How very cool, Roice!
--------------EAA66486CB9CD942E6529C47
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
How very cool, Roice!
I don't quite understand how the twist highlighting works but I'm able=20
to sort of find the ones I want and solve a couple of random scrambling=20
twists.
You've probably already guessed what I'm going to which is whether this=20
puzzle could support the "Show as Skew" view. We've learned that solving=20
is better supported by the hyperbolic view but a 3D view would help in=20
understanding the topology of the puzzle. I stared a bit at this image=20
understand what's going on. From your description it sounds like each=20
twist cuts one off the three struts of a red hub, turns one of those=20
arms around its cut, flipping the hub over and swapping the other two=20
struts. Is that correct? That seems to suggest that the scrambling=20
twists plus solving twists is always even. It also suggests there are=20
other types of possible twists. One of them seems like the most natural=20
one to me which twists a selected strut by 180 degrees, swapping the=20
hubs at each end. That one seems to be a "true" Big Chop-like deep cut=20
since it's symmetric on both sides. Actually, it looks like there are=20
more than one way to do that too though the simple geometric rotation=20
seems the most natural.
The really neat thing about your new feature is that it works at a kind=20
of meta level by operating on the hubs and struts of high genus surfaces=20
similarly to how we've been twisting vertices and edges within them.=20
Heck, it looks like you could even create puzzles within puzzles where=20
you manipulate the structure like you are doing now while also allowing=20
users to twist the elements within the texture with a modifier key or=20
something. Does that make any sense?
Assuming I haven't gone completely off into the weeds, I'd love to see=20
the {7,3} or other IRPs supported in this way. None of this is to=20
pressure you to implement anything but rather to try to understand what=20
this new puzzle means and where it could go.
Thanks for the wonderful new toy!
-Melinda
On 8/14/2016 1:47 PM, Roice Nelson roice3@gmail.com [4D_Cubing] wrote:
>
>
> Hi Hypercubers,
>
> I've got a new puzzle variant of the Klein Quartic surface for you=20
> that I'm excited to share. This puzzle was suggested to me by Arnaud=20
> Cheritat
> on illustrating mathematics, and uses a new kind of twisting. aside:=20
> Arnaud has made a beautiful applet=20
>
> explore the quartic.
>
> Rather than slice up the surface with circles that can be shrunk to a=20
> point, we slice it up with systolic (shortest length) geodesics.=20=20
> These geodesics cut the surface "around the horn" as Melinda has=20
> described in the past. To picture an analogous geodesic, think of a=20
> circle on a torus that can not be shrunk to a point, but which is=20
> shrunk as small as possible (see the beginning of this article=20
>
>
> Why call this the Earthquake? That was a term Arnaud was using, and=20
> it turns out quite descriptive when you see a portion of the surface=20
> shearing along a systole. It is even more appropriate because it is=20
> necessary to temporarily detach the surface from itself during the=20
> course of a twist. The surface remains connected along one systole=20
> (the movement near this slice reminds me of the "Big Chop" puzzle),=20
> but detaches along the other two systoles, swapping the material=20
> connected to each of them. The twist animation hopefully gives a=20
> flavor of the surface separating and reattaching to itself.
>
> I attempted to make it intuitive to control an earthquake twist, but=20
> note there are three ways to twist a set of systoles (6 if you count=20
> direction, but direction doesn't affect state so it's only a visual=20
> thing). Here's a video
> twisting. Here are a few images=20
>
> and scrambled.
>
> I have not tried to solve this puzzle yet. I hope it is a good=20
> challenge, though I wonder if the fact that twists result in 2-cycles=20
> of stickers might make it on the easy side. It certainly turned out=20
> to be a bear to implement!
>
> Grab the latest MagicTile=20
>
> check it out, and give us some detailed notes of anything you discover=20
> while solving it!
>
> Cheers,
> Roice
>
>
>
>
>
>
>=20
--------------EAA66486CB9CD942E6529C47
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
">
How very cool, Roice!
I don't quite understand how the twist highlighting works but I'm
able to sort of find the ones I want and solve a couple of random
scrambling twists.
You've probably already guessed what I'm going to which is whether
this puzzle could support the "Show as Skew" view. We've learned
that solving is better supported by the hyperbolic view but a 3D
view would help in understanding the topology of the puzzle. I
stared a bit at href=3D"http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/pentacontihexahedron2.jpg">this
image to try to understand what's going on. From your
description it sounds like each twist cuts one off the three struts
of a red hub, turns one of those arms around its cut, flipping the
hub over and swapping the other two struts. Is that correct? That
seems to suggest that the scrambling twists plus solving twists is
always even. It also suggests there are other types of possible
twists. One of them seems like the most natural one to me which
twists a selected strut by 180 degrees, swapping the hubs at each
end. That one seems to be a "true" Big Chop-like deep cut since it's
symmetric on both sides. Actually, it looks like there are more than
one way to do that too though the simple geometric rotation seems
the most natural.
The really neat thing about your new feature is that it works at a
kind of meta level by operating on the hubs and struts of high genus
surfaces similarly to how we've been twisting vertices and edges
within them. Heck, it looks like you could even create puzzles
within puzzles where you manipulate the structure like you are doing
now while also allowing users to twist the elements within the
texture with a modifier key or something. Does that make any sense?
Assuming I haven't gone completely off into the weeds, I'd love to
see the {7,3} or other IRPs supported in this way. None of this is
to pressure you to implement anything but rather to try to
understand what this new puzzle means and where it could go.
Thanks for the wonderful new toy!
-Melinda
cite=3D"mid:CAEMuGXr2LK59XLMmE4NeDgGcbxEsgqwHMk7CjkypLCNt-Rb6JA@mail.gmail.=
com"
type=3D"cite">
for you that I'm excited to share.=C2=A0 This puzzle was suggeste=
d
to me by href=3D"http://www.math.univ-toulouse.fr/%7Echeritat/"
target=3D"_blank">Arnaud Cheritat at a workshop on
illustrating mathematics, and uses a new kind of twisting.
