your arm strength. I think the submitter just took himself as a single sample point.
The Segway is not even useful enough (except maybe in warehouses) to be critized, much less to be branded as geek transport du jour!
I've been riding a recumbent (a RANS Rocket, which is a fairly basic entry-level model) for over a year now and I have to say I love it. Comfortable, efficient, low wind resistance compared to a wedgie^H^H^H^H^H^H upright (and that's without a fairing), and cool to boot. Check them out, I highly recommend them.
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
Apple Macintosh (you know, the computer that is now taking over the planet thanks to the iPod).
Which planet are we talking about?
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
in topic
"A brief rant against cars near the end is the exception to the rule of Wilson's professional, honest style."
Why should that not be professional or honest? I haven't read the book but that may be his honest opinion about cars as well as the opinion of many others.
An "honest" opinion that contains untruths is not really honest at all. Just because some others are deluded as well does not make a false opinion any more valid.
Heh. My Specialized has a sticker saying 'Designed on Sun Microsystems' immediately followed with 'Made in Taiwan'. How's that for outsourcing?
(It's still a great bike...)
Bijker (!) wrote a really good book which discusses the evolution of the bicycle, some of the false starts and ideas which got dropped if you're interested in the history of the bike. Some cool old photos and like all other technologies, shows that it is more than engineering or logic that dictates the evolution of artefacts.(Bijker, W. E. (1995). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA and London, England, The MIT Press.)
Look who is laughing come the weekend, when they've gone on a camping trip 2 states over, while you have barely enough time to ride to the "Fry's" and back: in town.
I have recently and at long last become reacquainted with my bikeE recumbent. Or, well, semi-recumbent as some people like to call them, since it's more like a propped-against-a-wall position. However, I guess a *true* recumbent would involve you lying senseless on a mattress or something, so I call kibosh on that aspect of the name game ;)
...) low-end: a bit heavy, a lot cheap (compared to many recumbents, which are designed and priced like sculpture). I had hoped they represented a sufficient mainstreaming of recumbent bikes, and a sufficient lowering of the price, that they would fill an obvious market gap and thrive, but ... No. Turns out they were not able to pull an eMachines, despite the similar naming scheme.
:) For Steve Roberts with his 210 gears, maybe, but not for me with my mere 21 ;) It's also more for streets and other flattish surfaces than for mountainous territory ;) However, the tires are sufficiently knobby it's certainly not confined to artificially perfect racing conditions. For the places and reasons I'm likely to ride it (mostly urban transport, for fun and utility, grabbing milk from the store etc) it's perfect.
As recumbents go, bikeE bikes are (or were, since the company is now out of business, but *are* in that their products still exist
So, now after a year of not riding it (long story, friend's delivery plan from the other coast was interrupted), I have the pieces, and soon will re-assemble my heavy but super-cruisy blue semi-recumbent.
Riding recumbent takes a few minutes to adjust, less so probably on the bikeE than on the truly radical ones, which I have long wanted to try but never have. It's cruisy! turns are a bit slow (long wheelbase), hills are enough to make me walk a lot of them, in contradiction to claims that they're no worse on a recumbent than on a conventional upright bike. Uh, Yeah right
(Who is Steve Roberts, you ask?)
However (and this is the reason I have bothered to type this much on an old bike), I have not yet located a bike rack that would hold one of these on the *back* of my small station wagon (subaru legacy outback). Has anyone seen one of these? I don't want a rooftop rack for it -- unless someone can provide evidence that rear carriers are just as bad, fuel-wise. Around town, the fuel difference is not so bad. I just ended a 9,500 mile road trip though, and may be taking one of similar length in August. At current gas prices, and even at old ones we may ne'er see again, I don't want to add anything unnecessary to the fule bill.
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
There is nothing that compares to a bicycle for efficiency of transport. I ride 60-100km most days and the only fuel I require is a protein shake (aprox. $1.00) and a couple of bottles of water. Positive physical side-effects aside, there is nothing more enjoyable than passing some Bicycling Science, Third Edition reading weenie on his tricked out, rarely ridden road bike! BTW, true geeks ride recumbants! (those ridiculous looking Lazy-Boy contraptions)
And I thought I had broken out of geekiness by riding a bike to work every day, and becoming an enthusiastic rock climber.
Thanks for destroying my illusions of normalcy, Slashdot!!!
