Helmet - Impact
#101
Senior Member
Then let it lie. But did you look at my list of inventions? Almost all of those inventors were American. Those inventions were not obscure. Some of them created trillion dollar industries. There are more.
Liquid crystal display
Object oriented programming
E-mail
Electric guitar
Lightning rod
But that's actually irrelevant to the bigger picture, which is that science and invention have always been international, since the time of Galileo if not before. The modern age of innovation may have started somewhere, but it spread wherever the industrial revolution found fertile ground. Scientists and scholars have always enjoyed open borders, and have not defined themselves by nationalities. They've always gone where the work was good. Especially in contemporary times, innovative businesses have become stateless, and have established open borders for the most highly skilled workers.
With that said, the time period when scientists and scholars felt that America was the best place to work and invent, lasted many decades. It was a darn good run.
Liquid crystal display
Object oriented programming
Electric guitar
Lightning rod
But that's actually irrelevant to the bigger picture, which is that science and invention have always been international, since the time of Galileo if not before. The modern age of innovation may have started somewhere, but it spread wherever the industrial revolution found fertile ground. Scientists and scholars have always enjoyed open borders, and have not defined themselves by nationalities. They've always gone where the work was good. Especially in contemporary times, innovative businesses have become stateless, and have established open borders for the most highly skilled workers.
With that said, the time period when scientists and scholars felt that America was the best place to work and invent, lasted many decades. It was a darn good run.
#102
Do Americans really have such thin skins that all their reading comprehension goes out the window when they sense a slight? I don't know where I said Americans never invented ANYTHING or that it wasn't a fertile valley for STEM innovation. It's beyond pathetic the defensiveness ... I am not impressed by any list you could come up with with under 1,000 entries. My aim was not to diminish American achievement. I won't repeat what I said. It is there in the post record. I haven't gone back and altered anything.
#103
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,612
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Liked 9,103 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Sadly, you are in fact missing something key: the actual inventors and experimenters that come up with these nifty American scientific and technical applications of engineering and mathematics aren't themselves American. Only the companies they work for are. The patents are applied for (and Nobels awarded) under (to) an American aegis, but the DNA of the patent developers is mainly European and Asian.
Do Americans really have such thin skins that all their reading comprehension goes out the window when they sense a slight? I don't know where I said Americans never invented ANYTHING or that it wasn't a fertile valley for STEM innovation. It's beyond pathetic the defensiveness ... I am not impressed by any list you could come up with with under 1,000 entries. My aim was not to diminish American achievement. I won't repeat what I said. It is there in the post record. I haven't gone back and altered anything.
You also appear to be making some sort of eugenics argument with the very odd references to the developers' DNA, but I can't decide whether you really mean that, or if it's just your usual awful writing comprehension. I'm pretty sure I just made up the phrase, but you're making it quite clear that either you're a complete liar, or you yourself don't understand what you've actually written.
If, btw, you actually meant to say DNA, I defy you to define what "American DNA" actually is.
So, yeah, lack of nuance definitely isn't the problem. You're either babbling incoherently or you're a racist. Your choice.
Now, to the extent there might be a real problem, it's the paradox that the US continues to have way more than its share of the best STEM research institutions in the world while having really bad STEM education at the elementary and high school levels.
Likes For livedarklions:
#104
I work for a company that serves scientific research, and it's pretty noticeable the shift of markets from the US to Europe and Asia.
And in terms of innovation, it's not even just STEM. The US has been a net exporter of culture for a century. American culture is so infectious, that countries have to impose limits on broadcasting American music, movies, and TV, to prevent their indigenous cultures from being obliterated. Now that's not too surprising, given that the recording and broadcasting of music and visual media were all invented in the US.
Swing, jazz, rock 'n' roll, hip hop
Last edited by Gresp15C; 03-23-20 at 11:45 PM.
#105
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,612
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Liked 9,103 Times
in
5,054 Posts
I think it's a mixed bag here in the states. There are public schools with world class STEM curricula... my kids attended one of those schools. But it's certainly not widespread, and that's bad. And our universities are battling declining funding.
I work for a company that serves scientific research, and it's pretty noticeable the shift of markets from the US to Europe and Asia.
And in terms of innovation, it's not even just STEM. The US has been a net exporter of culture for a century. American culture is so infectious, that countries have to impose limits on broadcasting American music, movies, and TV, to prevent their indigenous cultures from being obliterated. Now that's not too surprising, given that the recording and broadcasting of music and visual media were all invented in the US.
Swing, jazz, rock 'n' roll, hip hop
I work for a company that serves scientific research, and it's pretty noticeable the shift of markets from the US to Europe and Asia.
And in terms of innovation, it's not even just STEM. The US has been a net exporter of culture for a century. American culture is so infectious, that countries have to impose limits on broadcasting American music, movies, and TV, to prevent their indigenous cultures from being obliterated. Now that's not too surprising, given that the recording and broadcasting of music and visual media were all invented in the US.
