(Published on 1/14/2001--aside from the new material at bottom of page, this site is unchanged since January)

Post-mortem and update added to bottom of page 12/4/2001...

 

Here's what Dean Kamen's "Ginger" might really be...

and it's still way cool!

 

In my opinion, the media is failing to see the forest for the trees when they disappointedly claim "it's just a scooter."  The tone of the January 12th Reuters article seemed to indicate disappointment.  On the contrary, I suggest that this invention probably will be (at least nearly) as significant as claimed by witnesses (here's the Inside.com story with witness reactions).

 

A pretty clear and reasonable hypothesis can be arrived at through even a casual review of the sketches, articles and cyber-celebrity testimonials appearing on the Internet.  All you really have to do is look logically at all the hints, ground yourself in reality (it ain't a teleporter, folks) and piece it together.

 

How would Mr. Spock analyze this for Captain Kirk?  Logically and unemotionally--and that's the key. Oh, and by the way, in spite of the fact that it isn't some kind of earth-shattering miracle, it is quite revolutionary and will, I believe, become a highly sought-after item that will change our lives.

 

So let's look at the big questions...

 

Is it a hoax?  Nope.  I simply do not believe that the people involved (particularly Jobs and Doerr) would participate in a flat-out hoax.  Also, while the inventor does have a history of colorful, attention-getting behavior, there's nothing to suggest that he'd concoct a complete lie--if nothing else, the guy is a dedicated, impassioned advocate for science.  He would not want to squander his reputation with an empty trick.  In fact, as speculation began to run rampant, Kamen even spoke to the press to downplay expectations.  I believe he did this to allay some of the more grandiose hypotheses that were cropping up.  Claims have ranged from a new form of energy conversion to a hovercraft that would glide over the ground on a magnetic "cushion."  Once the true nature of his invention is arrived at, you can easily see why he moved to de-escalate the frenzy of expectation.

 

Is the hype true then?  Well, yes and no.  The original comments made by Jobs, et al are probably appropriate and accurate to their reaction to seeing it.  The public's interpretation of those comments and the speculative flights of fancy that have ensued however, have indeed been over the top.  As I suggested above, people are now wondering if Kamen has invented the equivalent of the perpetual motion machine or that he has discovered some other holy grail of engineering.  This is certainly NOT the case but, if we calm down a bit and fully consider the potential and appeal of what he really is working on, it will be clear that it's significance can indeed live up to the original claims.  If my theory of what Ginger might be is accurate, then I think I'd be inclined to I'd agree with the claims that the gurus were described as making in the proposal.

 

What the hell IS it then?  I believe "IT" is a self-balancing, mono-wheeled, one-person scooter-like vehicle (see illustration).  A sort of modified, stand-up, no-pedal unicycle that provides a remarkably steady standing platform with a handlebar "stalk."  The "monowheel" itself will be very nearly spherical (for reasons we'll discuss later) and this means that the device will look both bizarre and incredibly cool.  It'll be a sort of cross between something out of the Jetsons and a sort of model of the planet Saturn that you stand on and ride.  The simple handlebar will be for holding on and the controls will be located there.

 

Because it is monowheeled and gyroscopically stabilized, it will be remarkably robust in terms of curb hopping, pothole surfing and the like--remember the behavior of the gyroscope toy you had as a kid?

 

Its propulsion system will most likely be an unremarkable electric motor.  Navigation will be achieved by subtly leaning the stabilized sphere-like wheel which will bank easily and safely.

 

How is that hype-worthy?  Well, while it isn't an engine that runs on air or a personal flight-machine, the idea of a nearly silent, topographically robust, small-footprinted vehicle which, incidentally, is remarkably enjoyable to use, is extremely compelling.  If it's as delightful a device as I think it might turn out to be, then surely people will embrace it. Wildly, I think.  The currently popular scooters you see around town require a lot of energy and balance to use and the electric ones, while somewhat similar to Kamen's product are nowhere near as stable or low profile as a gyroscopically stabilized mono-wheel.  Once a person tries IT and feels the pleasure of smoothly gliding down a sidewalk without feeling unstable, they won't be able to resist it.  Do not underestimate the sensation of balance that one will feel--it will be addicting to ride them!