My bicyles
I haven't read this book, and I'm not sure I want too, because it seems to be overkill. Bicyclists in search of a practical, down-to-earth analysis of the bike might check out the prodigious writings of Jobst Brandt, a mechanical engineer and avid touring rider. Brandt eschews quantum mechanics and other irrelevancies and instead analyzes and explains the real problems of bicycles. Most notably, Brandt published The Bicycle Wheel, the definitive text on the function, response, and building of spoked wheels. I used it to select parts for and to build my current wheels and let me tell you, building your first set of bike wheels is even more interesting than building your first PC.
Brandt is a tourer of some note. His Alpine and Sierra Nevada tours are legendary and have inspired a lot of cyclists.
You can access and search Brandt's writings via USENET: try looking at rec.bicycles.tech.
- Kabauze
Drill baby drill - on Mars
WTF? Stupid mods. Mod as troll, I say!
Oh no you don't...
Every time I see a cyclist on the sidewalks, I get a strong urge to shove something into their spokes. The rules are there for a reason. Some jackass shifted into top speed careening down the sidewalk is going to hurt a pedestrian. They can stay to the right on the streets, and that's that. Get the hell off of my walkway unless you're planning on keeping one foot on the ground at all times.
And seriously, would it kill you bicyclists to operate responsibly on the streets? Just because you take up less space doesn't mean that you have the right to try to cut off everyone in dense urban traffic, run traffic lights, etc. Maybe if there weren't so many braindead bike messengers, I wouldn't notice it so much, but it's things like this which tell me a few things:
1) Bikes belong on the street.
2) Bike lanes must exist.
3) Cyclists should be licensed.
If you're going fast enough to hurt someone, you should be forced to take a test and own up to some responsibility for your actions.
Raptor
"Procrastination is great. It gives me a lot more time to do things that I'm never going to do."
If I had mod points I'd mod you troll, but surely you must know that in many municipalities cycling on the sidewalk is illegal and cyclists are obligated to ride in the street.
Not only that, but on streets without bike lanes, the law often dictates that a cyclist ride in the middle of the lane.
-carl
. We've got computers, we're tapping phone lines, you know that ain't allowed - Talking Heads, "Life During Wartime"
You should never ride very far without carrying a spare tube and/or patch kit!
Just 2 weeks ago I was on a 40 mile out and back ride, and at about 16 miles out, I flatted... That was the second time I had gotten a flat, took me a few minutes to swap the tube out, the small pump I keep strapped to my bike was a little slow in filling my tire up, but I was on the road again in under a half hour.
It is also a good idea to carry an extra energy bar on long rides incase you get a flat...
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
I hope this is a joke. In all 50 states the law is for cyclists to abide by the same traffic rules as cars which usually means staying off the sidewalk. The only real danger on the open road to cyclists is the threat of inattentive, malicious, and/or impatient drivers. Slow down and share the road.
The climbing thing takes some getting used to on a recumbent, but it's not a problem really. There are two ways to climb - grinding (slow power strokes with all your weight on the pedals) and spinning (smooth fast cadence with minimal force applied). You can't grind on a recumbent, for the simple reason that you can't bring your weight to bear on the pedals. Once you get used to spinning, though - and maintaining your balance while slowly riding up a hill - climbing isn't a problem.
As for visibility in traffic, that's thought to be a myth by most recumbent riders with any experience. First, you're not really all that low. My 'bent has a seat height of something like 21" - trust me, I'm visible. Second, recumbents are still relatively rare, and they stand out like a sore thumb. I'd rather have drivers saying "WTF" and paying MORE attention to me than the idiots who look right through bikes because, well, they're just bikes, right?
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
Youve never climbed then have you.
I both cycle and rock climb.
Rock climbing is not a pure muscle power activity. I've seen people climb that way and they get very tired very quick. Its all about technique, balance and keeping a clear mind. Which obviously gives it many similarities to martial arts (which I've also done). On top of that there is lots of very cool gadgetry that goes along with it...all those bits of sculpted aluminium (which makes it similar to cycling).
If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done?
For a few reasons.
1. They are quite easily the most efficient means of transport there is. By a long way.
2. I have a recumbent bicycle. Actually a Pashley PDQ based on the Counterpoint design. Sunbed and exercise bike in one.
3. Cycling keeps you healthy.
4. It moves you from A to B rapidly, quietly and with minimum environmental impact. Soon after crude is $100 per barrel, cyclists will reclaim their rightful place at the top of the roaduser hierarchy. Grr.
5. I have a quasi-religious belief that in The Future, everyone will wear matching co-ordinates, and will almost certainly travel by bicycle.
Huzzah for the bicycle!
