[HN Gopher] Alan Turing using math to repair his bike
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Alan Turing using math to repair his bike
        
       Author : johndcook
       Score  : 110 points
       Date   : 2022-05-23 17:39 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (mathmutation.blogspot.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (mathmutation.blogspot.com)
        
       | janandonly wrote:
       | I think I read about this incident in the book "Cryptonomicon" by
       | Neal Stephenson. It's pure fiction, mind you...
        
         | dredmorbius wrote:
         | The book is fiction.
         | 
         | The incidents mentioned in it ... _may_ not be.
        
       | donquichotte wrote:
       | I guess if you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail, even
       | if you are Alan Turing!
       | 
       | Tangentially related, I have recently become aware of a sound
       | similar to a bag of potato chips being crushed coming from the
       | rear wheel of my mountain bike. Closer inspection showed that the
       | rear wheel hub exhibited an unwanted additional degree of freedom
       | with respect to the rest of the wheel. The hub was able to be
       | moved slightly back and forth radially. "An excuse to get my
       | hands dirty, and an easy fix", I thought foolishly -- it is only
       | mechanics, after all, nothing that will not surrender immediately
       | to the agile mind and nimble hands of a computer programmer! Fast
       | forward 300$ in tools of and 4 weeks of attempts to fix this,
       | which typically resulted in the purchase of a new specialized
       | tool, and the bike runs again. I learned more than I had hoped
       | about the vast number of very small metal balls that reside in a
       | modern freewheel hub, and it was a good lecture in humility.
        
         | vcdimension wrote:
         | You could make some of the money back from those tools, and
         | help others in a similar situation, by renting them out on
         | https://fatllama.com (or some other sharing website/app such as
         | https://olioex.com/). Sharing & hiring saves money and
         | environmental impact.
        
         | dekhn wrote:
         | When I was a kid, I had a similar noise (and resistance to
         | turning). I took apart my bike with whatever tools I had and at
         | some point found the ball bearings. Took them out, wiped off
         | "all the dirty grease" and put them back in and tightened it
         | all up. Needless to say, it got worse. It was a good lesson,
         | though- only take apart your spare bike, and bring the prod
         | bike to a real mechanic until you know what you're doing.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | Decabytes wrote:
       | I'm always amazed at the genius of people like Turing and their
       | ability to apply it in almost any situation they find themselves
       | in
        
       | BeniBoy wrote:
       | Kind of reminded me of the traditional wisdom that you should
       | select chains and sprocket to avoid patterned wear. I don't know
       | if there is an effect (especially with bikes and their low
       | torque),but I always think about it when changing my chain. I
       | suppose this only applies to single sprocket bike.
        
         | fyhn wrote:
         | Isn't this only relevant for fixed gear bikes, where you can
         | skid the rear wheel to brake, and you want maximize the number
         | of possible "skid patches", or orientations of the rear wheel
         | while the pedals are in a fixed position?
        
           | analog31 wrote:
           | It could also apply to the wear on the chainring and cog if
           | their teeth are in a perfect proportion to one another, but
           | without thinking too hard about it, I'm guessing that's
           | actually rare. For instance a 2:1 ratio would be awkward for
           | most cyclists riding on pavement (too low) and 3:1 too high,
           | if they had to choose exactly one ratio.
           | 
           | I ride 46:19, because those are the parts that were in my bin
           | when I built the bike, and it's a pretty good all-round ratio
           | for city riding unless you're a lot more athletic than I am.
           | 
           | Also, those components wear out soon enough anyway -- a chain
           | lasts 2 to 3 thousand miles, and a cog lasts a few chains.
        
           | namdnay wrote:
           | "I suppose this only applies to single sprocket bike."
        
             | jstanley wrote:
             | It applies to any bike. Ideally the number of links in the
             | chain would be coprime to the number of teeth on every
             | sprocket. The easiest way to achieve this is to make the
             | number of links in the chain prime.
             | 
             | It'll still _work_ just fine if you ignore this idea, but
             | it might wear out more quickly. If you 're a hobbyist just
             | trying to make something work, you can safely ignore it and
             | do whatever is most convenient. If you're a bicycle
             | engineer trying to make things reliable and long-lasting,
             | then there's no downside to making the number of links
             | prime if you can arrange it.
             | 
             | I don't know whether bike companies actually _do_ choose
             | prime-numbered chains, maybe they have other constraints
             | that are more important.
        
