2024 Subscriptions Darryl Gunson Posted October 12, 2013 2024 Subscriptions Report Share Posted October 12, 2013 Hi Folks Having a clear out - too many bikes (now up to n+2!). The bike has been well-used, and has the usual marks, but it still looks tidy and is in good working order. Details: Frame: Kinesis Racelight Frame and Carbon Fork, colour silver. T-T 55cm Ideal for someone 5 7" to 5 11" (I'm 5 9) Wheels: Campagnolo Khamsin with Michelin pro 3 tyres Group set: Campagnolo Centaur 10speed Gears: 48x 34 front; 12-23 rear. (Ideal winter setup) Mudguards Rear Rack No pedals. £250 for quick sale PM me if you want to view Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2023 Subscriptions duncan thomson Posted October 12, 2013 2023 Subscriptions Report Share Posted October 12, 2013 A point of order. surely, n= current number of bikes. n+2 is a theoretical value. As soon as n+1 is attained, n+1=n. z= the number of bikes it is possible to own without significant spousal grumbling y= number of bikes (bike) thought required by said spouse. note z>y your status may be z+2. Disclaimer: This does not constitute legally binding advice nor a mathematically sound formula Marginal Gains A wee bit of help. Darryl Gunson 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2023 Subscriptions duncan thomson Posted October 12, 2013 2023 Subscriptions Report Share Posted October 12, 2013 put it another way, sounds a good winter bike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al Posted October 12, 2013 Report Share Posted October 12, 2013 Duncan, philosophically the phrase "too many bikes" is a paradox! Resolution to the paradox could include phrases such as "we're going to need a bigger house/garage/shed", "merry Christmas, he'll grow into it", or "it's not you, it's me (and my bikes)" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2024 Subscriptions Darryl Gunson Posted October 12, 2013 Author 2024 Subscriptions Report Share Posted October 12, 2013 One might have thought that n+2 is incoherent (except for comedic effect), but actually recent work on bicycle number paradox theory has shown this is mistaken. The paradox is resolved when one understands that the value n is actually a composite composed of a 1st order n and a 2nd order n*. Thus n+2 should be read as n*+2. See Gunson, 2010, for a complete explanation. Richard 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2023 Subscriptions duncan thomson Posted October 13, 2013 2023 Subscriptions Report Share Posted October 13, 2013 precisely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2023 Subscriptions P McDonald Posted October 13, 2013 2023 Subscriptions Report Share Posted October 13, 2013 Whatever formula or theoretical argument is used the answer is always the same. And its simple. Another bike is always justified. Oh, and it sounds like a decent bike for sale at the start of this thread! Darryl Gunson 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark O Posted October 14, 2013 Report Share Posted October 14, 2013 Flawed genius! I'm, however, concerned over the "Having a clear out - too many bikes" opening statement. Does this not fly in the face of your theory of n=n+2. Your post suggests for you Darryl your current affliction is actually n=n-1, unless of course a sale subject n immediately leads to plans being hatch for new shiny n in which case universal parity is restored. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Committee Alan McLean Posted October 14, 2013 Committee Report Share Posted October 14, 2013 I thought it might be helpful to expand on Darryl's philosophy work a little. Andy Gumley is a pretty bright uni guy too so we threw together this quick paper. We've included some references to our previous work for context. Hope you sell the bike. Alan jwcc citation.pdf Mark O 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Committee Alan McLean Posted October 14, 2013 Committee Report Share Posted October 14, 2013 The trackies thought this was too obscure so they looked from another angle... track paper.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al Posted October 14, 2013 Report Share Posted October 14, 2013 Noam Chomsky's going to chase you McLean! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest George Posted October 15, 2013 Report Share Posted October 15, 2013 I stopped reading at wang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Committee Alan McLean Posted October 19, 2013 Committee Report Share Posted October 19, 2013 Darryl wondered where I found the time to prepare pseudo papers.... http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/ Darryl Gunson 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2023 Subscriptions P McDonald Posted October 19, 2013 2023 Subscriptions Report Share Posted October 19, 2013 Genius Alan, if you spent the time training that you spend on such trivia genius you'd be world champ Big Al 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2024 Subscriptions Darryl Gunson Posted October 20, 2013 Author 2024 Subscriptions Report Share Posted October 20, 2013 After returning from a half-term break I'm surprised to see the interest in my original post. It is clear that this is quite a controversdial subject - thanks to Alan etal for clarification - but one thing we can all agree on, I hope, is that, other things being equal (a big assumption), one CAN have too many bikes, if the exisitng steeds deprive a NEW bike of a place in the stable! BTW anyone need a winter bike! ginty001 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.