"It's not your information. It's information about you" - John Ford, Vice President, Equifax
I'm not going to share the road with some bike retard! The fuckers that take up road space can kiss my ass! Goddamn out-of-place cyclist fags. Half of whom are chinks by the way! I hope their nuts fall off. Cocksuckers.
In the US, the regulations regarding on bikes on sidewalks vary from locality to locality.
Also, studies have found that sidewalk cyclists are more likely to have collisions with cars: the problem being that drivers know they have to scan to both sides for fast-moving traffic when crossing traffic lanes, but they don't do the same when they cross crosswalks.
Separated "bike paths" tend to have the same problems. The road really is where you want to be--and as someone who has shared the road with cars on daily commutes, I've found it works darned well in practice too. Just think of yourself as any other slow-moving vehicle (like a tractor (well, except when you have a sufficiently steep downhill...)) and it all works out.
--Bruce Fields
Remember the Bamboo Bike
I cycle round town, and spend more time waiting behind queues of cars than they spend waiting behind me.
Regarding cycling on the sidewalk. Read around http://www.lesberries.co.uk/cycling/cycling.html
Once you try one, you'll never be quite so keen on a normal bicycle design again.
The single drawback of cycling a recumbent is that you cannot use your body weight at the top of the chainwheel arc for extra drive. But with cleated pedals you can push with one foot and pull with the other on a recumbent. And you have a much lower centre of gravity (read: stability) and a lesser drag profile.
Motorists tend to give you a wider berth too - they seem to respect you as a not-so-average cyclist. A recumbent bicycle will oblige you to use the road responsibly too - you can't kerb hop on most models and you tend to stay with traffic in cities rather than get overtaken a lot.
You are also at the same eye-level as motorists. One of the problems with a normal cyclist is that the motorists who pull the most dangerous maneouvers and visa versa can't see each other.
When you can see a persons face it makes it more sifficult for them to pull a move that could kill you. And you have a deckchair, exercise machine and sunbed in one.
Try one soon.
"It's not your information. It's information about you" - John Ford, Vice President, Equifax
I've got 9, ranging from beater uprights to recumbent trikes (and a sweet 1972 Schwinn Town & Country upright trike). I bought the latest one for $2.50 at a police auction. I plan to fix it up and GIVE it to some neighborhood kids. When I move here in a few months I'll give most of the others away to people too. I do the same thing with old computer stuff too, giving it to someone that doesn't have one or has one much older than whatever I'm otherwise tossing out. I'm not sure if I like working on bikes more or computers more. Bikes are dirty and sweaty work.. computers are cleaner but I'm more prone to gouging my hands up inside a case.
They guy's point is perfectly valid. Bikes are the most energy-efficient form of transport in existence. Period.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Ah, these must be some of those "big blue room" activities I've heard people talk about.
It doesn't require a laptop (too heavy anyway) but a PDA. I just bought a personal GPS receiver and am working on a program for my Pocket PC to give me audible directions while biking/driving using maps I build myself (tracing over aerial imagery).
so the only two sports that you can 'geek-out' on are rock climbing and cycling?
Has anyone ever gone SCUBA diving? Plenty of stuff to geek out on equipment wise and -lots- of physiological stuff.
Granted the initial expense is high, however you can spend well over that on a new tricked out bike.
In case you don't know, the *legal* place for cyclists to ride is where other vehicles ride: the street. Sidewalk riding is dangerous for pedestrians AND bicyclists. So next time you're going 45 in your thousand-pound hunk of steel, have a heart and give a few feet to the bicyclist you're about to pass. Might as well learn to live peacefully with us.
Look out honey, 'cause I'm using technology; Ain't got time to make no apology
I highly suggest either :
1.Tai Chi
2.Kendo (Samurai swordsmanship)
both are very good at clearing the mind.
Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
Spot on. The bicycle is a powered vehicle and belongs on the road. In fact, the roads were first given smooth paving at the behest of bicyclists.
.
For the most part serious cyclists don't even belong on bike paths, its too dangerous for them, the other cyclists, and the people walking their dogs because they don't understand the concept of either "bike" or "bike path." We just go too damed fast for these little noodly things narrower than the average sidewalk.
So get out in the road where you belong, but, when you get there. .
[i]act like a vehicle.[/i]
Hold your line. Oberve the rules and laws of right of way. Etc.
Then we can all live together in peace.
KFG
The above is not a pick one and only one answer. Life can be a bore, get over it.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I see a lot of geeky rock-climbers and cyclists, but fencing seems to take the cake when you talk about competitive sports.
