In article <[email hidden]>,
MagillaGorilla said:5.) Nowhere on this website does it take into account that the act of
changing your direction of inertia 180-degrees in a few seconds is more
inefficient as a function of conservation of energy vs. maintining a
straight line, which is the path of least resistance. When you ride your
bike with no hands, it wants to continue to go straight, not enter a
turn and take you in a circle. That's because an object left
undisturbed will travel in the path of least resistance, which for a
bicycle is to go in a straight line. If turning were more efficient
(i.e. faster), your bike would immediately enter a turn when you try to
ride no hands. Everyone who rides a bike knows this does not occur.
Oh! Well played, sir! This is as fine an example of
double-talk; misapprehension & bone-headed application
of physical principals; and dressed-up second hand oats
as it has ever been my privilege to witness.
--
Michael Press