On Tuesday, July 16, 2013 2:32:42 AM UTC-7, Blackblade wrote:
Irrelevant. You are assuming that they travel the same route, when in fact, mountain bikers travel several times as far as a hiker. Vandeman still 1000, mountain bikers ZERO.



Where do I make that assumption Michael ? Answer ... I don't. I assume the same power output for the hiker and the biker

Bas assumption. It takes more energy to propel the bike & to travel farther..

and I assume the same time spent conducting the activity.

So they are travelling different routes, making them incomparable.

Since the biker WILL travel further than the hiker, for the same energy input, it is clear that LESS energy is lost to friction with the trail, per metre, than for the hiker.

The energy input can't be the same, since the biker has more weight to carry, & farther to travel. You are assuming what you are trying to prove, which is blatantly dishonest. No surprise there! That's what mountain bikers ALWAYS do. Vandeman STILL 1000, mountain bikers ZERO.

Since this is axiomatically how a bicycle works it should come as no surprise to anyone.



You are OUT ... provide some equations and maths to backup your proposition. You are looking like a fool.