Not that cycling or rock-climbing can't be competitive; but most of the geek types I know do them recreationally.
darius
I mean, unless you've kind of got a death wish. It's about the best way to get hit by a car -- they are far more likely to see you if you are on the road, but when some guy turns directly into you because he didn't see you on the sidewalk...
:)
Oh, and it's usually illegal.
Get a city map, pick some routes that are calmer (i.e., avoid industrial areas, find some back roads, get off the 4 lane commuting routes), and check them out on the weekends. Once you find a good route or two, try it to work. Set a goal of doing it twice a week 6 months a year. You'll never look back.
If you are interested in working on a cycling Power Simulator see. www.grennan.com/BikePower/
There are 10 type of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
I've heard that it's very popular in Europe. Don't any geeks play it here in the US? Most of my college dorm buddies played it and some were pretty advanced at it.
"Is there any sort of data to back up the claim that either rock climbing or bicycling is a popular among geeks?"
Anecdotal evidence makes poor statistics, but I climb (prefer outdoors) as does my wife (another geek) and many of our climbing partners are various incarnations of the Geek Genome as well.
I chalk it up (pardon the pun) to three things:
Footnote: It's the shorter climbs that'll kill you. Folks simply don't realize the danger. Without a helmet, a 10 ft fall headfirst onto jagged granite shatters your grape like a fragile egg. Damn shame more folks don't wear helmets when climbing outdoors
And finally, unlike Tribes 2 or your favorite Jumping Cartoon Character game (which I also like ;-) if you screw up on the rock, you stand a good chance of splattering your visceral goo in a very real and lasting way. Something about the stakes of Real Life Physics makes the reward of grokking the system all the more tangible and tasty.
Does the book have any info on whether cycling in traffic is actually detrimental to your health or not? I honestly want to ride to work, but unless someone has come up with a small oxygen tank and mask I think the damage to my lungs is greater than the benefits of the exercise. Does anyone who's read the book know if there's anything about this in the book?
And will now mod down all even remotely anti-cycling posts.
1) Bikes belong on the street.
Most assuredly yes.
2) Bike lanes must exist.
On every street? Why? Designated bike lanes add an extra element of confusion into the traffic mix. Wide curb lanes are far, far better. IMHO, of course.
See John Franklins writings (particularly on the the Milton Keynes Redway) for examples of why designated, striped bike lanes may not be the best solution.
3) Cyclists should be licensed.
Again, why? Has it helped motorists skills? >40k dead on the roads annually would say no.
Plus, then you start to infringe on the right to travel.
We accept licensing for motor vehicles, because of the potential for damage. A person on a bike hits something, and you get a few bruises.
At what age do we issue this bike license? 16? 14, 10?
All roads are not alike. You'd remove the ability of a kid to ride to school or a friends house.
What's next? A license to walk?
You can go for cross country cruising and get a big fat bike. It's nice to ride upright and there's nothing quiet like it. Yeah, the leather and all works well. For someone without gas money a good motorbike represents a way to get around. Long rides are, of course, less comfortable than the same ride in an airconditioned vehicle. If you have enough money for both, you are a RUBBER, a Rich UrBan BikER.
You can go for racing and get yourself a crotch rocket. I know people who have done this and taken it all the way through racing school.
What's to look down at? Posers? Nah, they sooner or later get a clue. Groups of people who ride around stomping heads? Yep. Breaking heads is not a nice thing to do, even if you have figured out how to practically ride a motor bike. That's a good thing to look down at and stay away from.
Me? I like regular bike riding now. It's healtheir and less dangerous than the other stuff. No, I've never run around wanting to break people's heads.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I was under the impression that unicycling was the canonical geek sport. Especially mountain unicycling (muni).
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
You missed one other rant: Cyclists who cycle on the road, but against the flow of traffic. Dumber than a pile of bricks. Equipped with the argument that this way they (and motorists) can see what is happening, Great, but then every collision is head on, and causes no end of grief for cyclists following the flow of traffic.........
I've always felt all sporting is inherently ungeeky: sportsmen are numskulled bullies; they should stick to throwing balls - we should stick to coding and second-rate sports like laser tag or geocaching.
My (nongeek) brother got me into playing basketball recently. I never would have imagined how much fun it actually is. I wish I'd give up StarCraft for basketball a long time ago. Shedding my geek physique was easer than I thought, and I've got more vim for coding nowadays.
"Give a man a fish and he will ask for tartar sauce and French fries!"