 

When the tech gurus gushed about how it will be "bigger than the internet" or force a reconsideration of city layouts, they're seeing the inevitable popularity of the thing and probably foresee people having one with them constantly.  It will become an intimate tool for the people who embrace it.  And, with such appeal, millions will embrace it.  In the context of the heady speculations we've seen online as to what the great invention might be, the Silicon Valley gurus' enthusiasm for a super-cool, perfect transport device may seem hyperbolic, but they hadn't gone into their experience expecting to see some kind of earth-shattering miracle the way we have.

 

If this is such a hot concept, why is it manifested in a mere one-person scooter?  Why not a more conventional car-like vehicle with a trunk?  Quite simply, it's a matter of balance.  It would be staggeringly difficult to balance any kind of complex or shifting load.  A single human, straddling the lateral axis of the wheel can easily maintain their balance on a stable platform (especially with a handlebar to grasp).  It would be about as difficult to balance as it is when you stand on a moving bus and grasp the railings of seatbacks next to you.  When Metcalfe made his intriguing "metal and spoon" analogy, he points up the possibility that, as the on-board processing power and reliability of computers increases, it may become more feasible to balance a load in a larger system--just look at Kamen's amazing wheelchairs!  It's no wonder that Kamen brought in some top computer-age visionaries--he'd probably like their involvement and guidance.  After all, how will a man who'd never even heard of Warren Beatty pick marketable designs?  So the question becomes, "do you save this wonderful, yet elegantly simple technology for a later time when computers can make a whole complex 'mono-wheeled' vehicle possible, or do you downscale the execution and roll out an incredibly cool one-person version right now (or rather, in 2002)?"  Well, duh!

 

It all adds up...

The way I arrived at these conclusions was by mulling the things we've either been told by the inventor (via the book proposal and later statement), by the "cyber-luminaries," or that we've read in the patent application.  It's relatively easy then to fit them into a cohesive, viable model.  The following table lays these points out (in brief--you can follow the links or read the articles for more detail) and converts them into reasonable assumptions or interpretations.  It's a translation or decoding of the various "hints," if you will:

 

"Hint"	Reasonable Interpretation
Bezos' "honking laugh" reaction (from the book proposal narrative).	It's a fun thing and neat looking thing.  Not likely something with the gravitas of an air-powered engine.  Imagine the look on Bezos' face when Kamen turns it on and it suddenly stands up straight and level--it's gotta seem magical.  Of course Bezos laughed!
Jobs' comments about "re-architecting cities" (also from the proposal).	Their appeal will be so universal, but the problems of using them on either the streets or the sidewalks will force new landscaping designs to accommodate them.
Jobs' even more dramatic comment that it'd be "bigger than the PC" (same source).	This is a tough one to reconcile, but I'm betting that the amazingly solid ride, deceptively simple appearance, Saturn-like shape and all-around "gee whiz" impact led Steve to guess that demand  for and love of these devices would be enormous.
Many different and intriguing drawings in the patent filing.  There's a good summary at the Smoking Gun's website.	This is, in part, due to the necessary obfuscation strategy that the team must deploy to avoid being ripped off.  The strategy is to triangulate all around the actual invention so that they manage to protect the true version (which is actually a combination of several of the sketches) while maintaining their secrets.
Kamen's extensive background with gyros and balancing.	When you read the MSNBC article, you'll actually be amazed that Kamen's amazing wheelchair invention hasn't already been adapted somehow for general personal transport.
"speculation has led to expectations that are beyond whimsical." (from Kamen's clarification statement)	It is not a radical new propulsion device nor has he found a way to make safe personal flight possible.
"Single point of contact" reference in the patent documents.	This must then, mean a "mono-wheel."  Note that they repeatedly indicate "contact" with the ground, so I believe this also pretty well eliminates the hovercraft theory.  Besides, powering a small hovercraft would present tremendous energy issues that are all the more challenging if the device is indeed "clean" running.)
"...alternative to products that are dirty, expensive, sometimes dangerous..." (from book proposal).	The references to pollution and expense, not to mention comments elsewhere in the proposal that talk about challenges to "billion dollar industries, " etc. point to a small electric motor.   The "dangerousness" comparison is also very revealing in that much to everyone's relief, I expect that this device will move only moderately faster than the average walking pace.  The limitations of a small electric motor, the usability and safety factors (think "Liability") and people's positive reactions do not lead me to believe that this is perceived or envisioned as something that teenagers will careen around on wildly.  No such controversial product could ever hope to enjoy the widespread, society-changing adoption levels that product visionaries like Jobs seem to assume this will achieve.
Many references to the "whimsy" factor.	If they had invented a levitation device, "whimsy" would probably be an understatement.  The self-balancing unicycle concept perfectly matches the "whimsy" description.
Easy assembly "using a screwdriver and hex wrenches from components that fit into a couple of large duffel bags and some cardboard boxes."	Supports my theory that most of the works are housed in this necessarily spherical wheel.  What Kamen dumped out of the duffel appeared to be a large sphere, a standing platform and handlebar stalk.  Bolt 'em together and voila, you have an "IT."
Timeframe, cost factor.	If this were "just some scooter," would they STILL need at least a year (maybe almost two) to get it out?  Would a motorized scooter really cost $2,000?

