Exeter road rage driver banned for mowing down cyclist in Tesco car park

On 08:14 4 Aug 2020, TMS320 said:

On 03/08/2020 23:51, JNugent wrote:

If the effective centre of gravity of a bicycle and its rider is
raised, eg, by placing a heavy load high up, perhaps by the wearing of
a loaded backpack, what effect does that have on its stability? Does
it:

(a) decrease stability, or

(b) increase stability, or

(c) have no effect on stability?

You're doing is the equivalent of saying that the sun rises over one
horizon and sets over another. When asked why? you then ask "are you
claiming it doesn't do this?" when the answer you should be giving has
something to do with orbit and rotation.

You claim a). Now show your working.

You must have enough of a technical background to know full well Nugent is
right but you're seeking to drag this out. Yup, you're trolling.

On 04/08/2020 12:39, JNugent wrote:
On 04/08/2020 08:14, TMS320 wrote:

On 03/08/2020 23:51, JNugent wrote:

If the effective centre of gravity of a bicycle and its rider is
raised, eg, by placing a heavy load high up, perhaps by the wearing
of a loaded backpack, what effect does that have on its stability?
Does it:

(a) decrease stability, or

(b) increase stability, or

(c) have no effect on stability?

You're doing is the equivalent of saying that the sun rises over one
horizon and sets over another. When asked why? you then ask "are you
claiming it doesn't do this?" when the answer you should be giving has
something to do with orbit and rotation.

You claim a). Now show your working.

There we have it.

Where? There is no working.

You are insisting (with as much force as you dare for fear of rightful
ridicule) that raising a cyclist's centre of gravity will not decrease
that person's stability.

Thank you for being as clear as you feel able. It'll do. Your meaning is
plain enough.

Oh, it's certainly clear enough that you don't have a clue.

On 01/08/2020 20:05, Simon Mason wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 7:37:14 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 16:47 1 Aug 2020, Simon Mason said:
On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 4:26:56 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:

Of course a cyclist should stop to do this but sometimes it
would have to be every 25 metres making a journey effectively
impossible.

I achieved the "impossible" every day for 15 years then!

Are you saying that for 15 years you stopped every 25 metres while
cycling?

I never needed to as my luggage, such as it was, never shifted in
position as it was stored securely. You incorrectly stated that there
must be an "inevitable shifting of the load", which was not true in
my case.

Absolutely. So long as the bag is secure the contents don't shift once
they've settled. On a bike there is far less movement than when country
walking or downhill running (or rather, making a flowing series of leaps
between rocks).

On a volcano hike in NZ there is a downhill section of about 1 in 1 for
about 300m that's perfect for running. People that walk it (most people)
say how difficult it is. Walking takes 20-25 minutes, I did in 5.

Apparently I couldn't have done this because I was carrying a 30l bag
that would have caused me to lose balance. Or maybe the physics is
different to cycling. Or something.

On 04/08/2020 13:47, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/08/2020 12:39, JNugent wrote:
On 04/08/2020 08:14, TMS320 wrote:

On 03/08/2020 23:51, JNugent wrote:

If the effective centre of gravity of a bicycle and its rider is
raised, eg, by placing a heavy load high up, perhaps by the wearing
of a loaded backpack, what effect does that have on its stability?
Does it:

(a) decrease stability, or

(b) increase stability, or

(c) have no effect on stability?

You're doing is the equivalent of saying that the sun rises over one
horizon and sets over another. When asked why? you then ask "are you
claiming it doesn't do this?" when the answer you should be giving
has something to do with orbit and rotation.

You claim a). Now show your working.

There we have it.

Where? There is no working.

You are insisting (with as much force as you dare for fear of rightful
ridicule) that raising a cyclist's centre of gravity will not decrease
that person's stability.

Thank you for being as clear as you feel able. It'll do. Your meaning
is plain enough.

Oh, it's certainly clear enough that you don't have a clue.

You are insisting that raising the centre of gravity does not affect
stability.

Thanks for making your (erroneous) position clear.

On 04/08/2020 23:35, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/08/2020 20:05, Simon Mason wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 7:37:14 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 16:47Â* 1 Aug 2020, Simon Mason said:
On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 4:26:56 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:

Of course a cyclist should stop to do this but sometimes it
would have to be every 25 metres making a journey effectively
impossible.

