Weaves applying the wrong theory.
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
   
Author Message

Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 589
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:57 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Jackalgirl wrote:
Karpeth wrote:

It’s a manner of perspective. While the weave has a bias or slant to it, it can be reduced to following a {4.4} geometry, and for clarity, on the theoretical level, I call it peripendicular.


Okay, so one other question (I'm getting what you're saying around the edges, but I don't fully understand it): when you say "4.4" or "4.3.4", what do those numbers reference?


It’s Schläfli notation, where the Numbers are for sides and vertices and such.

{4} is a square, {4,4} is an infinite tiling of squares, as each vertex has 4 adjoining squares. A cube is {4,3}. Infinite cubes are {4,3,4}. Triangles are {3}, hexagon {6} and their infinite tilings are {3,6} and {6,3} respectively.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: April 30, 2018
Posts: 63
Submissions: 9
Location: San Diego, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:32 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Karpeth wrote:

It’s Schläfli notation, where the Numbers are for sides and vertices and such.

{4} is a square, {4,4} is an infinite tiling of squares, as each vertex has 4 adjoining squares. A cube is {4,3}. Infinite cubes are {4,3,4}. Triangles are {3}, hexagon {6} and their infinite tilings are {3,6} and {6,3} respectively.


Okee. That makes sense on the edges. Math and I are frenemies, so I'm going to have to let this percolate in the brain pan a bit. Thank you!

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 2 of 2. Goto page Previous  1, 2
All times are GMT. The time now is Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:12 pm
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
Display posts from previous: