• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Scientists still don't understand how a bicycle works

#41
dmusic148 said:
Pfftt....mere child's play. I'll see your 6K year old earth and raise you:

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

I wanted to think there was some sort of evidence for their beliefs. I really did. But after their faq wiki it just kept getting worse and worse.
Heck I didnt even lose faith at the whole space exploration conspiricy theory..... But the ice wall and no gravity... I just lost it then :scowl: :rollno:
 
#44
Tony Flow MMMM said:
http://www.newstatesman.com/2013/07/mysteries-bicycle

I call BS the reason a bike stands up is because of its front fork angle. Even standing still, if you lean a bike to the right the handle bars turn right. Keeping it up. What am I missing?
Click to expand...

Exactly. The OP has the correct answer but the speculation continues.

The gyroscopic effect of the spinning wheels will resist changes
in the rotating plane but, once the wheel is pushed from that
plane, it will not try to go back. It cannot recover.

The explanation for the recovery is the front fork offset. It
causes the wheel to steer in the direction that the bike is leaning.
 
#45
96tbird said:
If you can't write a prescription you ain't a real doctor; especially in psychology. Sorry people, I'm not alone here with this opinion. A PhD in physics or chemistry, the hard sciences, is the exception. I do know a guy with four: now he's brilliant.
Click to expand...

So what's your point? That psychologists aren't "real" doctors? A) that's total BS and B) what in the world does it have to do with anything?
 
#46
I'm going to point to post number two, my post, quoted below, as being my input on the thread topic.

This thread is somewhat off the rails. That's ok, it's the off topic forum. I was responding to the post that mentioned PHuds.I don't care if you think it's BS, you're entitled to think that. I gave my opinion (which in keeping of the spirit of the "off topic" forum, it was OT) which is merely opinion and hence cannot be proved correct or incorrect. Again it was OT, but in response to others comments.
96tbird said:
The interaction of a human and our inner ear adjusting the center of gravity of the combined apparatus is involved. Left to its own devices, a bicycle will fall down. I have personally witnessed this and know it to be true. Bicycles don't "work" we make them work. The mystery is in the human brain alone. That and a small amount of gyroscopic effect if the bike is in motion.

Your link didn't work for me, but judging your response, yes it's BS.
Click to expand...
 
#48
ICPbicycles_zps8d07925a.jpg
 
#49
dmusic148 said:
I almost entirely agree, with one small refinement: to turn most efficiently the rider momentarily applies a small amount of pressure to the handlebar in the 'wrong' direction. The wheel doesn't want to change it's path, so it transfers some of its angular momentum directly to the chassis in the form of torque. This torque forces the chassis and rider to lean in the 'correct' direction. From there, rake and trail bring the wheel back into line with the newly created direction of travel.
Click to expand...

When I rode motorcycles, I always countersteered, but I don't remember countersteering my bicycles.
 
#50
Munjibunga said:
When I rode motorcycles, I always countersteered, but I don't remember countersteering my bicycles.
Click to expand...

Yep. Once you get going at a pretty good clip, it's just like the motorcycle. The biggest difference is, on a bicycle, how much more time you can spend under the transition speed - especially on a mountain bike in technical stuff.

But, it's really easy to be convinced. All you have to do is steer with only one hand on the wrong side of the bars, and you immediately see what you're really doing. :p
 
#51
warnergt said:
Exactly. The OP has the correct answer but the speculation continues.

The gyroscopic effect of the spinning wheels will resist changes
in the rotating plane but, once the wheel is pushed from that
plane, it will not try to go back. It cannot recover.

The explanation for the recovery is the front fork offset. It
causes the wheel to steer in the direction that the bike is leaning.
Click to expand...

Or, to put it succinctly: trail.
 
#52
Uh, a couple thoughts.

A person on a unicycle can lean into a turn. There is no fork involved.

Angular momentum is real (and is an interesting thing to see in demonstrations) and is what makes it difficult for a bicycle to fall over when it is moving.

The person on a unicycle or bicycle who leans into a turn doesn’t fall because of the opposing forces of gravity and centrifugal force on the combined center of gravity. The combination of these two forces would make the bicycle slide to the side if it weren’t for the forces of friction and gravity acting on the points of contact of the tires and road surface. Countersteering works on these same principals.

Yes, scientists (and anyone with a basic understanding of physics or engineering mechanics) do understand how bicycles work.
 
#56
That's neat /\. There was a guy named Doug Domokos who was able to wheelie a motorcycle for seemingly impossible distances and lengths of time, across nearly any terrain. It eventually became known that he had a motor in the front hub to keep the wheel spinning constantly.
 
#60
Munjibunga said:
The University of Mons? Luckily, the baffled "scientists" are not the same ones who designed the gyroscopes for the space program. Apparently the mouth-breathers that can't figure it out ditched physics class the day they talked about angular momentum.
Click to expand...

One of my professors said he wanted to place a gyro in a suitcase and turn it on just before the baggage handler took it, so he could watch peoples' reactions as the handler tried to change direction.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back