Cycling art, energy, and locomotion : $b A series of remarks on the development of bicycles, tricycles, and man-motor carriages — John Shaqi
Cycling art, energy, and locomotion : $b A series of remarks on the development of bicycles, tricycles, and man-motor carriagesScott, Robert P. (Robert Pittis)
History
Cycling art, energy, and locomotion : $b A series of remarks on the development of bicycles, tricycles, and man-motor carriages
Scott, Robert P. (Robert Pittis)
Bicycles; Cycling; Tricycles
upon a reasonably smooth level road. Why we have been able to thus
improve upon nature’s device is not quite clear. Undoubtedly, however,
there is some unnecessary friction in the leg method; it cannot be on
account of impact with the air, because a man on a bicycle certainly
catches as much air himself, in addition to that of the machine, as
he would do in walking. Evidently, then, there must be more motion or
extra friction or both in the body, in the leg method, than is really
essential in conveying one over a good road. Probably the main cause
of this friction is that the rider’s body is supported differently; it
requires less muscular strain to sit than to stand. We not only know
this from experience, but it is proved by the fact that the temperature
of the body is lower while sitting than while standing; also still
lower when lying down, showing that less energy is being expended and
less muscle consumed. Since the spirit of the writer began to wrestle
with the foregoing leg versus cycle controversy, by happy chance he
fell upon an estimable work[2] of which a careful perusal would almost
make us think that nature really had an embryo cycle or wheel method
in view when we were planned for legs. The great interest attaching to
the above-mentioned work arises from the fact that the book was written
before the cycle was at all broadly known to be of any assistance to
the self-propulsion of man under any circumstances. This work must be
read to be appreciated. I give some quotations, the application of
which shows that, in the minds of some, the Creator had an idea of a
wheel within a wheel; in short, that nature seemed to want to roll.
Let us quote from page 51, “Animal Locomotion.”
“When the right leg is flexed and elevated, it _rotates_ upon its
iliac portion of the trunk in a forward direction to form the
_arch_ of a _circle_ which is the converse of that formed by the
right foot, if the _arcs_ alternately supplied by the right foot
and the trunk are placed in opposition, a more or less _perfect
circle_ is produced, and thus it is that the locomotion of animals
is approximated to the wheel in mechanics.”
Hence we _roll_,—but not far enough,—we approximate in nature, but
reach the goal by man’s genius; shown in the full circular wheel.
It will be seen from the following (p. 51) that the bones in man are
not arranged for high speed; hence we must make up for this deficiency.
“The speed attained by man, although considerable, is not
remarkable; it depends on a variety of circumstances, such as
height, age, sex, and muscular energy of the individual, the
nature of the surface to be passed over, and the resistance to
forward motion due to the presence of air whether still or moving.
A reference to the human skeleton, particularly its inferior
extremities, will explain why the speed should be moderate.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account