Quezi

Golf (photo by chispita_666– CC-BY)

United States

From the National Golf Foundation:
Golf Participation in America, 2010-2020

From GOLF 20/20:
Participation Reports

Canada

From the National Allied Golf Associations (NAGA):

Golf Participation – “SNG estimates that approximately 70 million rounds of golf were played in 2008, a level of play that was as much as 10% lower than the average number of rounds based on prior years.”

Economic Impact of Golf for Canada , August 2009
Key Findings Report (published August 14, 2009)

Canadian Golf Consumer Behaviour Study 2012
Conducted by NAVICOM on behalf of the National Allied Golf Associations FINDINGS REPORT (Published September 12, 2012)

Australia

From Golf Australia:

• National Golf Census 2012
• National Golf Census 2011
• National Golf Census 2010
• Quick facts

Europe

From KPMG’s Golf Advisory Practice in Europe, Middle East and Africa:

Golf participation in Europe 2011
“The number of golfers in Europe has more than doubled in the past 25 years, buoyed

by economic growth and the spread of the game to both developed and emerging economies. However, in 2011, European golf experienced its first fall in participation in more than two decades.”

Golf participation in Europe 2010
The number of registered players grew by 5% annually until 2005.
Growth has slowed down in the second half of the decade to 1-2% per year.

UK

From The British Golf Industry Association (BGIA):

UK Golf Participation
“The number of golfers in Great Britain who play on a full length course remains just under the 4 million mark.”

UK Golf Participation Figures

- Active people Survey (Golf) 2012
- Active people Survey (Golf) 2012

Detail from “Susanna im Bade” by Anthony van Dyck (PD-EXP)

As everyone knows, cross-examination is the dramatic part of a criminal trial—at least in films—when the attorney of the defendant is allowed to question the witness:

The main purposes of cross-examination are to elicit favorable facts from the witness, or to impeach the credibility of the testifying witness to lessen the weight of unfavorable testimony

What does that have to do with a painting of a nude woman and two aged voyeurs? That theme was used by

many artists over the centuries because it relates to a famous story (and also, of course, because it was an excuse for showing a nude woman, perhaps mitigating the viewer’s prurient interest by including two lusting old men).

Many will recognize the theme as that of “Susanna and the Elders”. Roman Catholics may know that it is a Biblical story, since it is chapter 13 of the Book of Daniel in their Bible, which is based on the Vulgate, the Latin translation of the earlier Greek Bible, which includes the story. Protestants may also think it is from their Bibles, but both Luther’s translation and the King James’ Version of the Bible leave the story out of the Book of Daniel, although it is included in the their apocryphal books, early texts that were excluded from the canonical scriptures.

The paintings present the visually most attractive episode in the story. The old voyeurs aren’t just elders, they are judges, making their action even more reprehensible. When Susanna resists their advances, they accuse her of being unfaithful to her husband, Joachim. In her trial, young Daniel insists on questioning them individually (cross examination) and catches their telling that they had been hiding under two different trees. Susanna’s virtue is vindicated, and the judges are executed.

When the paintings were made, the story of Susanna and the Elders was widely known, so that the paintings were understood (perhaps excused) as a warning against bearing false witness.

That is the earliest example of a cross examination, but the principle was known, as Proverbs, chapter 18, verse 17 documents:

He that speaks first in his own cause seems just; until his neighbor comes and examines him

Didn’t we all know that implicitly, as did everyone at the time the proverb and the story were first recorded?

Susanna’s name is telling, meaning lily in Hebrew, possibly from the Egyptian for lotus. Both of these flowers are associated with purity=chastity, which is why many paintings of the Annunciation include a lily. The name is known throughout Europe and much of the Arabic/Muslim world.

Differential on a truck (photo by Satish Krishnamurthy – CC-BY)

A differential is the set of gears between the drive shaft of a vehicle’s motor and the wheels, in rear-wheel drive vehicles. It not only changes the direction of the effort but also allows the wheels to turn at different speeds. In vehicles with front wheel drive, those with a cross-mounted engine, there must also be a differential. Why? In both cases, in a curve, the wheels travel different distances. The inner wheel follows a curve of a smaller radius, not having to turn as fast as the outer wheel, which follows a larger radius. The differential allows this, while still applying torque to both wheels.