=C2=A0aside: Arnaud has made a href=3D"http://www.math.univ-toulouse.fr/%7Echeritat/AppletsDiv=
ers/Klein/"
target=3D"_blank">beautiful applet to explore the quartic.<=
/div>
shrunk to a point, we slice it up with systolic (shortest
length) geodesics.=C2=A0 These geodesics cut the surface "around
the horn" as Melinda has described in the past.=C2=A0 To picture =
an
analogous geodesic, think of a circle on a torus that can not
be shrunk to a point, but which is shrunk as small as possible
(see the beginning of href=3D"http://www.ams.org/notices/200803/tx080300374p.pdf"
target=3D"_blank">this article).
using, and it turns out quite descriptive when you see a
portion of the surface shearing along a systole.=C2=A0 It is even
more appropriate because it is necessary to temporarily detach
the surface from itself during the course of a twist.=C2=A0 The
surface remains connected along one systole (the movement near
this slice reminds me of the "Big Chop" puzzle), but detaches
along the other two systoles, swapping the material connected
to each of them.=C2=A0 The twist animation hopefully gives a flav=
or
of the surface separating and reattaching to itself.=C2=A0=C2=A0<=
/div>
twist, but note there are three ways to twist a set of
systoles (6 if you count direction, but direction doesn't
affect state so it's only a visual thing).=C2=A0 Here's a=C2=A0 moz-do-not-send=3D"true" href=3D"https://youtu.be/5w6-dD8YfoI"
target=3D"_blank">video=C2=A0introducing the twisting.=C2=
=A0 Here
are a few=C2=A0 href=3D"https://goo.gl/photos/YvpdPvwNxzV8Z9CH6"
target=3D"_blank">images, showing the puzzle pristine and
scrambled.
a
good challenge, though I wonder if the fact that twists result
in 2-cycles of stickers might make it on the easy side.=C2=A0 It
certainly turned out to be a bear to implement!=C2=A0=C2=A0
ile_v2.zip">latest
MagicTile, check it out, and give us some detailed notes
of anything you discover while solving it!
=20=20=20=20=20=20
--------------EAA66486CB9CD942E6529C47--
From: "Eduard Baumann" <ed.baumann@bluewin.ch>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 09:40:45 +0200
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Earthquake Puzzle
------=_NextPart_000_001B_01D1F6D9.1C3A8B70
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Wow!
Roice and Melinda your are amazing!
Kind regards
Ed
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Melinda Green melinda@superliminal.com [4D_Cubing]=20
To: 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com=20
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 3:42 AM
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Earthquake Puzzle
=20=20=20=20
How very cool, Roice!
I don't quite understand how the twist highlighting works but I'm able to=
sort of find the ones I want and solve a couple of random scrambling twist=
s.
You've probably already guessed what I'm going to which is whether this p=
uzzle could support the "Show as Skew" view. We've learned that solving is =
better supported by the hyperbolic view but a 3D view would help in underst=
anding the topology of the puzzle. I stared a bit at this image to try to u=
nderstand what's going on. From your description it sounds like each twist =
cuts one off the three struts of a red hub, turns one of those arms around =
its cut, flipping the hub over and swapping the other two struts. Is that c=
orrect? That seems to suggest that the scrambling twists plus solving twist=
s is always even. It also suggests there are other types of possible twists=
. One of them seems like the most natural one to me which twists a selected=
strut by 180 degrees, swapping the hubs at each end. That one seems to be =
a "true" Big Chop-like deep cut since it's symmetric on both sides. Actuall=
y, it looks like there are more than one way to do that too though the simp=
le geometric rotation seems the most natural.
The really neat thing about your new feature is that it works at a kind o=
f meta level by operating on the hubs and struts of high genus surfaces sim=
ilarly to how we've been twisting vertices and edges within them. Heck, it =
looks like you could even create puzzles within puzzles where you manipulat=
e the structure like you are doing now while also allowing users to twist t=
he elements within the texture with a modifier key or something. Does that =
make any sense?
Assuming I haven't gone completely off into the weeds, I'd love to see th=
e {7,3} or other IRPs supported in this way. None of this is to pressure yo=
u to implement anything but rather to try to understand what this new puzzl=
e means and where it could go.
Thanks for the wonderful new toy!
-Melinda
On 8/14/2016 1:47 PM, Roice Nelson roice3@gmail.com [4D_Cubing] wrote:
Hi Hypercubers,=20
I've got a new puzzle variant of the Klein Quartic surface for you that=
I'm excited to share. This puzzle was suggested to me by Arnaud Cheritat =
at a workshop on illustrating mathematics, and uses a new kind of twisting.=
aside: Arnaud has made a beautiful applet to explore the quartic.
Rather than slice up the surface with circles that can be shrunk to a p=
oint, we slice it up with systolic (shortest length) geodesics. These geod=
esics cut the surface "around the horn" as Melinda has described in the pas=
t. To picture an analogous geodesic, think of a circle on a torus that can=
not be shrunk to a point, but which is shrunk as small as possible (see th=
e beginning of this article).
Why call this the Earthquake? That was a term Arnaud was using, and it=
turns out quite descriptive when you see a portion of the surface shearing=
along a systole. It is even more appropriate because it is necessary to t=
emporarily detach the surface from itself during the course of a twist. Th=
e surface remains connected along one systole (the movement near this slice=
reminds me of the "Big Chop" puzzle), but detaches along the other two sys=
toles, swapping the material connected to each of them. The twist animatio=
n hopefully gives a flavor of the surface separating and reattaching to its=
elf.=20=20
I attempted to make it intuitive to control an earthquake twist, but no=
te there are three ways to twist a set of systoles (6 if you count directio=
n, but direction doesn't affect state so it's only a visual thing). Here's=
a video introducing the twisting. Here are a few images, showing the puzz=
le pristine and scrambled.
