h a l f b a k e r yFewer ducks than estimates indicate.
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,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I drive home on a long two lane city avenue where cars are always
stopping to turn either left or right and waiting for all the rush hour
traffic coming the other way to break before they can make the turn
and thus get out of the way. Until they do make the turn there is s
long line of cars waiting
behind them trying to get into the other
lane. This stack of cars mostly peels off backwards so that the first
car behind the turner is the last to get to change lanes.
Inefficient.
If cars had points then when a car in front of you decided to turn,
your point, which would be pointed to the passing lane side of the
car, would just slide you right around him on the passing side. It
occurred to me that all this waiting is due to the inefficiently shaped
square ends of cars.
On to the smart fur. Eventually software will do all of this blood cell
type negotiation and flocking for us, but on the way there there will
have to be a hardware side of it, so start making smart fur on cars
now, in the form of antennae that will let you know when you get
close to another car.
[link]
|
| |
T-bone type collisions would also be less damaging to cars as the pointed car would not transfer all kinetic energy suddenly as a square end is prone to do, but rather tend to pass right through the vehicle struck, moving the front and back out of the way. This would also be true for collisions with pedestrians. |
|
| |
I wanted to be cruel to the idea. |
|
| |
Then I read it again, then yet again. |
|
| |
But at least the part about points is correct. Especially if you had one on both ends of the car. |
|
| |