Clever, but as many know, if one wheel slips on snow or mud, the differential would let it spin, while the other wheel remains still. This problem has been solved with the limited-slip differential.

But when was the differential gear invented? It might have been invented in China many centuries ago, since it is hypothesized that it was used in South-pointing Chariots, which carry a figure that always points south, regardless of which way the chariot turns.

Credit where credit is due, although such chariots could have been made to function without differential gears. Furthermore, the explanations for the chariot’s purpose seem illogical, since travelers could orient themselves by the sun and stars, as they always had done. The chariots sound more like a sophisticated toy—from whichever century.

Leonardo da Vinci is also credited with inventing a differential

gear for a vehicle, but this is also doubted. Without question, however, a differential gear became necessary for mechanically propelled vehicles. Onésiphore Pecqueur is credited with inventing the differential gear as we know it in 1827, to power a steam driven vehicle.

Rail vehicles solve the problem a different way. Their wheels are shaped into a conic section. The explanation applies to all the wheels of the train, not just those of the locomotive that are under power. This solution also has the effect of slightly tilting the train against the centrifugal force in the curve. The conical bearing surface of the wheels is not a differential, but solves the same problem that a differential does.

What would happen without coned wheels on trains, or differentials on road vehicles?

The train would be forced to go around the curve by the flanges of the train’s wheels against the track; the vehicle’s rear wheels would be forced to follow the front wheels. As evident from Pecqueur’s (or maybe da Vinci’s) invention, it was recognized very early that this was a serious problem, as one or both of the wheels would slip on the road surface. The differential solved the problem, avoiding (most of) the tire wear that would have resulted.

This wear is still a problem for vehicles that use multiple rear axles to distribute the load onto more wheels. Most of these vehicles reduce the wear by raising the leading rear axle when the load allows, thus limiting the drag of rubber on road, and the resulting additional friction.

There would be a similar problem for trains’ wheels and the tracks in curves. Imagine a train winding up a slope, the slippage generating heat, wasting the effort of the locomotive and wearing down both wheels and track.

Whiffletree at Westfälisches Freilichtmuseum Detmold (photo by Beige Alert – CC-BY)

Whiffletrees are a part of the harnessing of a horse or horses to a plow or wagon. The whiffletree consolidates the force applied by the horse or horses, and applies that consolidated force to the plow or wagon as smoothly as possible.

But you also have an example of a whiffletree every time you get in your automobile. Recall your windscreen/windshield wiper: it is a modern example of a whiffletree. The pressure from the end of wiper arm is distributed over the length of the wiper by two or more joints and levers.

With horse-drawn vehicles, the action is reversed. The

effort of one, two or even three horses is linked together to create a steady pull on the vehicle.

With just one horse, the whiffletree, also called a singletree, distributes the horse’s effort on the “traces” that come from both sides of the horse collar. Despite the alternating left and right pull of the horse, the effort on the plow or wagon is continuous, as is the load on the horse, distributing the strain to both sides of the horse’s collar.

With a pair of horses, a double whiffletree is used: singletrees from the traces of each horse, linked to another whiffletree, or doubletree, thereby distributing the individual effort of each horse but also that of them together.

Pretty clever! And someone figured out that three horses could be spanned together by using a longer, third lever. The singletrees of two horses are fastened to the end of a doubletree, which is fastened to one end of a third piece. The singletree of the third horse is fastened to the other end of this lever. To equalize the pull of two horses vs one horse, this lever is attached to the vehicle or plow by a fastening much closer to the end pulled by the two horses.

An image from 1170 AD shows primitive whiffletrees, recognizing and solving the problem of combining the efforts of two horses.

But the problem was understood and addressed much earlier, as an Egyptian model from around 2040-1750 BC in the British Museum shows:  a farmer plowing with yoked oxen.  The shaft from the middle of the yoke transfers fairly constantly the effort of both animals to the plow.  Nothing has changed in 4000 years, as images of yoked oxen from around the world demonstrate.

When reading about three horses being spanned together, you might think of a Russian troika. However, the three horses of a troika are not harnessed using a whiffletree.

