Ah, why women get their own bike frames

d21dga

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Plus the natural jiggleability.

Is that a technical term? And how would you measure it? I'd happily put myself forward for the job of chief tester.

Greg T

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Only if you apply some kind of weighting factor, for the... erm... weighting. Plus the natural jiggleability.

telekinesis must also play some part - sometimes I wish so hard my hair bleeds

gtvlusso

I think I need a picture to define this exactly.....anyone care to post one?! :-)

UndercoverElephant

Greg T wrote:

telekinesis must also play some part - sometimes I wish so hard my hair bleeds

I suspect that only has the opposite effect, dear chap.

CiB

tardington wrote:

Just been told:

I can't ride men's bikes - you're always leaning just that little bit further forward, so all your weight goes where ... weight didn't ought to go.

See I read this this morning and assumed it was a reference to the... umm... ahhh... err frontal seated area pressing where pressing from the saddle may not always be the most welcome sensation. As in budgie, and associated tongue thereof. Was it just me then?

laughingboy

ChrisInBicester wrote:

tardington wrote:

Just been told:

I can't ride men's bikes - you're always leaning just that little bit further forward, so all your weight goes where ... weight didn't ought to go.

See I read this this morning and assumed it was a reference to the... umm... ahhh... err frontal seated area pressing where pressing from the saddle may not always be the most welcome sensation. As in budgie, and associated tongue thereof. Was it just me then?

Exactly the point in point, so to speak. If it didn't sound so painful, I'd say that you have hit the nail on the head. :shock:

P.S. - that's a new one on me: budgie tongue. The things you learn on this forum!

skyd0g

Now then chaps, settle down please.
All this chuckling and guffawing makes it terribly difficult for me to get funding for my research. :roll:
Why, the last time I conducted research like this, I had to substitute the wind-tunnel with a hair-dryer. It made me appear like a total charlatan to the dear young ladees that had taken the time-out to assist in my research!

lost_in_thought

skyd0g wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

skyd0g wrote:

Top-notch thread hi-jack!

...if I can remember, it started with some guff about equal heights for ladies frames or suchlike nonsense, but it has moved into an entirely more interesting direction.

...now lets see, if we take ambient air temperature multiply that by wind direction and speed of travel... ...factor in the height of the cobblestones... ...we should be able to calculate escape velocity! 8)

Only if you apply some kind of weighting factor, for the... erm... weighting. Plus the natural jiggleability.

Drat!
*reaches for board-rubber*
I must admit, 92.6mph did seem a little-bit on the high side. :?

This thread has reached new levels of hilarity since I went out for lunch

Rich158

skyd0g wrote:

Now then chaps, settle down please.
All this chuckling and guffawing makes it terribly difficult for me to get funding for my research. :roll:
Why, the last time I conducted research like this, I had to substitute the wind-tunnel with a hair-dryer. It made me appear like a total charlatan to the dear young ladees that had taken the time-out to assist in my research!

If it helps I've got enough fans in the office to power a small hovercraft which should suit your purpose And I'd be only too happy to assist in your research, all in the name of science of course

All I have to do now is order enough stuff on Wiggle to get the required quantity of Haribo oops sorry wrong thread :oops:

Kieran_Burns

laughingboy wrote:

ChrisInBicester wrote:

tardington wrote:

Just been told:

I can't ride men's bikes - you're always leaning just that little bit further forward, so all your weight goes where ... weight didn't ought to go.

See I read this this morning and assumed it was a reference to the... umm... ahhh... err frontal seated area pressing where pressing from the saddle may not always be the most welcome sensation. As in budgie, and associated tongue thereof. Was it just me then?

Exactly the point in point, so to speak. If it didn't sound so painful, I'd say that you have hit the nail on the head. :shock:

P.S. - that's a new one on me: budgie tongue. The things you learn on this forum!

Ahhh.... you mean distribution of weight between back bottom and front bottom.

Now I understand!

Kieran_Burns

d21dga wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Plus the natural jiggleability.

Is that a technical term? And how would you measure it? I'd happily put myself forward for the job of chief tester.

I would think the jiggleability would be dependent on the cup size. Therefore a woman with an A cup would have a jiggleability (hereafter called the J factor) of 1

Whereas a woman with say an F cup would have a very high J factor and therefore be more prone to OOB moments (OOB = Out Of Bra, or Out Of Bounds)

So the OOB quotient would be found by the J Factor divided by the bounceability of the road surface (BRS) multiplied by the speed of the bike:

OOB = J / (BRS * Speed)

Maths is a wonderful thing

woodyonthebeach

Kieran_Burns wrote:

So the OOB quotient would be found by the J Factor divided by the bounceability of the road surface (BRS) multiplied by the speed of the bike:

OOB = J / (BRS * Speed)

Maths is a wonderful thing

So are the gorgeous ladies out there

UndercoverElephant

Kieran_Burns wrote:

d21dga wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Plus the natural jiggleability.

