321–330 of 515 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. HP is a measure of power . So is watts. Watts/second is not a meaningful unit.
It is the standard unit of power response slope over time . 1 horse of power equals 746 Watts, though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "The precision of keeping all those threads perfectly spaced is one thing" > Making the first precision screw requires a "screw originating machine".[1][2] This is a special-purpose device which can make a better screw than the ones used in building it. I hadn't realized screws would be needed to create a screw-making machine. I love that we have machines that make better versions of their own components, something…
This is kinda inherent in everything, our tech generally moves upwards based on iterations of improvements. Even cheap mass production shitty stuff is still an improvement. Or do you mean exactly screws? Really when you get down to it, like computers, tools are used like 30+% of the time to build other better tools. Jigs, more accurate cutters, measurement devices, etc. With code that's things like test frameworks, r…
here's a link to the text https://www.sefaria.org/Pirkei_Avot.5.6?lang=bi&with=all&lan...
The unicycle was invented shortly afterwards. Here's a patent from 1869, for an over-complicated unicycle with a treadle mechanism instead of pedals on cranks. https://patents.google.com/patent/US87355 Many of the objections about how complicated the bicycle is don't apply to the unicycle. The Romans could have made a perfectly good one out of wood with brass cranks. But maybe it was even less obvious than the bicycl…
If unicycles had come first, would bicycles have ever surpassed them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I often wonder as I am building/fixing something (often my bicycle as it happens) and I happen to toss an extra screw in the trash how miraculous a simple screw of this type would have been to a middle-ages craftsman. The precision of keeping all those threads perfectly spaced is one thing, but the technology to make them in such volume at these sizes (often quite tiny), and in volumes so as to make them essentially…
(Maybe not as precise as screws, I'm not sure, but) I'm freaked out by bicycle chains, so many pieces, each manufactured to precise tolerances. $15.
https://bikecloset.com/product/shimano-cn-hg901-11-dura-ace-...
> (Some commenters have suggested that it was not obvious that a two-wheeled vehicle would balance, but I find this unconvincing given how many other things people have learned to balance on, from dugout canoes to horses themselves.) I'll be one of those commenters I guess.... What!?? Balancing in a canoe is in no way similar to a bicycle. I can jump in a canoe having never been in one, and it will balance itself. I…
It does seem utterly counterintuitive that a vehicle that cannot balance by itself would be able to balance with the addition of a heavy rider elevating its center of gravity. Usually making an object top-heavy renders it even more unstable, and bicycles are not stable to begin with. And adding a rider on top of a bicycle does make it more unstable, but the amazing flexibility of the human brain allows us to transfor…
It is totally unlike the intentional instability of a modern jet fighter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That sounds like a unicycle, which is a hundred times harder to balance than a bicycle. The physics of how a bicycle balances itself when you are moving is very different than that, complicated, and quite unintuitive. Basically when the bike starts to lean to one side, the rotation of the front wheel causes it to steer to move the bike underneath the direction you are leaning. This happens several times a second, and…
>> ... a unicycle, which is a hundred times harder to balance than a bicycle. It's not that hard to unicycle. It just seems so to people who didn't try it until they were an adult. In Japan, any junior high school may have a few unicycles and you frequently see kids larking around on them in the playground. Nothing special.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I often wonder as I am building/fixing something (often my bicycle as it happens) and I happen to toss an extra screw in the trash how miraculous a simple screw of this type would have been to a middle-ages craftsman. The precision of keeping all those threads perfectly spaced is one thing, but the technology to make them in such volume at these sizes (often quite tiny), and in volumes so as to make them essentially…
It's similar with nails. If you tour Jefferson's home Monticello, there was a "nailery" where the nails needed were forged by hand, one by one. Being handmade, the each nail was valuable. People would burn scrap lumber to recover the nails.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "The precision of keeping all those threads perfectly spaced is one thing" > Making the first precision screw requires a "screw originating machine".[1][2] This is a special-purpose device which can make a better screw than the ones used in building it. I hadn't realized screws would be needed to create a screw-making machine. I love that we have machines that make better versions of their own components, something…
I don't have a source, and maybe I'm misremembering, but I think compilers (for software) and CPU production tooling (for hardware) both bootstrap off their own performance. A better compiler can compile itself more efficiently, same for CPU/chip layout systems.
Absolutely. Otherwise, all compilers would be written in Assmebly. Most compilers used today are written in C and the compiler for C (GCC) is written in C itself.
The C language was also written by Ken Thomson, because he was unhappy with the BCPL language, so the compiler for C was originally written in B. So on and So forth.
More Recently, the initial compiler for Rust was written in OCaml but is now written in Rust itself.
This is one of the draws for the Paris-Roubaix spring classic race, a +200 mile, single day race with dozens of sections of rural cobble stones. Though, generally well maintained, the roads are narrow and brutal on modern road racing carbon-fiber bikes on 23mm wide tires. Lots of attrition from accidents. Typically pretty wet weather for the (spring) race and the cobbles are slippery and also get muddy. Riders tend to ride on the dirt shoulderer when they can, because it's smoother, but this can lead to tire punctures. The sections of cobbles are also narrow, so getting around 200 riders through is harrowing by itself. Smallest mistake by one rider compounds quickly.
Also mechanicals such as punctured tires and tossed chains are common. Rough corners/edges on the stones and gaps between cobbles easily puncture tires. The bikes have no suspension, so the chains bounce quite a bit, easily being tossed and in extreme cases, can be bent or broken if they jump a chain ring, requiring a replacement.
For their efforts, the trophy? A cobble stone with adornment.
The race is a spectacle. Probably one of the greatest one day spring classics of the UCSI Pro Tour. 6 hours or more of grueling, punishing cycling in crappy weather while being vibrated like crazy from the cobbles (the whole race isnt cobbles, but significant sections are, usually +20 sections, ranging in length of around a few kilometers each).