* Riding in traffic exhaust: there is no good discussion of bike-car interactions. (I recommend Effective Cycling, John Forrester, pub. MIT Press, for lots of statistical and practical information on this subject.) Unfortunately, neither EC or BS cover exhaust; I remember some studies done before gas (petrol) went unleaded in London that showed elevated lead levels in cyclists. Not sure how the trend to LEVs has helped.
* Effeciency of the bicycle design. It is definitely the case that recumbents are more efficient. This is in large part due to wind resistance. In general, designs that allow for continuous motion (e.g., circular motion of pedals) are far better than pumping (discontinuous change of direction), and that's what we've got. Attempts to make the pedal motion more efficient on the upright have not been too successful -- it seems we adapt well and smooth out the minor troubles.
* Bicycle weight: yes, I was wrong to call it a "new" trend to drill out chainwheels and generally obsess over grams. The new trend is perhaps the use of Ti and exotic compounds to lessen weight without sacrificing strength. In any case, even a one pound change in the weight (very large for the obsessives) has little effect on efficiency compared to, e.g., tire pressure, out of alignment parts, chain loss, &c&c. Lance needs it, but Lance has a team of engineers to keep everything else in check! Check it out!
* My comment on the traffic "rant." I am a huge anti-car person when it comes to urban design, and I generally agree with the conclusions of his rant. However, he makes some unsubstantiated claims about traffic flow in order to support his argument, and I just don't think they hold up. It is in stark contrast to the rest of the book, where he is very careful to cite and discuss the evidence for even the most "obvious" assertion.
* Climbing and cycling are totally the geek sports! No question. They are problem solving sports, where you combine smaller syntactical units to form original solutions to constantly changing conditions. (Martial arts fits this description very well, as well.) In cycling, the problem solving happens "offline" and during training, of course, where as martial arts and rock climbing are live. Compiling C versus interpreting LISP, I guess.
Thanks, all who contributed and will contribute! It is fun to see people's opinions, and to discover the number of /bikes.
Protect your liberties. Donate to the ACLU
Better watch out. The Wright Bros. might have some patents on that stuff.:-) Remember what they tried to do to Glen Curtiss(sp).
What?
Out of my climbing buddies, I am a geek who became a (real) architect, my frequent climbing partner is a network admin for a wine importer (and set up/ran the "Iraqi Playing Card" merchant site), an old buddy is a member of the NetBSD team, another old buddy is a software sales guy (hmmm, shaky geek cred there), and on and on.
Rock climbers are very un-jocky. Bulked up (American) football players make lousy climbers - too much weight, little delicacy. Not surprisingly dancers and gymnasts make great climbers. But the vast majority of climbers are non-athletes who fall in love with the movement and challenge of climbing. I have no natural athletic ability, but I have built myself into a half-way decent climber.
Everytime I top a hill, I curse the 40 lbs of flab I carry. Good tires are a must but I'll worry about components fancier than those on my $250 used bike when I've reduced my biggest drag. Every hill helps.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
To those who are about to start cyclo commuting, a word of advice. Next to wearing a helmet, make sure you get a bicycle with one of those "anatomically correct" / V-Groove, or whatever it is called, saddles... better safe than sorry later in life :-)
...which is, by my humble transatlantic opinion, way too often the case. I am Dutch, and biking is the national activity here. Cycling here is something like breathing, even up to the point that many women have balloon-shaped calves (**yuck**). So I'd rather do something REALLY different after my job - like taking a bath in the surf of the North Sea, getting crushed under a few tons of foam; or playing a game of chess in a storm on the beach, the so-called storm-chess, which is, btw, a Dutch invention.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
I have a well worn dog-eared copy of the one i bought in 1978 - thank goodness this is updated.
I am a geek and a cyclist and can't get enough of either.
Can't wait for this one!
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
I've been thinking about this lately on my ride to work. I'm currently riding one way, once per week for a 35km ride that includes taking a ferry. Anyway, it's very hilly for the first half of the ride and very flat for the second half. So I've had lots of time to compare the changes on the two different terrians.
My theory is this: When you are riding on a flat surface you work your muscles much less constantly than when you are on a hard surface. When you're on a flat surface you can coast for short periods. When you are on a flat surface every time you push your pedal the bike speeds up and starts to move slightly faster than how hard you are pushing. For one pedal revolution each foot could possibly push 1/4 of the distance around, the remainder could be coasting.
Now, when you are going up a hill you are constantly pushing hard on the pedal. For each pedal revolution each foot has to push for 1/2 the revolution. So not only are you pedaling harder to fight the hill, but you get less relaxation time between revolutions.