I have not tried to solve this puzzle yet. I hope it is a good challen=
ge, though I wonder if the fact that twists result in 2-cycles of stickers =
might make it on the easy side. It certainly turned out to be a bear to im=
plement!=20=20
Grab the latest MagicTile, check it out, and give us some detailed note=
s of anything you discover while solving it!
Cheers,
Roice
=20=20
------=_NextPart_000_001B_01D1F6D9.1C3A8B70
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=EF=BB=BF
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: =
0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black">Fro=
m:=20
href=3D"mailto:melinda@superliminal.com [4D_Cubing]">Melinda Green=20
melinda@superliminal.com [4D_Cubing]
href=3D"mailto:4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com">4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com <=
/DIV>
=20
AM
Puzzle
I don't quite understand how the twist=20
highlighting works but I'm able to sort of find the ones I want and solve=
a=20
couple of random scrambling twists.
You've probably already guesse=
d=20
what I'm going to which is whether this puzzle could support the "Show as=
=20
Skew" view. We've learned that solving is better supported by the hyperbo=
lic=20
view but a 3D view would help in understanding the topology of the puzzle=
. I=20
stared a bit at href=3D"http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/pentacontihexahedron2.jpg">this ima=
ge=20
to try to understand what's going on. From your description it sounds lik=
e=20
each twist cuts one off the three struts of a red hub, turns one of those=
arms=20
around its cut, flipping the hub over and swapping the other two struts. =
Is=20
that correct? That seems to suggest that the scrambling twists plus solvi=
ng=20
twists is always even. It also suggests there are other types of possible=
=20
twists. One of them seems like the most natural one to me which twists a=
=20
selected strut by 180 degrees, swapping the hubs at each end. That one se=
ems=20
to be a "true" Big Chop-like deep cut since it's symmetric on both sides.=
=20
Actually, it looks like there are more than one way to do that too though=
the=20
simple geometric rotation seems the most natural.
The really neat =
thing=20
about your new feature is that it works at a kind of meta level by operat=
ing=20
on the hubs and struts of high genus surfaces similarly to how we've been=
=20
twisting vertices and edges within them. Heck, it looks like you could ev=
en=20
create puzzles within puzzles where you manipulate the structure like you=
are=20
doing now while also allowing users to twist the elements within the text=
ure=20
with a modifier key or something. Does that make any sense?
Assumi=
ng I=20
haven't gone completely off into the weeds, I'd love to see the {7,3} or =
other=20
IRPs supported in this way. None of this is to pressure you to implement=
=20
anything but rather to try to understand what this new puzzle means and w=
here=20
it could go.
Thanks for the wonderful new toy!
-Melinda
=
href=3D"mailto:roice3@gmail.com">roice3@gmail.com [4D_Cubing]=20
wrote:
cite=3Dmid:CAEMuGXr2LK59XLMmE4NeDgGcbxEsgqwHMk7CjkypLCNt-Rb6JA@mail.gmail=
.com=20
type=3D"cite">
that=20
I'm excited to share. This puzzle was suggested to me by href=3D"http://www.math.univ-toulouse.fr/%7Echeritat/" target=3D_blank=
=20
moz=3D"true">Arnaud Cheritat at a workshop on illustrating mathemat=
ics,=20
and uses a new kind of twisting. aside: Arnaud has made a href=3D"http://www.math.univ-toulouse.fr/%7Echeritat/AppletsDivers/Klei=
n/"=20
target=3D_blank moz=3D"true">beautiful applet to explore the quarti=
c.
o a=20
point, we slice it up with systolic (shortest length) geodesics. =
These=20
geodesics cut the surface "around the horn" as Melinda has described in=
the=20
past. To picture an analogous geodesic, think of a circle on a to=
rus=20
that can not be shrunk to a point, but which is shrunk as small as poss=
ible=20
(see the beginning of href=3D"http://www.ams.org/notices/200803/tx080300374p.pdf" target=3D_b=
lank=20
moz=3D"true">this article).
ng,=20
and it turns out quite descriptive when you see a portion of the surfac=
e=20
shearing along a systole. It is even more appropriate because it =
is=20
necessary to temporarily detach the surface from itself during the cour=
se of=20
a twist. The surface remains connected along one systole (the mov=
ement=20
near this slice reminds me of the "Big Chop" puzzle), but detaches alon=
g the=20
other two systoles, swapping the material connected to each of them.&nb=
sp;=20
The twist animation hopefully gives a flavor of the surface separating =
and=20
reattaching to itself.
ut=20
note there are three ways to twist a set of systoles (6 if you count=20
direction, but direction doesn't affect state so it's only a visual=20
thing). Here's a target=3D_blank moz=3D"true">video introducing the twisting.&n=
bsp; Here=20
are a few target=3D_blank moz=3D"true">images, showing the puzzle pristine an=
d=20
scrambled.
od=20
challenge, though I wonder if the fact that twists result in 2-cycles o=
f=20
stickers might make it on the easy side. It certainly turned out =
to be=20
a bear to implement!
ip"=20
moz=3D"true">latest MagicTile, check it out, and give us some detai=
led=20
notes of anything you discover while solving it!
------=_NextPart_000_001B_01D1F6D9.1C3A8B70--
From: Roice Nelson <roice3@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:45:32 -0500
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Earthquake Puzzle
--001a114ab9c25d1c54053a1e1fa5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Thanks for your response Melinda. Your email really adds to the
description of the twisting! I have some inlines below...
I stared a bit at this image
>
> understand what's going on. From your description it sounds like each twist
> cuts one off the three struts of a red hub, turns one of those arms around
> its cut, flipping the hub over and swapping the other two struts. Is that
> correct?
>
Yes, exactly!
> That seems to suggest that the scrambling twists plus solving twists is
> always even. It also suggests there are other types of possible twists. One
> of them seems like the most natural one to me which twists a selected strut
> by 180 degrees, swapping the hubs at each end. That one seems to be a
> "true" Big Chop-like deep cut since it's symmetric on both sides. Actually,
> it looks like there are more than one way to do that too though the simple
> geometric rotation seems the most natural.
