Motorised traffic can be diverted well around areas that cyclists can simply cross, because distance is not such a problem for motorised traffic. As long as the travel time stays under a certain limit and as long as the new routes have a good flow, people in cars are willing to travel (much) longer distances to get from A to B.
The fact that the diverted routes for motorised traffic are longer gives cyclists the advantage of the shorter route, which makes cycling more attractive than using a car.
When motorised traffic is diverted around an area, that area becomes more pleasant and liveable and the available space can be used for people, often even without the need for separated cycle infrastructure. The traffic calmed areas can for instance be changed to 30km/h (18mph) zones in which cyclists and the remaining lower amount of motorised traffic can easily mix.
Where road managers do make a choice for separated cycle paths, these paths are well away from noise and air pollution of motorised traffic. This makes cycling even more pleasant than on a cycle path directly next to a main route.
Because traffic is unbundled there are fewer places where the different types of traffic have to interact. That makes it possible to make the fewer crossings multilevel within reasonable costs. This also reduces the number of traffic lights and thus the number of stops. That makes travel times shorter and to be able to cycle un-interrupted at a constant speed is very pleasant for cyclists.
Unbundled cycle routes can be made bi-directional in a more safe way (because of the fewer crossings). A bi-directional cycle path is wider than a cycle path for one direction, which makes it easier for faster cyclists to pass slower cyclists.
Unbundled cycle routes usually go through residential areas giving cyclists a better sense of social safety than they would have on cycle tracks on larger roads which are kept well away from homes and people.
There aren't many places in the US that would make this sort of investment, but one wonders about the change in quality of life making a place much more walkable and bikeable. What sort of populace would that attract? The thought that most people wouldn't go along with it means it probably won't happen...
Neil deGrasse Tyson was asked by the Templeton Foundatation (yikes - not exactly well thought of in most scientific circles) if the Universe has a purpose... his answer in the form of a short series of sketches (one minute science style)
Lightlane is an idea that allows bike riders to paint their own lanes of light in night riding... Prototypes have been built and patents filed, bit it remains to be seem if bright enough green lasers would pass legal/safety muster.
Here a concept (and only a concept) takes the idea a bit farther painting turn indicators on the road. (to do it with red lasers would require something very powerful and probably not legal as the eye is more sensitive to green light than red).
But if catching the attention of car drivers is the point, something like Revolights probably makes more sense and you can buy them as a product.
I grew up in Montana where some people were very religious, but most made a place for it in their lives on days like Easter and perhaps Christmas (although Christmas was really a mostly secular holiday). I suspect if you really tested the allegiances of people, many would give up religion before football or hunting and fishing.
In high achool I had a great history teacher who was given a bit of freedom to create his own course. His history of religion course was one of the best high school classes I had, but it was quickly shut down by the school board and he received a reprimand and suspension as a result. It seems he presented religions as equal - just very different manifestations of man's belief in something else and basically a thread that probably ran to ancient times. His sin, in the eyes of some in the community, was not setting Christianity apart as special and correct.
There is a separation of church and state here, but it is a bit leaky ... a couple of religions are strongly favored and are given amazing tax exemptions and public square benefits. Occasionally atheists and people of unusual religions test what has evolved, but there has been little success as many in authority either believe or fall in line with the notion of some that perhaps there is only one true belief.
I wonder what would happen if blue laws were returned in force and Sunday football, non-religious television and hunting and fishing was banned? Perhaps this is something the Republicans can work on to strengthen their ties with the religious right...
I'm all for teaching about religion in public schools - but only about religion. They should be presented in their multitude and fairly compared and contrasted in proper context rather than promoting one. Their existance and enormous variety is fascinating and may well point to something else - perhaps something deep about the workings of the human mind.
Vectrex is one of the classic game consoles - a 6809 based unit that set itself appart with vector graphics and a small internal CRT. They are apparently very rare now.
Vectres Regeneration is a Vectrex "console"for iOS was just announced and is now available on the AppStore. One of the original games (Mine Storm) and a few indie games are on the free version and a $6.95 in-app purchase adds many others. (the price may be discounted as an intro - I've seen it listed at $9.99 elsewhere). A short review is here as I've only been using it for 15 minutes on my iPad 3..
We are lucky enough to have an original Vectrex console in mint working condition with numerous games and overlays. I managed to get fairly good with the interface and have ok scores in many of the titles. I'm spoiled.
The graphics seem reasonably authentic, although they don't capture the exact look of the original - but close enough and probably fine if you haven't played with the original. Sound is just fine and there is an online mode for multiplayer play (turn taking).
The problem is the virtual game pad. While you can configure positions of the control stick and buttons, it isn't a physical object and lacks the "feel" I need causing the user experience to fall apart.
The game comes so close.
If you have a real Vectrex (maybe a couple of people out there), I'd pass on it unless you have a physical game unit for it. It is apparently compatible with the iCade (which I don't have) if you buy the game pack. I've never used an iCade (about $100), but have heard good things about them and they are probably very useful for people who want to play classic computer games on their iPads. I can't imagine this working on an iPhone given the tiny screen and just didn't try...
So if you have an iCade, give it a try. Dave ... I'm waiting for you to get one to tell me how well it works...