T
Torched Smurf
Guest
gwhite wrote:
> Regardless of what definition is used, efficiency approachs zero as
> cadence approaches zero*, and also approachs zero as it increases
> "without limit." So there has to be at least one "max" between these
> ("ultra-low and ultra-high") although that says little regarding how
> "broad" a peak(s) may be.
>
>
> * Otherwise a discontinuity would have to exist between zero cadence --
> which produces zero power -- and some arbitrarily low cadence. One
> could say zero cadence is indeterminant, but I see that as pointless
> quibble.
It's not a pointless quibble, and your reasoning is completely unsound.
Efficiency does not necessarily approach zero as cadence approaches
zero. We haven't established exactly what the relationship is between
efficiency and cadence, but if, for example, they vary inversely to one
another (efficiency = N/cadence), efficiency would most definitely NOT
approach zero as cadence did, and there would be no "local maximum",
either:
http://melusine.eu.org/syracuse/bbgraf/albums/courbes_03/hyperbole.jpg
Again, that might not be the relationship, but not knowing otherwise
you can't say efficiency approaches zero as cadence does. And thinking
about it intuitively, I highly doubt that it does.
-Smurf
> Regardless of what definition is used, efficiency approachs zero as
> cadence approaches zero*, and also approachs zero as it increases
> "without limit." So there has to be at least one "max" between these
> ("ultra-low and ultra-high") although that says little regarding how
> "broad" a peak(s) may be.
>
>
> * Otherwise a discontinuity would have to exist between zero cadence --
> which produces zero power -- and some arbitrarily low cadence. One
> could say zero cadence is indeterminant, but I see that as pointless
> quibble.
It's not a pointless quibble, and your reasoning is completely unsound.
Efficiency does not necessarily approach zero as cadence approaches
zero. We haven't established exactly what the relationship is between
efficiency and cadence, but if, for example, they vary inversely to one
another (efficiency = N/cadence), efficiency would most definitely NOT
approach zero as cadence did, and there would be no "local maximum",
either:
http://melusine.eu.org/syracuse/bbgraf/albums/courbes_03/hyperbole.jpg
Again, that might not be the relationship, but not knowing otherwise
you can't say efficiency approaches zero as cadence does. And thinking
about it intuitively, I highly doubt that it does.
-Smurf