>
Very cool, I hadn't considered this. I think the twist you envision will
swap two sets of systoles, with four cuts total, and all of them will
detach during the twist.
Your idea made me think of something else as well... I had thought about
systolic twists on a torus puzzles, which could be done without detaching
the surface at all. But I hadn't thought about doing twists with two
"around the horn" cuts on a single strut of the genus-3 surface. I'm
guessing the cuts wouldn't be geodesics or shortest length in this case,
but it still does seem like it should be possible. I'll have to think on
that more.
Lots of possibilities!
> The really neat thing about your new feature is that it works at a kind of
> meta level by operating on the hubs and struts of high genus surfaces
> similarly to how we've been twisting vertices and edges within them. Heck,
> it looks like you could even create puzzles within puzzles where you
> manipulate the structure like you are doing now while also allowing users
> to twist the elements within the texture with a modifier key or something.
> Does that make any sense?
>
Yeah! One thing about the earthquake twists is that they are "centered" on
vertices, so a natural "twist within a twist" would be the normal
vertex-centered twist MagicTile already supports.
In fact, you can do an earthquake twist where all 3 systoles break from the
surface instead of just two of them, which makes it a little easier to see
why earthquakes are vertex-centered. This is like a 3-cycle rotation about
a hub. I didn't include that twisting because I thought it might make the
puzzle easier if more permutation options were allowed. Plus the controls
were already difficult to try to make intuitive.
I think the twist you described earlier would be an edge-centered
earthquake.
> Assuming I haven't gone completely off into the weeds, I'd love to see the
> {7,3} or other IRPs supported in this way. None of this is to pressure you
> to implement anything but rather to try to understand what this new puzzle
> means and where it could go.
>
Totally, I want to see this too, and I have some surprises in this
direction I've been working on with Burkard. I'm nowhere near there yet
with the earthquake puzzle, and not even there with the classic KQ, but we
will have some cool stuff to show. Hopefully what you are picturing will
come eventually too!
Best,
Roice
P.S. I've been checking all changes into GitHub, and anyone who is
interested in participating in the development is welcome. Hopefully
looking at recent code diffs could help others find their way around the
code base.
--001a114ab9c25d1c54053a1e1fa5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
adds to the description of the twisting!=C2=A0 I have some inlines below...==3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rg=
b(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
I
stared a bit at hedron2.jpg" target=3D"_blank">this
image to try to understand what's going on. From your
description it sounds like each twist cuts one off the three struts
of a red hub, turns one of those arms around its cut, flipping the
hub over and swapping the other two struts. Is that correct?
olid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
seems to suggest that the scrambling twists plus solving twists is
always even. It also suggests there are other types of possible
twists. One of them seems like the most natural one to me which
twists a selected strut by 180 degrees, swapping the hubs at each
end. That one seems to be a "true" Big Chop-like deep cut sin=
ce it's
symmetric on both sides. Actually, it looks like there are more than
one way to do that too though the simple geometric rotation seems
the most natural.
I hadn't considered this.=C2=A0 I think the twist you envision will swa=
p two sets of systoles, with four cuts total, and all of them will detach d=
uring the twist.
ing else as well...=C2=A0 I had thought about systolic twists on a torus pu=
zzles, which could be done without detaching the surface at all.=C2=A0 But =
I hadn't thought about doing twists with two "around the horn"=
; cuts on a single strut of the genus-3 surface.=C2=A0 I'm guessing the=
cuts wouldn't be geodesics or shortest length in this case, but it sti=
ll does seem like it should be possible.=C2=A0 I'll have to think on th=
at more.
div>der-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
t works at a
kind of meta level by operating on the hubs and struts of high genus
surfaces similarly to how we've been twisting vertices and edges
within them. Heck, it looks like you could even create puzzles
within puzzles where you manipulate the structure like you are doing
now while also allowing users to twist the elements within the
texture with a modifier key or something. Does that make any sense?
=
hquake twists is that they are "centered" on vertices, so a natur=
al "twist within a twist" would be the normal vertex-centered twi=
st MagicTile already supports. =C2=A0
can do an earthquake twist where all 3 systoles break from the surface ins=
tead of just two of them, which makes it a little easier to see why earthqu=
akes are vertex-centered.=C2=A0 This is like a 3-cycle rotation about a hub=
.=C2=A0 I didn't include that twisting because I thought it might make =
the puzzle easier if more permutation options were allowed.=C2=A0 Plus the =
controls were already difficult to try to make intuitive.
iv>
arthquake."margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-le=
ft:1ex">
Assuming I haven't gone completely off into the weeds, I'd love=
to
see the {7,3} or other IRPs supported in this way. None of this is
to pressure you to implement anything but rather to try to
understand what this new puzzle means and where it could go.
/blockquote>
some surprises in this direction I've been working on with Burkard.=C2=
=A0 I'm nowhere near there yet with the earthquake puzzle, and not even=
there with the classic KQ, but we will have some cool stuff to show.=C2=A0=
Hopefully what you are picturing will come eventually too!
<=
/div>
e been checking all changes into GitHub, and anyone who is interested in pa=
rticipating in the development is welcome.=C2=A0 Hopefully looking at recen=
t code diffs could help others find their way around the code base.
div>
--001a114ab9c25d1c54053a1e1fa5--
From: Melinda Green <melinda@superliminal.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:35:31 -0700
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Earthquake Puzzle
--------------0E1C860055BD0B308F872198
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 8/15/2016 8:45 AM, Roice Nelson roice3@gmail.com [4D_Cubing] wrote:
>
> Thanks for your response Melinda. Your email really adds to the
> description of the twisting! I have some inlines below...
>
> I stared a bit at this image
>
> to understand what's going on. From your description it sounds
> like each twist cuts one off the three struts of a red hub, turns
> one of those arms around its cut, flipping the hub over and
> swapping the other two struts. Is that correct?