This is similar to lifting objects. If you pick up an object and just hold it for 10 minutes it can become rather heavy rather quickly. If you lift it and put it down, taking a short break, then lift it again, it takes much longer to become so heavy.
Need a website host? Try out http://WebQualityHost.net
... is smoking crack today. How the hell is this flamebait?! It's damn informative!
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Add one more datapoint for me. Computer Engineer, lucasarts adventure gaming dork, halloween tron-costume wearer, serious runner, cyclist, triathlete and occasional rock-climber and backpacker.
I'd climb more if it wasn't so freaking expensive at the gyms around here, or if Indiana had much of anywhere to actually climb. My last apartment was near a "bootleg" wall built on the underside of a bridge, which was nice, but I'm a good half-hour drive from there now and don't make it out that way much.
Unsurprisingly, we were pretty early on getting a rec.sport.orienteering news group. Registration systems for events are nowadays completely Internet-based, allthough the quality of some systems are not very high. But at least we've got some good open standards.
I think this sets it a bit apart from e.g. bicycling in that in bicycling, the overwhelming majority are non-geeks, whereas in orienteering, we're perhaps not the majority, but at least it shows.
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
And there are lots of studies which suggest that riding on the sidewalk is damn dangerous! There's an amusing (if slightly inaccurate) quiz online to find out what type of cyclist you are at C.I.C.L.E.
When I took it I was "cyclo-analyzed" as 51% messenger and 49% effective cyclist.
Having said that, I am a computer engineer, and an avid club cyclist.
As for martial arts, I am not aware of geeks who indulge in this...
If you are trying to bike more (for the environment, to save money, for your health, etc..) you should join a local Bike Coalition (which could be a little different than a Bike Club depending on your area). They work for geting things like more bike lanes, enforcement of stiffer penalties for people who drive dangerously, better access for bike to transit, etc... They are good places to meet like minded individuals as well as provide a place to volunteer to help change things. In San Francisco, you can contact the San Francisco Bike Coalition http://www.sfbike.org which has great local information, as well as links to other bike coalitions around the area/country.
If the world's largest dictatorship can live without bicycle licenses, maybe the "free" world can manage it too...
(Incidentally, the lower risk of damage is the usual justification for bike riders being sloppy about compliance with traffic rules, much in the same way that pedestrians don't think much of jaywalking. The usual claim is that the laws are optimized for cars, and that bikes should be held to a different standard, e.g. bikes should treat reds as stops and stops as yields. Which is not to say that there aren't some whacked cyclists around who over do it. By the way, seen any crazy motorists lately?)
As long as cyclists remember that the rules of the road apply to them too. Stop signs, traffic lights, do not enter signs, etc. are not just for cars. If I were a cyclist, I would be more careful on my bike than in my car since I'm no longer surrounded by a steel cage. Seems like most cyclists think they're surrounded by a force shield or something.
Still, at least you guys aren't as bad as the assholes on Yamaha motorbikes. If I ever witness one of those idiots wipe out after attempting some lame-ass trick or trying to drive between cars then I'll pull my car over, get out, calmly walk over to their bleeding body and laugh in what's left of their face. Then I'll let someone else call an ambulance.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
In my state, bicycles have the right of way on roads, and are supposed to be ridden *in* the road, obeying the same rules as cars. It is against the law to ride a bike on the sidewalk, but this is rarely enforced.
There are plenty of idiots on both sides, from cyclists who won't stop for lights/signs to avoid losing their speed, to drivers who don't pay attention or pass where it's illegal.
Personally, I fear for my life when bike-commuting here (nobody expects cyclists because they're so rare on the roads)-- so I tend to stay on the illegal sidewalks near large roads, where there aren't many pedestrians and the side-road traffic is minimal.
I'm a computer programmer of nearly 10 years. Not to brag, but I climb rock pretty well: when fit, I redpoint 5.12 cracks and 5.13- sport. Yes, I can do a one-armed pull up.
So furious masturbation does work, I guess. Also, such are the advantages of living in Vancouver: proximity to Squamish and the Coast Range.
I also like to juggle a bit, and I'm a longstanding cyclist (commuting only these days). So I suppose I have the geek sports thing covered, except for martial arts.
There's something very elegant about controlling your speed and direction by subtle changes in your balance. I'd never had any interest in snow sports, and was scared to even go on a ski lift. But once I saw some snowboarders effortlessly linking turns down a really steep slope, I knew it was something I wanted to do.
