Still not right on centrifugal "force"
OK, I need to clarify some things. I said centrifugal or gyroscopic because they ARE different, not as alternative terms. I believe it is others who are confusing the concepts.
Secondly I thought someone would jump on the use of centrifugal force in the article. But tell me, please, where is the source of that force? (Apparent) centrifugal force pulls outward, but the force referred to in the article is pushing the bicycle inward to its previous path. If anything centripetal force would have been more appropriate. I believe the author is using the term incorrectly. His summary gives centrifugal force little or no significance in stabilty.
Nobody has yet shown me any mechanism by which centrifugal force (supposed energy directly outward from the center of a circle) would contribute to bicycle statbilIty. As for gyroscopic effect I will accede that it may have an effect on a riderless bike but that is more an academic excercise than a relevant discussion, as there is no function served by a riderless bike.
p.s. For those who still believe in centrifugal force, try this: Tie a string to a rock, strong enough to hold it but weak enough to break under modest pressure. Find a clear space outside and start to twirl the rock faster and faster. When the string breaks note that the rock does not fly directly away from you but rather at a right angle. This is because two forces were at work – intertia that would tend to keep the rock moving forward and the string which kept forcing it inward. Remove the string (centripetal force) and the rock will travel at a tangent (right angle) or “straight ahead.”