>
>
> Yes, exactly!
>
> That seems to suggest that the scrambling twists plus solving
> twists is always even. It also suggests there are other types of
> possible twists. One of them seems like the most natural one to me
> which twists a selected strut by 180 degrees, swapping the hubs at
> each end. That one seems to be a "true" Big Chop-like deep cut
> since it's symmetric on both sides. Actually, it looks like there
> are more than one way to do that too though the simple geometric
> rotation seems the most natural.
>
>
> Very cool, I hadn't considered this. I think the twist you envision
> will swap two sets of systoles, with four cuts total, and all of them
> will detach during the twist.
Exactly.
>
> Your idea made me think of something else as well... I had thought
> about systolic twists on a torus puzzles, which could be done without
> detaching the surface at all. But I hadn't thought about doing twists
> with two "around the horn" cuts on a single strut of the genus-3
> surface. I'm guessing the cuts wouldn't be geodesics or shortest
> length in this case, but it still does seem like it should be
> possible. I'll have to think on that more.
That's sort of what I was expecting from your initial description. It
reminds me of the Dual Circle
intriguing resemblance to the MC4D duoprisms puzzles.
>
> Lots of possibilities!
>
> The really neat thing about your new feature is that it works at a
> kind of meta level by operating on the hubs and struts of high
> genus surfaces similarly to how we've been twisting vertices and
> edges within them. Heck, it looks like you could even create
> puzzles within puzzles where you manipulate the structure like you
> are doing now while also allowing users to twist the elements
> within the texture with a modifier key or something. Does that
> make any sense?
>
>
> Yeah! One thing about the earthquake twists is that they are
> "centered" on vertices, so a natural "twist within a twist" would be
> the normal vertex-centered twist MagicTile already supports.
>
> In fact, you can do an earthquake twist where all 3 systoles break
> from the surface instead of just two of them, which makes it a little
> easier to see why earthquakes are vertex-centered. This is like a
> 3-cycle rotation about a hub. I didn't include that twisting because
> I thought it might make the puzzle easier if more permutation options
> were allowed.
It's definitely trippy to see one systole twisting in place while the
others detach and reattach but I don't understand how that makes
anything more clear. The pure vertex earthquake twist is more symmetric
and I'd expect it would be easier to understand, no? Maybe you're even
making it more difficult on yourself to support those non-detaching
earthquake twists. Was that a big part of what made the implementation
difficult? In the current case of one rotating systole and the rest
moving, I'm often reminded of the Grand Staircase
in which the ends of particular staircases detach and reattach to
different landings.
Now here's a truly crazy idea. In trying to imagine both the 2D and 3D
aspects together, I imagined the current 2D view as a plane in 3-space,
intersected by 3D arches. One could initiate earthquake twists on the 3D
structure, and 2D twists in the plane. Looked at this way it bares a
striking resemblance to that amazing rendering you did called Hyperbolic
Catacombs
I never did follow what that thing was so I have no idea if shares any
connection with this puzzle, but if it does, then it suggests the
possibility of a wonderfully immersive VR puzzle.
> Plus the controls were already difficult to try to make intuitive.
>
> I think the twist you described earlier would be an edge-centered
> earthquake.
Exactly. The only missing analog would be an earthquake face twist. On
this puzzle, that's equivalent to a twist of the opposite vertex but in
larger puzzles may be interesting though the UI challenges makes me
think it's probably not worth attempting.
> Assuming I haven't gone completely off into the weeds, I'd love to
> see the {7,3} or other IRPs supported in this way. None of this is
> to pressure you to implement anything but rather to try to
> understand what this new puzzle means and where it could go.
>
>
> Totally, I want to see this too, and I have some surprises in this
> direction I've been working on with Burkard. I'm nowhere near there
> yet with the earthquake puzzle, and not even there with the classic
> KQ, but we will have some cool stuff to show. Hopefully what you are
> picturing will come eventually too!
>
> Best,
> Roice
>
> P.S. I've been checking all changes into GitHub, and anyone who is
> interested in participating in the development is welcome. Hopefully
> looking at recent code diffs could help others find their way around
> the code base.
Here's the link for reference: https://github.com/roice3/MagicTile
Great stuff, Roice!
-Melinda
--------------0E1C860055BD0B308F872198
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
">
On 8/15/2016 8:45 AM, Roice Nelson " href=3D"mailto:roice3@gmail.com">roice3@gmail.com [4D_Cubing]
wrote:
cite=3D"mid:CAEMuGXrUN8zeHCyhqQn5d5NG3MzPvKX1_MrMZywUgSyVGZXxxg@mail.gmail.=
com"
type=3D"cite">
really adds to the description of the twisting!=C2=A0 I have some
inlines below...
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
a
moz-do-not-send=3D"true"
href=3D"http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/pentacontihexahedro=
n2.jpg"
target=3D"_blank">this image to try to understand
what's going on. From your description it sounds like
each twist cuts one off the three struts of a red hub,
turns one of those arms around its cut, flipping the hub
over and swapping the other two struts. Is that correct?
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
suggest that the scrambling twists plus solving twists
is always even. It also suggests there are other types
of possible twists. One of them seems like the most
natural one to me which twists a selected strut by 180
degrees, swapping the hubs at each end. That one seems
to be a "true" Big Chop-like deep cut since it's
symmetric on both sides. Actually, it looks like there
are more than one way to do that too though the simple
geometric rotation seems the most natural.
st
you envision will swap two sets of systoles, with four
cuts total, and all of them will detach during the twist.v>
Exactly.
cite=3D"mid:CAEMuGXrUN8zeHCyhqQn5d5NG3MzPvKX1_MrMZywUgSyVGZXxxg@mail.gmail.=
com"
type=3D"cite">
I
had thought about systolic twists on a torus puzzles,
which could be done without detaching the surface at all.=C2=
=A0
But I hadn't thought about doing twists with two "around
the horn" cuts on a single strut of the genus-3 surface.=C2=
=A0
I'm guessing the cuts wouldn't be geodesics or shortest
length in this case, but it still does seem like it should
be possible.=C2=A0 I'll have to think on that more.
