Science also says it takes no energy to hold a weight up. Have you ever cycled a hill?
No it doesn’t, only the dumbed down formulas taught in low level classes say that.
Sounds like you never passed Experiencing Earth: 10 Things That Cost Energy To Do because last time I checked lifting weights definitely cost energy.
I am say science does not “say it doesn’t take energy to keep a weight lifted”.
Her arms must be getting awfully tired.
Silly, everyone knows she drops it when they change the batteries
I watched that video a while ago, and I kind of dislike the conclusion.
Yes, you can gear down to make hills easier, but at what speed?
You also can’t sustain a hill climb like you can on the flats, because it takes energy to simply stay on an incline.
Lack of airstream too. Currently cycling at high temperatures and when there’s no breeze I am dying on the climbs, overheating. Feels so refreshing if the incline becomes mellower or flat and you get some airstream.
Care to explain why? I’m not going to watch some time-consuming video on a spy platform to find out.
The TL;DW is that bike gears are often not low enough.
If you give me a lever long enough, and all that.
The assumption here, though, is that climbing is all you care about, and not an average speed across a ride.
I’m by no means fast but I certainly won’t make it to the pub for lunch if my gearing was as low as it would need to be for me to make it up a hill using the same amount of effort if expend to travel moderately on the flat…
is this like ‘work’ in physics class? I’ll watch it when I get home but I swear if its some silly smartass shit…
Basically your lowest gear ratio is wrong for climbing.
