ResistedNormalcy

Over the last.. eh, 5 or 6 years I’ve periodically read and followed the blog ktheory. This is a strange activity of mine, and it’s worth noting:

I don’t know Aaron Suggs. I’ve never met him, nor had any relation to him and yet I’ve followed his life — at least via his blog — for several years now for no reason other than the fact he has a domain name I dig. Ktheory used to be my old AIM handle, hence me stumbling upon his writing.

But I digress..

I stumbled upon this little beauty this morning and had to share:

There is a stigma against people who merge late on roadways. Popular behavior dictates that one should vacate the closing lane as soon as signs announce that the lane closes in a few miles. I think those arrogant drivers rushing past rows of idle traffic are actually behaving efficiently and in accordance with Kant’s moral imperative. Those who merge at the first sign are slowing everyone down with their conformity.

Merging late is more efficient because it minimizes the duration of time when traffic is constrained to one lane. Having a 50-foot stretch of one-lane road does not slow down traffic as long as the flow of traffic is less than one car per 50 feet of road. But if all traffic merges miles in advance, 1 car/50 ft. of road is enough to cause backup. Merging late maximizes the use of available road, which alleviates bottlenecks.

Merging late concentrates the location where drivers switch lanes. This avoids drivers slowing down further while they negotiate who’s changing lanes. Drivers should understand that alternating lanes in the optimal way to merge two lanes into one, and if people use all available roadway, the lanes will be equally full at the point of merging. Since less negotiation is needed, drivers won’t need to slow down as much in order to be cautious of unexpected merging.

Filed under: Blather on March 11th, 2007