               | dmurray wrote:
               | > It applies to any bike
               | 
               | On a bike with derailleur gears, every time you change
               | gears the derailleur will add some slippage so you won't
               | get this effect.
               | 
               | > The easiest way to achieve this is to make the number
               | of links in the chain prime
               | 
               | The chainring is fixed, but you might need to add or
               | remove a link in the chain. In practice it seems more
               | common to make the chainring have a prime number of teeth
               | (53 or 47).
        
               | 1-more wrote:
               | > then there's no downside to making the number of links
               | prime if you can arrange it.
               | 
               | Bike chains always have to have an even number of links
               | because they come in inner and outer pairs. But this has
               | an effect on chainrings as well. When the tooth on a
               | chainring or sprocket is in between two inner plates it's
               | in a narrow gap. When the tooth is in between outer
               | plates that's a wide gap. If you have a chainring with an
               | even number of teeth then you can have the teeth match
               | the narrow and wide profiles (called a narrow-wide
               | chainring) which is supposed to make it less likely that
               | you drop your chain off the chainrings. I'm not sure if
               | it works, tbh. It seems to only be a thing in mountain or
               | gravel bikes with a single chainring. I can't find any
               | track chainrings that have the profile but I only looked
               | for a second.
               | 
               | For chains themselves there's usually a pretty narrow
               | number of links that work on a road drivetrain. I think I
               | can live with one fewer or more pair of links on mine.
               | 
               | https://www.firstcomponents.com/narrow-wide-chainring/
        
               | et-al wrote:
               | Just to add on:
               | 
               | Track chainrings don't need a narrow-wide profile because
               | there's very little slack in the system for the chain to
               | come off. Saint Sheldon warns of the possibility of
               | losing a finger also for this reason.
        
               | et-al wrote:
               | Yeah, chains and cassettes are considered wear items, so
               | I doubt manufacturers put much thought into patterned
               | wear. Avoiding chain drop and crisp shifting are higher
               | priorities.
        
         | jstanley wrote:
         | This is called "hunting tooth". It applies to any system of
         | gears or timing belts.
         | 
         | In gears, if you make sure the number of teeth of mating gears
         | is coprime then you wear the teeth of one gear evenly against
         | the other gear. If there are low factors, then each tooth of
         | one gear only engages with a small number of teeth on the other
         | gear, exacerbating wear.
         | 
         | With belts, if the number of teeth on the belt shares low
         | factors with the number of teeth on either of the pulleys then
         | you get the same effect: any given tooth on the belt only ever
         | meshes with a small number of teeth on the pulley.
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | You've just made me realise that several of the more popular
           | freewheel / sprocket combinations are in fact prime: 11, 13,
           | 17, 23.
           | 
           | Usually contrasted against the decidedly non-prime 52 (2 * 2
           | * 13) and 42 (2 * 3 * 7) chainrings. 38 if you're old-school
           | triple (2 * 2 * 7).
           | 
           | My chain lengths would vary and I never counted them
           | specifically, though I'd typically remove a few links for
           | fit.
        
       | vcdimension wrote:
       | Interestingly the bike repair bible that most of the experts
       | defer to, i.e. https://www.sheldonbrown.com/ is written by a man
       | who claims he was strongly influenced by the writings of Bertrand
       | Russell, and he is married to a mathematician and has two
       | children who are both mathematicians. The webpage contains
       | several simple maths formulas for calculating things such as gear
       | ratios.
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | (The web page hasn't been updated much for a while because
         | Sheldon died several years ago.)
        
           | vcdimension wrote:
           | It's kept upto date by employees of the bike shop he worked
           | for (Harris Cyclery), his widow, and his friend John Harris
           | (a nationally recognized bicycle expert). The most recent
           | post was about 3 weeks ago: https://sheldonbrown.com/blog/
        
             | geocrasher wrote:
             | I am absolutely delighted to see Sheldon Brown's website
             | posted on HN! It is an incredible resource.
        
             | loeg wrote:
             | Yeah, that's why I qualified it with "much." Trying to
             | provide some context for HN readers unfamiliar with
             | Sheldon.
        
       | spinaltap wrote:
        
       | dav_Oz wrote:
       | From occasionally repairing _modern_ bicycles the way the chain
       | is falling off  "regularly" doesn't click with me: If one spoke
       | is bent so much (more like a serious wheel wobble) that - at some
       | point - it touches a "damaged" chain link; this is quite a
       | spectacular failure. I have to assume back then those bicycles
       | were built quite differently that something like that could
       | happen in such a predicatble fashion. Or along the way some
       | information was lost and something different added in that
       | anectode.
       | 
       | Curious to see other versions I have quickly traced back the
       | ancetode to a Nature article "Are mathematician logical" (1987)
       | by Ian Stewart[0]; the version/wording unfortunately here is
       | quite the same.
       | 
       | [0]https://doi.org/10.1038/325386a0 (via paywall --> sci-hub)
        
         | tokai wrote:
         | Bikes back then weren't much different. Some from that time are
         | still around and are not technically anything special. I don't
         | buy the story. It might be what he told himself, but what fixed
         | it was just the maintenance in general. Probs moved the wheel
         | and tightened the chain. In any case if the bump of a crocked
         | wheel could throw his chain, it was waaaay to loose.
        