This is Kwajalein (9Nx167E), where I currently live. Green one-speed Huffys rule here - flat terrain, and why spend more than $90 if the damned thing's gonna be a pile of rust powder inside of 8 months? The most popular mod is a 3-foot extension of the handlebar yoke so you can rest your forearms on the handlebars without bending over. Bike trailers are a must, for transporting large boxes home from the post office or schlepping SCUBA tanks to the beach. Adkins diet is a killer, because you need carbs to pedal a bike, go figure! And most important, there are many more bikes than the few government vehicles prowling around, so bikes rule the road - yeah!
The local store has brought in aluminum-frame bikes with 4-speed internal transmissions - they'll last about 2 years before the steel components go. I have one, sprayed a couple of coats of clear Krylon on it, and it's still going after a year and a half - did have to replace the chain. But at $300 apiece, the economics of the green Huffy still rule.
Some folks with time on their hands will scrounge parts from Bicycle Heaven (where all rusty bikes go) to build their primary tranporation - hey, what's a little rust, or a off-true wheel that shoves the seat up your butt, when all you need is a ride from the dorm to the chow hall?
We do have competitive cyclists on-island, and they get into the standard stuff - aerodynamics, lightweight materials and such. But we also have folks who compete in the annual triathalon (aptly called "The Rustman") with "Kwaj-condition" bikes.
All this to say it's been interesting living in a world where bikes really do rule...
Seriously, this thing looks like too much fun. Maybe heavier than most would like, but I've been biking for 30 years so I don't mind the effort to be this cool.
http://www.schwinnstingray.com/
They simply *must* make a bigger one for us large kids.
Heh? We didn't get these materials from scratch? As an industry we take advantage of materials from external sources? That is shocking.
No need given that HR.1023 - "Bicycle Reform Bill" proposes equal funding with X (please fill in).
I don't agree with that. This month here in Ohio some guy on a bike was killed by a car. He was in the middle of the road about to make a left turn just like a car would, only a fast moving car coming up behind him decided cross onto the other side of the road to pass him like you'd usually pass a bike. He would up turning left and the car hit him.
When I have to ride my bike on main roads (which I try to avoid) I always stay as far to the right as possible. If I have to turn left or go to the other side, I stop on the corner and cross with pedestrian traffic.
Drivers seem to get confused when bikes are acting just like cars...
A pedestrian crossing at the corner was killed in my neighborhood just last year.
Some drivers you just can't do anything about.
KFG
Runners. Skiers. Sledders. Snowboarders. Skaters. Divers.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
I used to bike all the time, but I pretty much quit. Now I unicycle instead. It's a bit slower, but the maintenance is less, the wow-factor is higher (especially when I go off-road) and the exercise rocks going up-hill (fehl my mahsiv lag mussles!) Plus, it fits in my trunk, so I can ride whenever.
It's such a simple machine compared to all the gears and chains and such... The only thing simpler is an ultimate wheel... Remember, it takes twice the man to ride half the bike!
The box said "Requires Windows XP or better"... so I installed Ubuntu!
Ok, pack up 5 people, a dog, and some groceries, then try to ride 100km.
I can do this without the protien shake, so when looking at it from a protien shake point of view, the CAR is far more effecient then the bike.
I noticed you didn't take time to do the work into your calculation for effenciency.
So, while your being a 'geek' on the road, I will already be at work, doing actual geek things. that means my geek time per day is higher then yours.
I win.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I love riding my bike vs. driving, but the real problem with owning a bike IMO is not maintaining it, but keeping it! Even if you buy several huge impressive locks and wind them all around the bike you can still have various parts from the bike stolen that aren't or cannot be easily secured. So the thieves peck away at it piece by piece.
It's 2004, with all the bright minds out there can't someone come up with better bike locks than we have today? As it is I have to go out and buy locks made to secure heavy equipment and motorcycles to secure my bike and that's not a sure thing.
And aside from locks, what about tracking? Isn't there anyway to come up with some type of electronic tracking device that can be put inside a piece (or pieces) of the bike? The open source movement is great for software, I think we need to start open sourcing more things in our lives such as bike security for example, coming up with ideas for devices and spreading the information freely like one would with an open source program.
I would appreciate any suggestions on how to better secure bikes and any brainstorming on electronic tracking methods. Thanks for reading.
to hit cyclist with your door as you pass them I find that relieves a lot of stress.
