Dolphin Inspired Potential New Weave

[chainmaillers.com]

This is actually the hardest question in Mailling.

I don't know about the hardest, but it's one of, if not, the most divisive.

Based on these terms it seems that it is heavily based on traditional Geometry concepts. Is that correct?

Very much so. It's my belief (and therefore CCT's) that "Maille is Math". While traditional Geometry transformations, are usually applied to 2 dimensional objects, CCT tries to apply them to joined 3 dimensional torus.

It does pick up a tendency to twist, though at the AR I used for the sample(4.3) you can manually lay out the rings to avoid it. Though if made at an AR of 4 it does twist quite a bit.

Glad to have that confirmed, I noticed it when applying physics to the model. Probably an artifact of that change in the connection point for that ring. Increasing AR can sometimes lessen the "tension" created by connections and alleviate minor twist.

Thank you, for the clarification.

Ok, thank you for the clarification. I have been trying to think of a few names but so far they have all been taken.

You're welcome I don't currently have any suggestions, but I'll see if I can think of any.

I can see how this would be hard to give a definitive answer to.

The real problem is that it's easy to give a definitive answer to, and everyone has their own.

 

[Karpeth]

I’d say it’s not a belief; Maille is nothing but pure applied math.

It’s knot theory and topology applied to solid torii.

 

[moaatt]

Very much so. It's my belief (and therefore CCT's) that "Maille is Math". While traditional Geometry transformations, are usually applied to 2 dimensional objects, CCT tries to apply them to joined 3 dimensional torus.

I thought Geometry has already been pretty well defined for n-dimensional objects that can be represented in Euclidian space? Though, as chainmaille deals with solid torii not everything would be applicable. I can see how defining a series of applicable rules would be hard.

Glad to have that confirmed, I noticed it when applying physics to the model. Probably an artifact of that change in the connection point for that ring. Increasing AR can sometimes lessen the "tension" created by connections and alleviate minor twist.

Thank you for the information about lessening tension. Also I really look forward to learning how to model 3D items when I get more time, it seems to have many benefits.

You're welcome I don't currently have any suggestions, but I'll see if I can think of any.

I have a few ideas, I just want to think of a few before I chase them down to see if they have been used.

The real problem is that it's easy to give a definitive answer to, and everyone has their own.

So true.

I’d say it’s not a belief; Maille is nothing but pure applied math.

It’s knot theory and topology applied to solid torii.

I would say that Maille is applied math in the same way that basically everything can be reduced to/modeled by math given enough time. I would say that there are may ways to view something and they can all be valid, its just about what is most helpful to the person viewing it. Though Math is a great way to create a repeatable, rule driven way to dissect and understand things. Additionally, please let me know if you are aware of any good sources to learn about knot theory and topology.

 

[Karpeth]

I thought Geometry has already been pretty well defined for n-dimensional objects that can be represented in Euclidian space? Though, as chainmaille deals with solid torii not everything would be applicable. I can see how defining a series of applicable rules would be hard.

Thank you for the information about lessening tension. Also I really look forward to learning how to model 3D items when I get more time, it seems to have many benefits.

I have a few ideas, I just want to think of a few before I chase them down to see if they have been used.

So true.


I would say that Maille is applied math in the same way that basically everything can be reduced to/modeled by math given enough time. I would say that there are may ways to view something and they can all be valid, its just about what is most helpful to the person viewing it. Though Math is a great way to create a repeatable, rule driven way to dissect and understand things. Additionally, please let me know if you are aware of any good sources to learn about knot theory and topology.

Wikipedia is a great start - unless you go to school for it.
Unless you befriend mathematicians or study it in school, wikipedia or a library will point you the right way.

 

[moaatt]

Wikipedia is a great start - unless you go to school for it.
Unless you befriend mathematicians or study it in school, wikipedia or a library will point you the right way.

If only I took some topology electives instead of economics I would be in a better place to understand this. I will check out Wikipedia and try to learn more about this when I have some time.

You're welcome I don't currently have any suggestions, but I'll see if I can think of any.

If you know of a way to search all of M.A.I.L. for a weave by name that would be helpful. Currently I am searching each category page by page. Unless using a filtered google search like the one below would be considered sufficient.

saturn site:mailleartisans.org

 

[chainmaillers.com]

If you know of a way to search all of M.A.I.L. for a weave by name that would be helpful. Currently I am searching each category page by page. Unless using a filtered google search like the one below would be considered sufficient.

That's generally what I do, along with reaching out to a few contacts Other than that, there's manually going through their alphabetical weave list. MAIL's general search has been down for a long time.

 

[Karpeth]

That's generally what I do, along with reaching out to a few contacts Other than that, there's manually going through their alphabetical weave list. MAIL's general search has been down for a long time.

The best way is to remove the "category" after the questionmark. then you get all weaves.

 

[moaatt]

The best way is to remove the "category" after the questionmark. then you get all weaves.

Thank you for the suggestion. I think later I might try to use the dataset I gathered earlier to just do a string comparison check against that.

Actually, I just remembered that I did publicly release these datasets on github that contain the names of each weave. Since M.A.I.L. isn't getting any new entries it would be feasible to just do a search through either one of the files. Hopefully this might help.

Thanks to that I have a few name ideas:
* Pragyan (IRSO's currently active lunar rover)
* Lunokhod (First lunar rover launched by the USSR in 1969)
* Artemis (NASA's 2022 unmanned moon orbiting mission)
* Orion (NASA next-gen space vehicle being tested by Artemis mission)

 

[chainmaillers.com]

Thanks to that I have a few name ideas:
* Pragyan (IRSO's currently active lunar rover)
* Lunokhod (First lunar rover launched by the USSR in 1969)
* Artemis (NASA's 2022 unmanned moon orbiting mission)
* Orion (NASA next-gen space vehicle being tested by Artemis mission)

Out of the 4, I'm kind of partial to "Artemis", but the choice is yours

 

[moaatt]

Out of the 4, I'm kind of partial to "Artemis", but the choice is yours

While I think Artemis is cool, I do like the meaning of "Pragyan" and it is actually a lunar rover, so my choice would be "Pragyan".

 

[chainmaillers.com]

While I think Artemis is cool, I do like the meaning of "Pragyan" and it is actually a lunar rover, so my choice would be "Pragyan".

"Pragyan" it will be then

 

[moaatt]

"Pragyan" it will be then

Great, I am very excited.