Where could whiffletrees be found, after mechanical vehicles replaced horse-drawn ones? Where one would least expect them: in the ball driver of the IBM Selectric typewriter.

The P J Clarke’s Holdout in New York City (photo by flickr4jazz – CC-BY)

Holdout, Nail House, and Spite House are all expressions for a building that obviously shouldn’t be there, when one views its neighbors. But there they are, and they exist in many countries where real estate development is—or was—strong.

Take a look at Edith Macefield’s house in Seattle. The owner simply refused to sell, forcing the developer to buld around her old farmhouse, and creating a Holdout.

Nail House is the Chinese expression for the same thing, as this dramatic image shows.

New York City has many Holdouts, perhaps the best known being the 5-storey building at the corner of Macy’s flagship store on 34th Street and Broadway at Herald Square. Robert Smith bought the small building to try to stop Macy’s from becoming the largest department store. Macy’s simply built around his building, creating a Holdout.

Holdouts are generally small buildings, obviously older than what was built next to them. New York City has many: small shops, a church, once-attractive dwellings whose similar neighbors were sold and replaced by apartment blocks. They add variety to the view of streets, but some of them are disappearing, such as the five story townhouse at  No. 16 46th Street, once the site of the Gotham Book Mart. The building was replaced by The Gotham Hotel, which has 25 floors but is only the width of two rooms per floor, so the hotel is less than 10 metres wide.

You may wonder that there was not already a Gotham Hotel in NYC.  There was, but it is now the Peninsula Hotel, no doubt playing on the name of the famous hotel in Hongkong.

Spite Houses are designed and built to upset neighbors’ expectations or developers’ plans, or as a result of family feuds—unlike Holdouts which come into existence by the owners’ just sticking to their property rights in the face of subsequent development.

Spite Houses come in many shapes and sizes, often smaller than the neighbor thought could be built, and to spite the neighbor for different reasons. Wikipedia provides many examples of Spite Houses.

And now the reason for this Quezi article: nostalgia. A few days ago at the corner of Fifth Avenue and 55th Street I recognized an old landmark: P. J. Clarke’s, a bar and restaurant, unchanged from when I first saw it, and inside, still unchanged: the zinc counter by the door, once for the free lunch that saloons /pubs provided for guests. The waitress confirmed that the shoulder-high facilities in the men’s room were still flushed with a 50 lb block of ice. The red and white checked table cloths were as I remembered, but around the building was a tall office building, not the great hole that was there in the 1960s, which made one fear that P. J. Clarke’s could slide into it.  My favorite Holdout survived.

A typical Uclue researcher (Flickr Commons, no copyright restrictions)

Everyone’s a researcher, whether you realize it or not. When you buy a new car (or computer, or house, or pair of shoes) you research the options, the prices, the best place to shop. When you go to college, you research the school’s reputation for your field of interest, overall academics and, of course, its ranking as a party school. Go on a blind date, and you may be of a mind to look into your date’s background.

Sometime’s a quick search on the internet gets you everything you need. But most of the time, research is hard. And time consuming. And confusing. And you could sure use a little help.

Where to turn to, though? The last thing you feel like doing is research to find good researchers! If only there was someplace you could go…someplace with a team of excellent researchers in a wide variety of topics that you could hire for some quick work without spending a fortune.

That place is Uclue. The researchers at Uclue are good at everything, from business, to law, to health, to personal advice, to making travel plans. They can fix your computer, track down a half-remembered movie, check out a potential business partner, or even tell you how to send a private rocket to the moon.

Best of all, they work fast, and they work cheap. You can get a small bit of research done for just a few dollars, or spend a few hundred bucks on a larger-scale research effort. Uclue’s top tier efforts max out at $400 (though you can leave a tip, if your heart desires).

No sense trying to describe their work. Just have a look:

• A book about the aftermath of World War One that I cannot find ($40)

• Win 7 64 Bit HTML Issue ($50)

• Looking for a monitor that will will give me more workspace ($25)

• Rosa dei Venti in Museo Galileo ($12)

• Mapping Airport Codes to Timezones ($25)

• Homeland Security “agents”? ($10)

This is top-notch research work at bargain basement prices. Go for it!