I achieved the "impossible" every day for 15 years then!

Are you saying that for 15 years you stopped every 25 metres while
cycling?

I never needed to as my luggage, such as it was, never shifted in
position as it was stored securely. You incorrectly stated that there
must be an "inevitable shifting of the load", which was not true in
my case.

Absolutely. So long as the bag is secure the contents don't shift once
they've settled. On a bike there is far less movement than when country
walking or downhill running (or rather, making a flowing series of leaps
between rocks).

On a volcano hike in NZ there is a downhill section of about 1 in 1 for
about 300m that's perfect for running. People that walk it (most people)
say how difficult it is. Walking takes 20-25 minutes, I did in 5.

Apparently I couldn't have done this because I was carrying a 30l bag
that would have caused me to lose balance. Or maybe the physics is
different to cycling. Or something.

Centre of gravity.

You *must* have heard it mentioned before.

On 05/08/2020 01:35, JNugent wrote:
On 04/08/2020 13:47, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/08/2020 12:39, JNugent wrote:
On 04/08/2020 08:14, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/08/2020 23:51, JNugent wrote:

If the effective centre of gravity of a bicycle and its rider is
raised, eg, by placing a heavy load high up, perhaps by the wearing
of a loaded backpack, what effect does that have on its stability?
Does it:

(a) decrease stability, or

(b) increase stability, or

(c) have no effect on stability?

You're doing is the equivalent of saying that the sun rises over one
horizon and sets over another. When asked why? you then ask "are you
claiming it doesn't do this?" when the answer you should be giving
has something to do with orbit and rotation.

You claim a). Now show your working.

There we have it.

Where? There is no working.

You are insisting (with as much force as you dare for fear of
rightful ridicule) that raising a cyclist's centre of gravity will
not decrease that person's stability.
Â*
Thank you for being as clear as you feel able. It'll do. Your meaning
is plain enough.

Oh, it's certainly clear enough that you don't have a clue.

You are insisting that raising the centre of gravity does not affect
stability.

Thanks for making your (erroneous) position clear.

I recall that on a legal forum you once related how you started your
working career failing to be an electrical technician. You should know
there is more to science than stripping wires.

On 08:45 5 Aug 2020, TMS320 said:

On 05/08/2020 01:35, JNugent wrote:
On 04/08/2020 13:47, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/08/2020 12:39, JNugent wrote:
On 04/08/2020 08:14, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/08/2020 23:51, JNugent wrote:

If the effective centre of gravity of a bicycle and its rider is
raised, eg, by placing a heavy load high up, perhaps by the wearing
of a loaded backpack, what effect does that have on its stability?
Does it:

(a) decrease stability, or

(b) increase stability, or

(c) have no effect on stability?

You're doing is the equivalent of saying that the sun rises over one
horizon and sets over another. When asked why? you then ask "are you
claiming it doesn't do this?" when the answer you should be giving
has something to do with orbit and rotation.

You claim a). Now show your working.

There we have it.

Where? There is no working.

You are insisting (with as much force as you dare for fear of
rightful ridicule) that raising a cyclist's centre of gravity will
not decrease that person's stability.

Thank you for being as clear as you feel able. It'll do. Your meaning
is plain enough.

Oh, it's certainly clear enough that you don't have a clue.

You are insisting that raising the centre of gravity does not affect
stability.

Thanks for making your (erroneous) position clear.

I recall that on a legal forum you once related how you started your
working career failing to be an electrical technician. You should know
there is more to science than stripping wires.

Great example of a straw man argument.

Are you still saying raising the centre of gravity has no effect on
stability?

On 23:35 4 Aug 2020, TMS320 said:

On 01/08/2020 20:05, Simon Mason wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 7:37:14 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 16:47 1 Aug 2020, Simon Mason said:
On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 4:26:56 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:

Of course a cyclist should stop to do this but sometimes it would
have to be every 25 metres making a journey effectively impossible.

I achieved the "impossible" every day for 15 years then!

Are you saying that for 15 years you stopped every 25 metres while
cycling?

I never needed to as my luggage, such as it was, never shifted in
position as it was stored securely. You incorrectly stated that there
must be an "inevitable shifting of the load", which was not true in
my case.

