h a l f b a k e r yA hive of inactivity
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
|
I would hope they'd all be hanging upsidedown in their cylindrical covers. |
|
|
You probably wouldn't need a motor. If this has an axle then shifting your weight would be enough to re-orient the tube (a bit like a very long hamsterwheel). You could rock yourself gently from side to side. I'm not sure that the double version would be comfortable, though. |
|
|
I like sleeping all curled up, but don't rotate me or I'll barf. |
|
|
st3f: It may not be clear that one sleeps on top of the tube, not in it. Even with the axis close to the top, I can't picture the bed self-adjusting to a roll on the hay. |
|
|
// I'm not sure that the double version would be comfortable // |
|
|
Especially when the bed partners rolled in opposite directions, and the servo started to hunt ....... |
|
|
Better, two "conveyor" systems, side by side. |
|
|
is there room for the dog? |
|
|
I was assuming sleeping on the inside. The outside sounds more comfortable, if a little more precarious. |
|
|
8th of 7: Yes, twin beds only. |
|
|
po: Yes, but not for both of you. |
|
|
If you spun it fast enough more than one could use it. |
|
|
I'm not sure I understand how you can have a "flat one-meter width" to sleep on and also have a "diameter of one meter". I also don't understand how this promotes "compact living", as a normal single bed is about a meter wide anyway. |
|
|
I was imagining a spongy, soft mattress that flattened out to approximately a meter depending on the sleeping position. I believe the norm here (Scandinavia) anyway is more 1.3 m for single beds. |
|
|
I think I would feel too much like a "Tootsie Roll" sleeping in one of these. Maybe with a sheet twisted around my neck and feet for extra security? |
|
|
This gives me a much better excuse for sleeping late. "I just CAN'T get out of bed in the morning!" |
|
| |