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...
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.
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.