Is that a technical term? And how would you measure it? I'd happily put myself forward for the job of chief tester.

I would think the jiggleability would be dependent on the cup size. Therefore a woman with an A cup would have a jiggleability (hereafter called the J factor) of 1

Whereas a woman with say an F cup would have a very high J factor and therefore be more prone to OOB moments (OOB = Out Of Bra, or Out Of Bounds)

So the OOB quotient would be found by the J Factor divided by the bounceability of the road surface (BRS) multiplied by the speed of the bike:

OOB = J / (BRS * Speed)

Maths is a wonderful thing

Jigglability also has other factors which affect the erm.. outcome, or at least the possibility of an outcome

If you think further, the more relaxed the tissue, given that the mass is the same, the less likely we have spillage, due to the relative length of the leverage. In this way, a pool ball in a sock has a much diminished probability of bounce-out than a delicious peach of the same mass.

God bless Edinburgh council's policy of digging up every road all at once.

skyd0g

I've found that one of the serious limiting factors in my research has been the rather sudden appearance of an un-scheduled lamp-post. :shock:

iclestu

Kieran_Burns wrote:

d21dga wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Plus the natural jiggleability.

Is that a technical term? And how would you measure it? I'd happily put myself forward for the job of chief tester.

I would think the jiggleability would be dependent on the cup size. Therefore a woman with an A cup would have a jiggleability (hereafter called the J factor) of 1

Whereas a woman with say an F cup would have a very high J factor and therefore be more prone to OOB moments (OOB = Out Of Bra, or Out Of Bounds)

So the OOB quotient would be found by the J Factor divided by the bounceability of the road surface (BRS) multiplied by the speed of the bike:

OOB = J / (BRS * Speed)

Maths is a wonderful thing

Hmmm - amateur!

you neglected to account for loads of other variables:

1. the angle of the body, (the more horixontal the more likely the OOB moment becomes), (Θ)
2. The Strapped in Factor, (SIF) - ranging from 1 = bouncing free under a flimsy low cut top to ∞ = some heavy duty gaffa tape
3. Awareness of the owner (AO) - in my experience, the stupid or drunk are much less likely to notice the moment comming an make a last minute 'adjustment'

Gentlemen, we need to appraise this much more carefully.....

Kieran_Burns

Jigglability also has other factors which affect the erm.. outcome, or at least the possibility of an outcome

If you think further, the more relaxed the tissue, given that the mass is the same, the less likely we have spillage, due to the relative length of the leverage. In this way, a pool ball in a sock has a much diminished probability of bounce-out than a delicious peach of the same mass.

God bless Edinburgh council's policy of digging up every road all at once.

You mean the pointy up factor?

So the more pointy up the pointy up bits are the more natural the bounce?

Hmmm.... yes... more detailed research into pointy up bits required.

d21dga

Kieran_Burns wrote:

Jigglability also has other factors which affect the erm.. outcome, or at least the possibility of an outcome

If you think further, the more relaxed the tissue, given that the mass is the same, the less likely we have spillage, due to the relative length of the leverage. In this way, a pool ball in a sock has a much diminished probability of bounce-out than a delicious peach of the same mass.

God bless Edinburgh council's policy of digging up every road all at once.

You mean the pointy up factor?

So the more pointy up the pointy up bits are the more natural the bounce?

Hmmm.... yes... more detailed research into pointy up bits required.

Similarly an adjustment needs to be made for any artificial enhancement which may affect the 'jiggleability'

Rich158

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

d21dga wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Plus the natural jiggleability.

Is that a technical term? And how would you measure it? I'd happily put myself forward for the job of chief tester.

I would think the jiggleability would be dependent on the cup size. Therefore a woman with an A cup would have a jiggleability (hereafter called the J factor) of 1

Whereas a woman with say an F cup would have a very high J factor and therefore be more prone to OOB moments (OOB = Out Of Bra, or Out Of Bounds)

So the OOB quotient would be found by the J Factor divided by the bounceability of the road surface (BRS) multiplied by the speed of the bike:

OOB = J / (BRS * Speed)

Maths is a wonderful thing

Jigglability also has other factors which affect the erm.. outcome, or at least the possibility of an outcome

If you think further, the more relaxed the tissue, given that the mass is the same, the less likely we have spillage, due to the relative length of the leverage. In this way, a pool ball in a sock has a much diminished probability of bounce-out than a delicious peach of the same mass.