       | isaacfrond wrote:
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | I can't picture this in a way that it would work, can you
         | explain please? How would it hold air?
        
           | moistofreason wrote:
           | It wouldn't
        
           | chmod775 wrote:
           | > GPT-3 continuation.
           | 
           | It's AI-generated nonsense.
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | Oh... totally missed that link, wow, that's really bad. It
             | pollutes HN with garbage.
        
       | avg_dev wrote:
       | > And in Turing's case, it was further complicated by the fact
       | that he always wore a gas mask as he rode, to prevent triggering
       | his allergies. But the alarm clock he was known to wear around
       | his waist might have helped.
       | 
       | What? Is that for real?
       | 
       | Edit: It is!
       | 
       | > He loved to ride his bicycle through the countryside. To time
       | himself, he would simply tie an alarm clock around his waist.
       | During the war, according to I.J. Good, a Cambridge
       | mathematician, Turing suffered horribly from hay fever during the
       | first week of June every year. So to keep the pollen off while
       | riding, he wore a military gas mask.
       | 
       | - https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/1999/06/09/alan-turin...
        
         | natly wrote:
         | Wasn't he a long distance runner. I wonder if he wore it then
         | too.
        
         | donthellbanme wrote:
         | For years before Covid, I would wear a N95 mask while doing
         | yard work, construction, biking, and even night walks.
         | 
         | I got some stares.
         | 
         | For awhile, I felt some of my neighbors thought I was trying to
         | conceal my identity; but it was just for allergies.
         | 
         | The last thing I wore it for was germs.
        
           | CrazyStat wrote:
           | I've tried wearing an N95 for allergies, but my eyes still
           | itch like mad so it's only moderately helpful.
        
             | ravi-delia wrote:
             | I thought about commenting you could wear goggles, but
             | that's just reinventing the gas mask. Turing was a genius!
        
         | dTal wrote:
         | I wonder which part of this (admittedly odd fashion statement)
         | seemed surprising to you? Gas masks were of course ubiquitous
         | during the war, so this was probably only about as eccentric as
         | wearing an N95 mask would seem now. And the alarm clock seems
         | like a fairly practical if whimsical hack in an age when
         | chronometers would have been mechanical, and therefore quite
         | expensive.
        
           | ravi-delia wrote:
           | I feel like the average person absolutely was not wearing a
           | gas mask at all times. Having myself used an N95 in my
           | neverending war on pollen I totally understand though.
        
             | dTal wrote:
             | No, of course people didn't routinely wear them. But every
             | citizen was issued one. Children took them to school every
             | day, and were drilled in their use.
             | 
             | It's still an eccentric thing to do, of course. But, like
             | the alarm clock tied around his waist, it was an instance
             | of solving a problem by grabbing something close to hand.
        
           | avg_dev wrote:
           | I didn't know about the gas masks being ubiquitous during the
           | war; that makes that part a little less surprising. History
           | can be sad.
        
             | ihaveajob wrote:
             | I bought one at a swap meet in Amsterdam a few years ago.
             | They were piled up high and cheap. It made a fun gift for a
             | friend back home, but we got really odd looks on the train
             | when wearing it :).
        
               | thenthenthen wrote:
               | Try Wear a N96 or FFP or surgical mask now in the train
               | in NL and people will look at you in the same fashion
               | haha
        
               | gmac wrote:
               | Ah, careful:
               | https://www.nationalasbestos.co.uk/news/wwii-gas-masks-a-
               | lif...
        
             | switchbak wrote:
             | They were common, but you wouldn't have seen folks wearing
             | them around the countryside, certainly not on a bike!
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | matthewmcg wrote:
       | This anecdote is memorably presented as an application of modular
       | arithmetic (along with the behavior of Enigma machine rotors) in
       | Neal Stephenson's _Cryptonomicon_. See the discussion in this
       | review of the book: https://www.ams.org/notices/199911/rev-
       | kasman.pdf
        
         | phaedrus wrote:
         | Your mention of modular arithmetic makes me draw a connection
         | between this story and the way I think about ceiling fan pull
         | chains.
         | 
         | Suppose the fan is clearly starting on high and you want to
         | turn it off, but you don't know if the order of settings is
         | "high-low-off", or "high-medium-low-off" (three states or
         | four).
         | 
         | It's often difficult to tell if the fan is coasting off or just
         | spinning down to low. If you get it wrong and pull one time too
         | many, it goes back to high and you have to start over.
         | 
         | Therefore I always pull fan chains eleven (11) times to turn
         | them off, so that I don't have to know if it's a three or four
         | state fan. (Also works for on-off pull chains.) Pulling the
         | chain 59 times would extend this technique to cover five-state
         | fans, but I've never encountered one.
        
