A bicycle in zero gravity is unrideable (The bricycle)

Physics hurt my head, this all makes sense but yet... no.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNQdSfgJDNM

So, no bike riding in space, essentially?

Okay.

But on some planets with moar gravity than earth, cycling might be even better?

But on some planets with moar gravity than earth, cycling might be even better?

Only when you're going downhill.

You might be able to ride a bike around the outside of your spaceship, with magnets.

I think 'unrideable' might be eronious.

There is a video about a bike with backwards steering (turn bars left bike goes right) which shows up in the related videos box after you've watched that one and in that video it was found to be necessary to relearn to ride the bike, something that an adult struggled with but that a child was able to do a lot more readily. Once they had learned to ride the backwards bicycle, similar relearning was needed to return to riding a normal bicycle.

I imagine the bricycle might be similar, that there exists a technique, which is quite different to the normal technique of cycling, which would make it rideable.

There’s a velodrome in space in a William Gibson novel (possibly Neuromancer) - it was supposedly at very low gravity, allowing the riders to go super fast. So, all bollocks then?

Lies. I rode my bike into space.

Quite the bollocks.

Gravity is what holds the riders on the track, allowing them to accelerate.
Air resistance is what's slowing you down.

So essentially: riding a bike in no air, but gravity, would be quite fast.

So lack of air resistance would facilitate a much higher top speed, but would starting off be noticeably easier (ie could you use much higher gearing than usual). Or is that more to do with overcoming inertia?

Acceleration would be similar, as it's dependent on the mass of the bike and rider, not the weight. In fact, it might even be lower, as standing on the pedals wouldn't provide the same force - you'd have to pull on the bars. Which might then lead to rad wheelies rather than pulling off - I think that would depend on power, the gravity force, and weight distribution.

The latter. Gravity only really works against you when climbing, and there's none of that in a velodrome.

Air density is why velodromes high up in the mountains are considered "faster" than those at sea level. The minimal difference in air density does make a difference at these speeds.

That sounds funny. We need a Velodrome on the moon to properly test this.

Perhaps recumbents might work better on a zero G track then - as pedalling force is (I think?) less reliant on gravity.

Yeah, that would make sense.

Cycling on a turbo is like cycling in Space

The driving force at the wheel contact points depends very much on friction and hence weight, which is reduced on the moon and so...

hmm, going to have think about that.

In true zero gravity, any movement that relies solely on friction between two surfaces would be pretty much impossible.

Just don't lean... non?
https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/189981/

Yeah, I did wonder about that - is rolling friction linear with weight as well? This gets more complicated the longer you think about it...

Indeed, without some form of maintaining contact between the surfaces wheeled traction can't work.

Yeah, I did wonder about that - is rolling friction linear with weight as well? This gets more complicated the longer you think about it...

Friction is a pain to work with when you start breaking it down and ultimately is poorly understood I believe, though it isn't my field.