That's sort of what I was expecting from your initial description.
It reminds me of the href=3D"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DuOAwjIebYDA">Dual Circle>
puzzle which has an intriguing resemblance to the MC4D duoprisms
puzzles.
cite=3D"mid:CAEMuGXrUN8zeHCyhqQn5d5NG3MzPvKX1_MrMZywUgSyVGZXxxg@mail.gmail.=
com"
type=3D"cite">
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
thing about your new feature is that it works at a kind
of meta level by operating on the hubs and struts of
high genus surfaces similarly to how we've been twisting
vertices and edges within them. Heck, it looks like you
could even create puzzles within puzzles where you
manipulate the structure like you are doing now while
also allowing users to twist the elements within the
texture with a modifier key or something. Does that make
any sense?
they are "centered" on vertices, so a natural "twist
within a twist" would be the normal vertex-centered twist
MagicTile already supports. =C2=A0
systoles break from the surface instead of just two of
them, which makes it a little easier to see why
earthquakes are vertex-centered.=C2=A0 This is like a 3-cycle
rotation about a hub.=C2=A0 I didn't include that twisting
because I thought it might make the puzzle easier if more
permutation options were allowed.=C2=A0
It's definitely trippy to see one systole twisting in place while
the others detach and reattach but I don't understand how that makes
anything more clear. The pure vertex earthquake twist is more
symmetric and I'd expect it would be easier to understand, no? Maybe
you're even making it more difficult on yourself to support those
non-detaching earthquake twists. Was that a big part of what made
the implementation difficult? In the current case of one rotating
systole and the rest moving, I'm often reminded of the href=3D"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DuFvizAQHJz8">Grand Staircas=
e
in the Harry Potter movies in which the ends of particular
staircases detach and reattach to different landings.
Now here's a truly crazy idea. In trying to imagine both the 2D and
3D aspects together, I imagined the current 2D view as a plane in
3-space, intersected by 3D arches. One could initiate earthquake
twists on the 3D structure, and 2D twists in the plane. Looked at
this way it bares a striking resemblance to that amazing rendering
you did called href=3D"http://gallery.bridgesmathart.org/exhibitions/2015-joint-mathematic=
s-meetings/roice3">Hyperbolic
Catacombs. I never did follow what that thing was so I have no
idea if shares any connection with this puzzle, but if it does, then
it suggests the possibility of a wonderfully immersive VR puzzle.
cite=3D"mid:CAEMuGXrUN8zeHCyhqQn5d5NG3MzPvKX1_MrMZywUgSyVGZXxxg@mail.gmail.=
com"
type=3D"cite">
intuitive.
edge-centered earthquake.
Exactly. The only missing analog would be an earthquake face twist.
On this puzzle, that's equivalent to a twist of the opposite vertex
but in larger puzzles may be interesting though the UI challenges
makes me think it's probably not worth attempting.
cite=3D"mid:CAEMuGXrUN8zeHCyhqQn5d5NG3MzPvKX1_MrMZywUgSyVGZXxxg@mail.gmail.=
com"
type=3D"cite">
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
gone completely off into the weeds, I'd love to see the
{7,3} or other IRPs supported in this way. None of this
is to pressure you to implement anything but rather to
try to understand what this new puzzle means and where
it could go.
surprises in this direction I've been working on with
Burkard.=C2=A0 I'm nowhere near there yet with the earthquake
puzzle, and not even there with the classic KQ, but we
will have some cool stuff to show.=C2=A0 Hopefully what you a=
re
picturing will come eventually too!
anyone who is interested in participating in the
development is welcome.=C2=A0 Hopefully looking at recent cod=
e
diffs could help others find their way around the code
base.
Here's the link for reference: =3D"https://github.com/roice3/MagicTile">https://github.com/roice3/MagicTil=
e
Great stuff, Roice!
-Melinda
--------------0E1C860055BD0B308F872198--
From: Roice Nelson <roice3@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 22:34:13 -0500
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Earthquake Puzzle
--001a114ab9c2a71b93053a3c23bd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>
> In fact, you can do an earthquake twist where all 3 systoles break from
> the surface instead of just two of them, which makes it a little easier to
> see why earthquakes are vertex-centered. This is like a 3-cycle rotation
> about a hub. I didn't include that twisting because I thought it might
> make the puzzle easier if more permutation options were allowed.
>
>
> It's definitely trippy to see one systole twisting in place while the
> others detach and reattach but I don't understand how that makes anything
> more clear. The pure vertex earthquake twist is more symmetric and I'd
> expect it would be easier to understand, no? Maybe you're even making it
> more difficult on yourself to support those non-detaching earthquake
> twists. Was that a big part of what made the implementation difficult? In
> the current case of one rotating systole and the rest moving, I'm often
> reminded of the Grand Staircase
>
> in which the ends of particular staircases detach and reattach to different
> landings.
>
>
oh yeah, I agree. The pure vertex earthquake would be easier to
understand, and would be more easily interpreted as vertex-centered. I
think my wording was confusing.
When Arnaud and I were talking about this, we were really hoping for a
twist that slid along the 3 systoles and didn't detach anywhere. I'd like
to be wrong, but that seems to be impossible.
The main difficulty in implementation was performance. These twists affect
a large number of tiles and stickers at once on the universal cover, which
is where the engine is doing it's internal drawing. I had to parallelize
some parts of puzzle building to deal with the fallout of that, and had to
profile and make various optimizations to get it to run reasonably well.
In fact, there are some rendering artifacts I haven't eradicated. It would
be easy to switch to the symmetric vertex-centered earthquake now, but I
probably would have had to deal with the same sorts of performance issues
if I had started there. The v2 engine is so much better than my first
MagicTile attempt, but this puzzle pushed it's boundaries. At this point,
I think I have a sense of how a better v3 engine could be designed, but I
doubt I'll ever do it.