I joke, I would never recommend endangering a cyclist...it might scratch my paint.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
It really depends on what and how much you use your bike. I've got two - one for commuting (e.g. thief bait) and one for touring. I don't tend to work on either if I don't have to (e.g. will bring to the shop), but I can if I must (flats, brakes, pedals, etc.). And that "must" necessity tends to occur when one is far from home - which is what cycling is all about!
So you were learning. Changing a tube gets progressively easier, like anything - the most difficult bit is getting the tyre off. Besides, fixing with a patch kit can be even easier - you don't even have to remove the tube. First time I changed tubes it took that long (do you have a good set of tire irons?) If you cycle exclusively in and are never going to be out of a city, then bringing your bike somewhere is fine, I do that myself to save my time. (Note you can severely reduce flat likelihood though kevlar-lined tyres - honestly can't even remember my last flat.) You just don't have that luxury if you decide to set out to parts unknown...
Agree. One thing that helps is to have lights that make you look like a car - head, tail, signal, and brake, all appropriately colour-coded.
And if you drive a twitchy 'bent like mine, that practically steers by thought control (16" wheels and short wheelbase will do that), it's nice to not have to make hand signals in traffic.
Cheers!
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
Depending on where you live, motorcycles are allowed to legally straddle lanes, but they cannot do it along the shoulder of the roadway.
Yes. I've just spent a week of evenings designing and building a PC controlled battery charger. It'll allow me to investigate the optimum charging regime for NiMH cells, but, ultimately, I could have bought a purpose designed battery charger for about what this one cost me in parts, never mind labour and writing the programs.
Even before this one is built I've been designing the Mk 2 version which will have fully controllable charge and discharge currents, rather than just using fixed currents. Practically it won't tell me much more than the Mk 1, it just seems... neater!
The rest of us recognize that they've got a lot of good points, but that the situation isn't as simple as they make it out. The expert cyclist *might* have no need for bike lanes, but beginning cyclists love them, and it's pretty clear that bike lanes help a lot to get people out on bikes (e.g. there've been cases in San Francisco where sticking in a bike lane on a street doubled the bike traffic). Having more bikes on the road gets the car drivers used to seeing bikes out there, and that makes it safer even for the expert riders, and helps encourage even more beginning cyclists.
Also, I have to say that while you might call me an "expert" rider I *still* like having bike lanes. They're not a panacea: you need to understand you have to ride on the *left* side of the lane to stay out of reach of car doors; you need to watch out for right turners cutting you off; and you need to know how to "ride like a car" when you're passing a double-parked idiot, or heading off into a zone where the city planners in their infinite wisdom have not yet seen fit to extend the bike lanes... But even with all those caveats, I like having a zone of relative safety that I can retreat to and relax.
Consider this guy's argument: He makes the point that wide lanes encourage a larger *average* distance between bikes and passing cars, but in his experience you also get a smaller *minimum* distance, which would seem to be more important.
this is always the first thing out of peoples mouths. if a bicyclist were smashed beyond all recognition by a convoy of runaway steamrollers you can bet the news media would let you know whether the geek was wearing a helmet.
I'd wager my geek time per pound(kg?) is higher than yours though.
how do you guys get rid of the sweat after biking.
i do 15 miles each way, and well i sweat a lot (its the tropics here dontcherknow). i used to go for a swim until they decided that the training squads needed it at the same time that i did and i didn't feel like fighting 100 people for a lane (i can do that on my bike thankyouverymuch)
so ideas? there isn't a place where i can shower and i REALLY don't like the "unfresh" feeling
Suchetha
learn from yesterday, plan for tomorrow, party tonight
or one out of three ain't bad
See references to bicycle-related laws in all 50 states at MassBike.org
Not sure if it's illegal here (in the USA), but it's definitely Not Reccomended, for the above reasons, not to mention that most sidewalks are barely wide enough for two pedestrians, nevermind a cyclist trying to pass a ped.
As it is, though, I see people riding their bike on the sidewalk, in the street (going the wrong way (on the wrong side)), etc. In other words, there's a lack of education, and it exists in both drivers and cyclists. I'm partially guilty of this as well.
For example, does anyone know if it's legal to use bike lanes to park in? Or as turn lanes? I generally avoid using bike lanes at all when I am not riding a bike, and I always grimace when I see another driver use them as "handy" passing, turning or parking lanes. My feeling is that they are not called turn lanes, they are not called passing lanes, and they are not called parking lanes. They are called BICYCLE LANES for a reason.
Nathan's blog
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/
I design recumbents on my computer for Easy Racers and Sun Bicycles! How's that for geekness!
http://www.easyracers.com/