eisfeld

At slow speed the rotational stability through bigger wheels doesn't matter much so probably more a factor of your gf not being an experienced pillion. Maybe the seat height is higher as well which would have a negative effect on stability with pillion. The 110cc might have been a Wave.

The truck rear-ended the bike. In other words the truck drove into the bike from behind. Not sure why they even mentioned that it was a "high powered" big bike. Might as well have been a scooter makes no difference if the bike just is stationary and a truck drives into it. The full article mentions additionally

So a lack of evidence is evidence for you? Like... "I looked into a dark room and didn't see anything, therefore the room is empty."?

The results of the study are completely misrepresented. If you bother to actually click through to the actual study and read the authors conclusions it just says the quality of the evidence in the studies they looked at was too low to draw conclusions. It was a meta study studying other studies. Let me quote the important parts: It then closes by saying that we need better randomly controlled trials to get proper data. This was then spun to say masks are not effective which is dishonest at best. Don't believe me? Here is what Cochrane who published the study themselves had to say. Karla Soares-Weiser, Editor-in-Chief of the Cochrane Library, has responded on behalf of Cochrane:

Eh no, well the first part with engineering is right. But not in the petroleum industry. Just out of friendly curiosity... why'd you think so?

Tell us you have no idea about practical engineering without saying so. I guarantee you, the engineers who planned this truck didn't take into consideration energy loss due to tires heating up. Watching Youtube videos is fine but it's no substitute for doing actual real world engineering. But of course I'll still eagerly await your calculations, take your time ????

OK, I'm waiting for you to do the calculations. Keep us posted. The total available energy just plays a role in battery capacity planing. The rest as mentioned twice just depends on two ratios. And yes, they did know those ratios before building the truck. Component specs are a thing. Obviously ???? Oh wait, didn't you say you don't need to measure. Hm how confusing. No idea why you got that impression. It's not the case. Should consider getting off those hallicugenics ????

You didn't ask that question. Are you still hallucinating maybe? What you said was: You can't derive the efficiency via F=ma and G. For that you need the total measured round-trip numbers and if you have those then what's the point of starting calculations at a way lower level? There is no reason to top-up the battery in order to find out if there was a net loss or gain. You simply look at the battery charge at the end. Are you still thinking in terms of diesel fuel powered trucks where you would have to top-up to get the number of liters used? But in those cases there is nothing traveling uphill like in the OP's case. It would be only one half of the equation. That's not the same at all. Pumped storage has a net loss. Clearly this truck has a net gain. May I challenge you? Please go ahead and post the calculations and the result which shows that this truck does not need charging via the equations you posted. Without measuring the efficiency. I'll wait.

You are missing the point with that exercise though. It's irrelevant what the individual absolute potential energies are for answering the question if the truck can do the trip without having to charge. All we need to know is the ratios of energy gained/spent (the energy round trip efficiency) as well as the ratio of weight fully loaded to empty. Because then we know the truck can recuperate more energy than it needs to climb back up. That way it doesn't even matter if our truck was operating on earth or on the moon and we have a way to calculate if the truck can go back up without charging independently of G or F=ma. In fact, your formulas cannot answer the question at all because it doesn't take into account the efficiency of the drivetrain, battery and so on which in the real world matter a lot.

What do you envision them to deliver to a rock quarry site up the mountain a dozen times a day? A cold bottle of beer for the workers?

No, as mentioned your understanding of the mechanism was wrong as it is converting kinetic energy directly into electricity just like about every battery electric car. You don't need to involve F=ma. All you need is the ratio of the weights of both full and empty truck plus the energy round trip efficiency of the electric motor and battery between recuperative braking and climbing. If say the efficiency is 50% and the weight difference was more than 2:1 then the thing wont need charging. Thermoelectric generators have an efficiency of usually less than 10%. How would that work? Anyways, no need if you can convert the kinetic energy directly into electricity without jumping through hoops.

Don't threaten over the missing payments. Threaten because they did not get the condo onto your name. Go to the police and file a report. Threatening letters don't have much impact. After you have a police report you can hand it to them in person so now they are aware something is moving. Then get a lawyer for a reasonable fixed fee on the case. But make the case about the condo ownership and not the missing rental income. Because once you have ownership you can legally prevent them from at least using it and you can rent it through other means. After that you can proceed with trying to enforce the rental income issue but that's going to be much more difficult.

You can't have a title (chanote) with no owner. A chanote is issued by the land department and they can't issue chanotes to "no one". Same as you can't have a blue book for a car on no name. Or a green book for a motorcycle on no name. Sounds mega fishy. I'd get a lawyer involved.

There are many other factors playing into stability like rake & trail, wheel size, wheel base, center of gravity, weight, suspension stiffness, tire pressure... probably a dozen more. Handlebar width is a lesser factor. Would have to compare back to back to get an idea what might be the biggest factors.

Sorry I have no idea how that is related. Can you clarify?

That's not how science works. If you don't know that something is impossible and also don't know that it is possible then the answer simply is "don't know yet". A scientific theory has a specific meaning. It means we have an *explanation* for an observed behaviour and the theory is able to repeatedly predict such behaviour and can be tested. What you have is an unsupported hypothesis.

I haven't met anyone in person who is "obsessed" with masks. People just do the reasonable thing and wear one when it makes sense. On the other hand I've read many topics and posts of people who obsess about such a boring matter. This very topic being a case in point.

You can only directly petition the Constitutional Court in specific cases involving constitutional questions. To appeal a normal case to the Supreme Court has to go through lower courts first. Going through Election Comission or Ombudsman are also filtering layers. The prison director works for the Corrections Department.

They are not petitioning the King. They are petitioning the corrections department to not forward a request for a royal pardon if one came along. To decide which requests to forward is part of the official role of the corrections department. But that's not at all the case. There are many possible requests for the Kings consent, pardons are just one of them. But in pretty much all cases there are lower parts of the system which are supposed to filter those requests before they reach the King. Otherwise there'd probably be an insurmountable amount of requests to consider. Similarily how you have to go through several layers of courts before being able to appeal a case to the Supreme Court. That doesn't mean a lower court gets to decide for the Supreme Court.

On the other hand his own party has shown that adhering to deals or promises seems to be optional so...

Holy moly! Only less than 4% of Thais actually agree with the current constitution. Now that is a damning result if I've ever seen one. Wow. Eh, what?

He didn't steal from the electric company. He put his usage on the meter and therefore bill of his neighbour. What the electric company could press charges for is unauthorized modification of state property. Yea there is no way this can happen by accident because if the neighbour wanted to add some cable for additional load he would just connect it to his mains inside his property. There is never a reason to connect directly to the pole unless they want to steal power.

No, you are alive because of the dialysis treatment. Your sickness is the underlying reason why you need treatment.

For historical reasons so the meter can be accessed and read without needing access to the property. But newer readers can transmit their data so it would be possible. But the person in question here anyways had no business connecting their cable on the electricity pole which is government property.