The comparison to the grand staircase does seem very apt!
> Now here's a truly crazy idea. In trying to imagine both the 2D and 3D
> aspects together, I imagined the current 2D view as a plane in 3-space,
> intersected by 3D arches. One could initiate earthquake twists on the 3D
> structure, and 2D twists in the plane. Looked at this way it bares a
> striking resemblance to that amazing rendering you did called Hyperbolic
> Catacombs
>
> I never did follow what that thing was so I have no idea if shares any
> connection with this puzzle, but if it does, then it suggests the
> possibility of a wonderfully immersive VR puzzle.
>
>
This got me thinking of MC2D and how the reflection twists are like 3D
rotation twists out of the plane. Perhaps these earthquake twists are also
"higher-dimensional" in this sense, and maybe there is some natural
out-of-plane representation like you are describing which would be cool.
I think the twist you described earlier would be an edge-centered
> earthquake.
>
>
> Exactly. The only missing analog would be an earthquake face twist. On
> this puzzle, that's equivalent to a twist of the opposite vertex but in
> larger puzzles may be interesting though the UI challenges makes me think
> it's probably not worth attempting.
>
>
I hadn't thought through the face-centered earthquake case yet, but
using Arnaud's
applet
just convinced myself there is no possible earthquake face-twist, at least
not based on systoles. Click the "systolic pants decomp" option there and
look at, say, the white "pair of pants" in the center. A twist will move
material within that pair of pants, but at the end of the twist the new
location of all the shuffled material will need to cover the same original
area. If you pan certain heptagon vertices or edges to the center of the
view, you can see that this works. If you move a heptagon center to the
center of the view, it doesn't - there's no way to make a 1/7th turn and
get the pants to return to covering the original area.
> Great stuff, Roice!
> -Melinda
>
>
Thanks! Great thoughts from you as well. This is fun!
Best,
Roice
--001a114ab9c2a71b93053a3c23bd
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
systoles break from the surface instead of just two of
them, which makes it a little easier to see why
earthquakes are vertex-centered.=C2=A0 This is like a 3-cycle
rotation about a hub.=C2=A0 I didn't include that twistin=
g
because I thought it might make the puzzle easier if more
permutation options were allowed.=C2=A0
It's definitely trippy to see one systole twisting in place while
the others detach and reattach but I don't understand how that make=
s
anything more clear. The pure vertex earthquake twist is more
symmetric and I'd expect it would be easier to understand, no? Mayb=
e
you're even making it more difficult on yourself to support those
non-detaching earthquake twists. Was that a big part of what made
the implementation difficult? In the current case of one rotating
systole and the rest moving, I'm often reminded of the ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DuFvizAQHJz8" target=3D"_blank">Grand Stair=
case
in the Harry Potter movies in which the ends of particular
staircases detach and reattach to different landings.
pure vertex earthquake would be easier to understand, and would be more eas=
ily interpreted as vertex-centered.=C2=A0 I think my wording was confusing.=
e really hoping for a twist that slid along the 3 systoles and didn't d=
etach anywhere.=C2=A0 I'd like to be wrong, but that seems to be imposs=
ible.
rformance.=C2=A0 These twists affect a large number of tiles and stickers a=
t once on the universal cover, which is where the engine is doing it's =
internal drawing.=C2=A0 I had to parallelize some parts of puzzle building =
to deal with the fallout of that, and had to profile and make various optim=
izations to get it to run reasonably well.=C2=A0 In fact, there are some re=
ndering artifacts I haven't eradicated.=C2=A0 It would be easy to switc=
h to the symmetric vertex-centered earthquake now, but I probably would hav=
e had to deal with the same sorts of performance issues if I had started th=
ere.=C2=A0 The v2 engine is so much better than my first MagicTile attempt,=
but this puzzle pushed it's boundaries.=C2=A0 At this point, I think I=
have a sense of how a better v3 engine could be designed, but I doubt I=
9;ll ever do it.
case does seem very apt!uote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,2=
04);padding-left:1ex">
Now here's a truly crazy idea. In trying to imagine both the 2D and
3D aspects together, I imagined the current 2D view as a plane in
3-space, intersected by 3D arches. One could initiate earthquake
twists on the 3D structure, and 2D twists in the plane. Looked at
this way it bares a striking resemblance to that amazing rendering
you did called /2015-joint-mathematics-meetings/roice3" target=3D"_blank">Hyperbolic
Catacombs. I never did follow what that thing was so I have no
idea if shares any connection with this puzzle, but if it does, then
it suggests the possibility of a wonderfully immersive VR puzzle.class=3D"">
me thinking of MC2D and how the reflection twists are like 3D rotation twi=
sts out of the plane.=C2=A0 Perhaps these earthquake twists are also "=
higher-dimensional" in this sense, and maybe there is some natural out=
-of-plane representation like you are describing which would be cool.=
edge-centered earthquake.
Exactly. The only missing analog would be an earthquake face twist.
On this puzzle, that's equivalent to a twist of the opposite vertex
but in larger puzzles may be interesting though the UI challenges
makes me think it's probably not worth attempting.=
thquake case yet, but using eritat/AppletsDivers/Klein/">Arnaud's applet I just convinced mysel=
f there is no possible earthquake face-twist, at least not based on systole=
s.=C2=A0 Click the "systolic pants decomp" option there and look =
at, say, the white "pair of pants" in the center.=C2=A0 A twist w=
ill move material within that pair of pants, but at the end of the twist th=
e new location of all the shuffled material will need to cover the same ori=
ginal area.=C2=A0 If you pan certain heptagon vertices or edges to the cent=
er of the view, you can see that this works.=C2=A0 If you move a heptagon c=
enter to the center of the view, it doesn't - there's no way to mak=
e a 1/7th turn and get the pants to return to covering the original area.=
div>
Great stuff, Roice!