           | burner556 wrote:
           | I just smash my hand in the blades after each pull of the
           | chain and eyeball the acceleration when it starts moving
           | again. Who's with me?!
        
           | Arrath wrote:
           | ...huh. Well, I am going to try this.
        
         | lelandfe wrote:
         | I have a love/hate relationship with his writing - he _adores_
         | going off on tangents, and action often gets put on pause while
         | he savors them (REAMDE has several long paragraphs of a
         | character pulling themselves onto a boat, admiring the hull,
         | praising the usefulness of the tires lashed to it, etc).
         | 
         | But it also introduces me to so many lovely things in the
         | process. That moment in Cryptonomicon was quite cool.
        
           | ravi-delia wrote:
           | It's funny, I almost feel the opposite. I love the little
           | weird tangents, but something about the expository bits never
           | squared with me. Not sure why
        
           | idontwantthis wrote:
           | Reamde is the only book of his I couldn't get through.
        
         | filoeleven wrote:
         | I had just assumed that this was Neal working more necessary
         | maths into the book with an amusing anecdote attributed to
         | Turing.
         | 
         | Given that this blog post is from this year, I'm going to
         | continue to assume as much.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | bbno4 wrote:
       | He used maths*, Alan was British.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | helloworld11 wrote:
       | Cue inevitable Cryptonomicon mentions.... What an amazing book
       | though. Stephenson's best.
        
       | rtkwe wrote:
       | Huh I always assumed that story was made up when it appeared in
       | Cryptonomicon by Neal Stephenson.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | bordercases wrote:
        
       | crispyambulance wrote:
       | That's a charming story. It reminds me of skid-patch calculations
       | on fixed gear bikes.
       | 
       | If you have ride a brakeless track bike and "stop" or slowdown
       | the bike by skidding, there's certain gear ratios that you'll
       | want to avoid. Basically, in skidding, you unweight the rear
       | wheel by moving your body forward and lock the position of your
       | cranks. The rear wheel will then skid and you can end up with a
       | flat spot of wear on your tire (assuming your don't face-plant
       | yourself when you do it wrong). The fewer the number of skid
       | patches for your gear-ratio, the more rapid the wear-down on the
       | tire will be.
       | 
       | There's even a calculator for this...
       | https://www.bikecalc.com/skid_patch_calculator
       | 
       | If you're over 35, please, just use brakes and keep the track
       | bike on the track! (stupid dangerous examples of skidding
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9xQcMniV84, don't do it).
        
         | zh3 wrote:
         | Even if you don't do skiddy tricks (but do a lot of miles)
         | knowing the arithmetic leads into all sorts of interesting
         | thinking about prime numbers - and, indeed, figuring out
         | optimum gears ratios for (personal perference for) particular
         | gear inches. Added to which, to minimise chain wear how big can
         | we go at the front without hitting the chainstays/still making
         | kerb jumps plus we want the number of links in the chain to be
         | relatively prime as well.
         | 
         | Agreed re brakes, on a bike having a decent front brake is all
         | that matters (irrespective of age)- if stopping quickly, the
         | back wheel is generally waving about in the air anyway so
         | whether its leg-braked or other makes no difference (except
         | fixed riders will still be pedalling, force of habit and all
         | that).
        
         | phiiiillll wrote:
         | That's funny, I'm 41 and planning on setting up my brakeless
         | track bike for the road again this afternoon (changing the
         | gearing to 42-17 and switching from drops to a wide riser bar).
         | If it goes badly I'll think of your warning.
        
       | sshlocalhost98 wrote:
       | Thanks for the fun story. I began appreciating mathematics and
       | sincerely loving it due to the biographies of mathematicians like
       | Sir Isaac Newton in Veritasium channel.
        
         | onos wrote:
         | I enjoyed the story too. I noticed in another on the blog a
         | mention of a book of selections from the blog, and plan to buy
         | a copy.
         | 
         | https://www.amazon.com/Math-Mutation-Classics-Interesting-Ma...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-05-25 23:02 UTC)