Swing, jazz, rock 'n' roll, hip hop
What any of this has to do with helmets is beyond me. As usual, a certain troll has derailed the thread with his nonsense. And just to be clear, I'm not quoting that troll in this post.
#106
The transistor, the microchip, the microprocessor, virtually all operating systems used worldwide, domination in the software sector,, and to your cultural point, worldwide domination in social media.
What any of this has to do with helmets is beyond me. As usual, a certain troll has derailed the thread with his nonsense. And just to be clear, I'm not quoting that troll in this post.
What any of this has to do with helmets is beyond me. As usual, a certain troll has derailed the thread with his nonsense. And just to be clear, I'm not quoting that troll in this post.
#107
What real world data supports this? I cannot find any.
#109
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II
Liked 1,057 Times
in
636 Posts
What I do wish is that someone would make a hard shell helmet like the Bell Tourlite I had back in the middle 80s. It had a hard very strong lexan shell. In the case in an accident where a persons head might hit a sharp object the lexan shell would not let it penetrate. Todays think candy shell and foam will not stop much of anything sharp.
#110
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,612
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Liked 9,103 Times
in
5,054 Posts
What I do wish is that someone would make a hard shell helmet like the Bell Tourlite I had back in the middle 80s. It had a hard very strong lexan shell. In the case in an accident where a persons head might hit a sharp object the lexan shell would not let it penetrate. Todays think candy shell and foam will not stop much of anything sharp.
#111
Senior Member
#112
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,612
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Liked 9,103 Times
in
5,054 Posts
#113
I cannot find anything to support your statement.
Last edited by CrankyOne; 04-21-20 at 02:43 PM.
#114
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,929
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Liked 3,933 Times
in
2,053 Posts
Just dropped in to remind myself of why I don't just drop in here any more.
It was seemed pretty bad that people argued that wearing some protection didn't give more protection than wearing no protection .... but that might have the logical high point of the discussion.
It was seemed pretty bad that people argued that wearing some protection didn't give more protection than wearing no protection .... but that might have the logical high point of the discussion.
Likes For Maelochs:
#115
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,612
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Liked 9,103 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Just dropped in to remind myself of why I don't just drop in here any more.
It was seemed pretty bad that people argued that wearing some protection didn't give more protection than wearing no protection .... but that might have the logical high point of the discussion.
It was seemed pretty bad that people argued that wearing some protection didn't give more protection than wearing no protection .... but that might have the logical high point of the discussion.
#116
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,929
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Liked 3,933 Times
in
2,053 Posts
#118
Banned.
Understanding one basic, core concept of how bike helmets protect us bypasses several mistakes that we hear repeated often. Fortunately it's very simple to grasp and I'll only address this one concept.
The helmet reduces the forces felt by our skull by stretching out the time of the impact. It takes a certain amount of time to crush the foam, depending on how fast the helmet is going, and how massive your head is of course. Simple as that, and that's all of it.
It does not "spread out the force" very much. It does not "dissipate energy". Energy is absorbed by crushing. And it's basically linear in the crush range - ie, twice as thick gives you twice as much protection. No amount of shaping and mysterious designs change that.
Check it yourself: hit a styrofoam sheet with a hammer and look at the damage. There will be a dent where the hammer hit, and maybe just a little slope in the surface closely surrounding the round hole. You can see that there is little if any "spreading out" of the force, because there would be visible damage if there were. Now crack it in half at an undamaged section, push the edges together and hit it with a hammer again right on the crack. You'll see the same damage as before, some on each half. As long as the crack is held together, it does not harm the impact protection. Surface (UV) damage of a mm thick or less is insignificant, because the only affect is reducing the crush by a mm.
That's all, valid corrections are welcome.
The helmet reduces the forces felt by our skull by stretching out the time of the impact. It takes a certain amount of time to crush the foam, depending on how fast the helmet is going, and how massive your head is of course. Simple as that, and that's all of it.
It does not "spread out the force" very much. It does not "dissipate energy". Energy is absorbed by crushing. And it's basically linear in the crush range - ie, twice as thick gives you twice as much protection. No amount of shaping and mysterious designs change that.
Check it yourself: hit a styrofoam sheet with a hammer and look at the damage. There will be a dent where the hammer hit, and maybe just a little slope in the surface closely surrounding the round hole. You can see that there is little if any "spreading out" of the force, because there would be visible damage if there were. Now crack it in half at an undamaged section, push the edges together and hit it with a hammer again right on the crack. You'll see the same damage as before, some on each half. As long as the crack is held together, it does not harm the impact protection. Surface (UV) damage of a mm thick or less is insignificant, because the only affect is reducing the crush by a mm.
That's all, valid corrections are welcome.