Absolutely. So long as the bag is secure the contents don't shift once
they've settled. On a bike there is far less movement than when country
walking or downhill running (or rather, making a flowing series of leaps
between rocks).

On a volcano hike in NZ there is a downhill section of about 1 in 1 for
about 300m that's perfect for running. People that walk it (most people)
say how difficult it is. Walking takes 20-25 minutes, I did in 5.

Apparently I couldn't have done this because I was carrying a 30l bag
that would have caused me to lose balance. Or maybe the physics is
different to cycling. Or something.

We're talking about ordinary groceries from Tesco, not what stuff you
wiuld carry on a volcano in New Zealand.

Think eggs, bread, milk, apples, lettuce, tomatoes, etc. How do you
practically strap a heavy bag of groceries inside a rucksack so securely
as not to shift -- without damaging the items?

On 05/08/2020 08:45, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/08/2020 01:35, JNugent wrote:
On 04/08/2020 13:47, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/08/2020 12:39, JNugent wrote:
On 04/08/2020 08:14, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/08/2020 23:51, JNugent wrote:

If the effective centre of gravity of a bicycle and its rider is
raised, eg, by placing a heavy load high up, perhaps by the
wearing of a loaded backpack, what effect does that have on its
stability? Does it:

(a) decrease stability, or

(b) increase stability, or

(c) have no effect on stability?

You're doing is the equivalent of saying that the sun rises over
one horizon and sets over another. When asked why? you then ask
"are you claiming it doesn't do this?" when the answer you should
be giving has something to do with orbit and rotation.

You claim a). Now show your working.

There we have it.

Where? There is no working.

You are insisting (with as much force as you dare for fear of
rightful ridicule) that raising a cyclist's centre of gravity will
not decrease that person's stability.
Â*
Thank you for being as clear as you feel able. It'll do. Your
meaning is plain enough.

Oh, it's certainly clear enough that you don't have a clue.

You are insisting that raising the centre of gravity does not affect
stability.

Thanks for making your (erroneous) position clear.

I recall that on a legal forum you once related how you started your
working career failing to be an electrical technician. You should know
there is more to science than stripping wires.

Thank you for making the desperation of your position - insisting that a
raised centre of gravity will not affect the balance of a bicycle - even
clearer.

On 05/08/2020 14:18, Pamela wrote:
On 23:35 4 Aug 2020, TMS320 said:
On 01/08/2020 20:05, Simon Mason wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 7:37:14 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 16:47 1 Aug 2020, Simon Mason said:
On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 4:26:56 PM UTC+1, Pamela wrote:

Of course a cyclist should stop to do this but sometimes it would
have to be every 25 metres making a journey effectively impossible.

I achieved the "impossible" every day for 15 years then!

Are you saying that for 15 years you stopped every 25 metres while
cycling?

I never needed to as my luggage, such as it was, never shifted in
position as it was stored securely. You incorrectly stated that there
must be an "inevitable shifting of the load", which was not true in
my case.

Absolutely. So long as the bag is secure the contents don't shift once
they've settled. On a bike there is far less movement than when country
walking or downhill running (or rather, making a flowing series of leaps
between rocks).

On a volcano hike in NZ there is a downhill section of about 1 in 1 for
about 300m that's perfect for running. People that walk it (most people)
say how difficult it is. Walking takes 20-25 minutes, I did in 5.

Apparently I couldn't have done this because I was carrying a 30l bag
that would have caused me to lose balance. Or maybe the physics is
different to cycling. Or something.

We're talking about ordinary groceries from Tesco, not what stuff you
wiuld carry on a volcano in New Zealand.

Think eggs, bread, milk, apples, lettuce, tomatoes, etc. How do you
practically strap a heavy bag of groceries inside a rucksack so securely
as not to shift -- without damaging the items?

Well, there are two issues here. Your concern about the produce and
Nugent's interpretation of the Laws of physics.

Concerning the produce. Don't put them in a shopping bag and then stuff
that bag inside a backpack. That action would do a lot of damage. Put
items in the pack individually, soft stuff at the top. There is some
shift when the pack is put on the back but there is no shift while
riding. The end result can't be worse than walking. Walking is likely to
worse because there is more motion and more steps have to be taken.
Never had squashed tomatos.