God bless Edinburgh council's policy of digging up every road all at once.

Aaaahhh yes the elasticity of the 'ahem' sock would appear to be a limiting factor. A new sock with a high modulus of elasticity would be more prone to bouncing-out the said peach than an old one that's been through the wash a few times and has lost much of it's elasticity.

skyd0g

iclestu wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

d21dga wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Plus the natural jiggleability.

Is that a technical term? And how would you measure it? I'd happily put myself forward for the job of chief tester.

I would think the jiggleability would be dependent on the cup size. Therefore a woman with an A cup would have a jiggleability (hereafter called the J factor) of 1

Whereas a woman with say an F cup would have a very high J factor and therefore be more prone to OOB moments (OOB = Out Of Bra, or Out Of Bounds)

So the OOB quotient would be found by the J Factor divided by the bounceability of the road surface (BRS) multiplied by the speed of the bike:

OOB = J / (BRS * Speed)

Maths is a wonderful thing

Hmmm - amateur!

you neglected to account for loads of other variables:

1. the angle of the body, (the more horixontal the more likely the OOB moment becomes), (Θ)
2. The Strapped in Factor, (SIF) - ranging from 1 = bouncing free under a flimsy low cut top to ∞ = some heavy duty gaffa tape
3. Awareness of the owner (AO) - in my experience, the stupid or drunk are much less likely to notice the moment comming an make a last minute 'adjustment'

Gentlemen, we need to appraise this much more carefully.....

There is also the droopage factor (D) to account for. No wonder my research is so costly. *sigh*

UndercoverElephant

Rich158 wrote:

Aaaahhh yes the elasticity of the 'ahem' sock would appear to be a limiting factor. A new sock with a high modulus of elasticity would be more prone to bouncing-out the said peach than an old one that's been through the wash a few times and has lost much of it's elasticity.

Unless of course the speed over the road surface reaches the resonant frequency of the sock, in which case all bets are off and it's black eyes all round.

Rich158

Surely a low modulus of elasticity would result in a low resonant frequency, albeit with an increased amplitude, whereas a high modulus of elasticity would yield a higher resonant frequency with a lower amplitude.

I feel we're approaching a definition for jiggleability isn't fizzicks a wonderful thing

Gussio

This thread would benefit from photographs to support the articulate and erudite points made above...

gert_lush

This thread is pure gold

I cant stop laughing

sarajoy

...I'm rather worried now that this thread might be used as an excuse to scrutinize any jiggling that I do cycling down the cobbled street to the Duke tonight...

Rich158

Gussio wrote:

This thread would benefit from photographs to support the articulate and erudite points made above...

Hold on I'll just pop out to Greenwich Park....

Sorry what's that officer :?:

It's official scientific research.....

And the Haribo in my pocket :shock: :shock: :shock:

skyd0g

sarajoy wrote:

...I'm rather worried now that this thread might be used as an excuse to scrutinize any jiggling that I do cycling down the cobbled street to the Duke tonight...

Yes! That could be very helpful!!!! *jigs*
...now what time where you planning precisely? 8)

Kieran_Burns

sarajoy wrote:

...I'm rather worried now that this thread might be used as an excuse to scrutinize any jiggling that I do cycling down the cobbled street to the Duke tonight...

Only if you film it.



You WILL film it won't you?

and for research purposes we will need to know:

cup size
use of artificial enhancements
pointy up factor
speed of bike
materials used in booby holder and top


God, I'm glad I'm at the other end of the A38 from Sara :P

il_principe

You guys are making maths fun!

Keep up the good work.

Is there a correlation between jiggleability and country of origin I wonder?

woodyonthebeach

Rich158 wrote:

Gussio wrote:

This thread would benefit from photographs to support the articulate and erudite points made above...

Hold on I'll just pop out to Greenwich Park....

Sorry what's that officer :?:

It's official scientific research.....

And the Haribo in my pocket :shock: :shock: :shock:

with a packet of crisps and a cheesy smile here come Rich158 the

serious note. maybe reconsider the bribe. Glass of champagne perhaps

woodyonthebeach

Il Principe wrote:

You guys are making maths fun!

Keep up the good work.

Is there a correlation between jiggleability and country of origin I wonder?

Age as well maybe?