 

Once you boil all of that down, you can then make some educated guesses and assumptions as to the rest of the picture.

 

The gyroscope plant could reside within the wheel. This leads to my guess that it features a nearly spherical wheel.  And as long as you've now got a big, round hollow wheel with the gyro plant housed inside, you may as well put the motor and its roller drive mechanism inside it too.  They'll all be mounted on the stationary axle that passes through the wheel/sphere.  This will not only be an efficient design, but it will create the fun, striking appearance that will become a great part of the product's appeal.

 

The hiding of the works in the wheel intensifies the mystery of its operation.  How can something that looks so ludicrous possibly allow one to balance, much less move along the sidewalk?  Here's where the "sense of wonder" factor induces reactions like Bezos' laughter.

 

Tremendous stability and a smooth, pothole-absorbing ride will come from this thick wheel which will be similar in softness to that of a wheelbarrow.  Think of the way a good wheelbarrow with a pneumatic tire bounces nicely over rough terrain as you push it.  That maneuverability comes also from the single point of contact with the ground.  A rough ride becomes much more complicated when you add even a second point of contact (or tire).

 

Since one must straddle the wheel's lateral axis, the size of the sphere must be reasonably small (maybe roughly the size of a basketball) or it would be awkward to straddle.  The odd diagram of the surfboard-like version (see Smoking Gun site) might indicate that they haven't completely resolved the problem of fitting the motor and gyro into the small sphere and they are concerned that straddling a larger wheel/sphere would require a different riding stance.  Hey, they still need a year to get this thing going--there must be some problems still outstanding.

 

The foot platform won't need to be much larger than absolutely needed (the profile of the average rider's foot) and it will ride lower to the ground than the midpoint of the wheel.  This point is crucial to the balance of the device--it lowers the center of gravity and "suspends" the platform from the wheel rather than placing it unstably at axle height.  This lowish platform will also contribute to the non-threatening, safe feeling that will be imperative for development of "richer-than-Gates" mass product penetration levels.

 

Finally, a low platform makes braking easier.  In addition to a probable hand brake, you could simply lean hard (harder than you think, due to the gyro force) such that a corner of the platform can actually drag the ground (which leads to my assumption that the device will have rubber skid pads on the corners.  Further edge cushioning would ensure that should one run into an old fashioned bi-pedal walker (how passé), you would not slice their ankles open with your platform. Remember, if it's going to be popular, people can't hate or dread them!

 

 

© January 13, 2001 Dave Hurley / www.syfer.net All rights reserved.

 

This article may be excerpted on any website or in any publication provided the author is credited and notified. The graphic may also be freely reprinted as long as credit is listed for "Dave Hurley" and a link is provided to www.syfer.net/ginger

 

Let me know if you have a good on-topic link and feel free to link to this page!

 

E - Mail me at: syfer a-t syfer d-o-t net

 

---

This links to my Ginger Theory Guestbook--Post your feedback or theory!