-Melinda
=20=20
div>
--001a114ab9c2a71b93053a3c23bd--
From: Melinda Green <melinda@superliminal.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 22:49:47 -0700
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Earthquake Puzzle
--------------34B856496E0DCC8B46F11D6E
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 8/16/2016 8:34 PM, Roice Nelson roice3@gmail.com [4D_Cubing] wrote:
>
>
>>
>> In fact, you can do an earthquake twist where all 3 systoles
>> break from the surface instead of just two of them, which makes
>> it a little easier to see why earthquakes are vertex-centered.
>> This is like a 3-cycle rotation about a hub. I didn't include
>> that twisting because I thought it might make the puzzle easier
>> if more permutation options were allowed.
>
> It's definitely trippy to see one systole twisting in place while
> the others detach and reattach but I don't understand how that
> makes anything more clear. The pure vertex earthquake twist is
> more symmetric and I'd expect it would be easier to understand,
> no? Maybe you're even making it more difficult on yourself to
> support those non-detaching earthquake twists. Was that a big part
> of what made the implementation difficult? In the current case of
> one rotating systole and the rest moving, I'm often reminded of
> the Grand Staircase
> in the Harry Potter movies in which the ends of particular
> staircases detach and reattach to different landings.
>
>
> oh yeah, I agree. The pure vertex earthquake would be easier to
> understand, and would be more easily interpreted as vertex-centered.
> I think my wording was confusing.
>
> When Arnaud and I were talking about this, we were really hoping for a
> twist that slid along the 3 systoles and didn't detach anywhere. I'd
> like to be wrong, but that seems to be impossible.
Except for the simple genus 1 (torus) case, I'm not certain but I think
you're right. For some surfaces I think you can slide two of the
systoles but no more.
>
> The main difficulty in implementation was performance. These twists
> affect a large number of tiles and stickers at once on the universal
> cover, which is where the engine is doing it's internal drawing. I
> had to parallelize some parts of puzzle building to deal with the
> fallout of that, and had to profile and make various optimizations to
> get it to run reasonably well. In fact, there are some rendering
> artifacts I haven't eradicated. It would be easy to switch to the
> symmetric vertex-centered earthquake now, but I probably would have
> had to deal with the same sorts of performance issues if I had started
> there. The v2 engine is so much better than my first MagicTile
> attempt, but this puzzle pushed it's boundaries. At this point, I
> think I have a sense of how a better v3 engine could be designed, but
> I doubt I'll ever do it.
>
> The comparison to the grand staircase does seem very apt!
>
> Now here's a truly crazy idea. In trying to imagine both the 2D
> and 3D aspects together, I imagined the current 2D view as a plane
> in 3-space, intersected by 3D arches. One could initiate
> earthquake twists on the 3D structure, and 2D twists in the plane.
> Looked at this way it bares a striking resemblance to that amazing
> rendering you did called Hyperbolic Catacombs
>
> I never did follow what that thing was so I have no idea if shares
> any connection with this puzzle, but if it does, then it suggests
> the possibility of a wonderfully immersive VR puzzle.
>
> This got me thinking of MC2D and how the reflection twists are like 3D
> rotation twists out of the plane. Perhaps these earthquake twists are
> also "higher-dimensional" in this sense, and maybe there is some
> natural out-of-plane representation like you are describing which
> would be cool.
>
>> I think the twist you described earlier would be an edge-centered
>> earthquake.
>
> Exactly. The only missing analog would be an earthquake face
> twist. On this puzzle, that's equivalent to a twist of the
> opposite vertex but in larger puzzles may be interesting though
> the UI challenges makes me think it's probably not worth attempting.
>
>
> I hadn't thought through the face-centered earthquake case yet, but
> using Arnaud's applet
>
> just convinced myself there is no possible earthquake face-twist, at
> least not based on systoles. Click the "systolic pants decomp" option
> there and look at, say, the white "pair of pants" in the center. A
> twist will move material within that pair of pants, but at the end of
> the twist the new location of all the shuffled material will need to
> cover the same original area. If you pan certain heptagon vertices or
> edges to the center of the view, you can see that this works. If you
> move a heptagon center to the center of the view, it doesn't - there's
> no way to make a 1/7th turn and get the pants to return to covering
> the original area.
OK, well now I'm having an out-of-pants experience but it made me
realize that I didn't previously make myself clear. Once I clarify
myself, you may conclude that I indeed have gone off into the weeds
regarding catacombs. When talking about the "meta" puzzle, I was
referring to the topology of the surface itself as opposed to the puzzle
within it though maybe they're always identical. In the case of KQ, the
genus is 3 making the topology that of a ball-and-stick model of a
tetrahedron. When I talk about vertex twisting at the meta level I'm
talking about cuts through the arms of this tetrahedron
current twists appear to cut three arms, twist one of them in place by
180 degrees while swapping the other two. What I called the pure
"vertex" twist would sever three arms that meet at a meta-vertex, rotate
that whole unit 120 degrees and reattach them all. The "edge" twist cuts
4 arms straight through the center of the tetrahedron and rotates one
half by 180 degrees. By now you probably understand what I mean about
"face" twists, which in the case of KQ is identical to a pure vertex
twist opposite a given systolic triangle.
-Melinda
--------------34B856496E0DCC8B46F11D6E
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
">
cite=3D"mid:CAEMuGXp2ZHA8YfkdNZJjavNhyNVdNzd2vZFzkHbtPB3t0XkkrQ@mail.gmail.=
com"
type=3D"cite">
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
where all 3 systoles break from the surface
instead of just two of them, which makes it
a little easier to see why earthquakes are
vertex-centered.=C2=A0 This is like a 3-cycle
rotation about a hub.=C2=A0 I didn't include th=
at
twisting because I thought it might make the
puzzle easier if more permutation options
were allowed.=C2=A0
It's definitely trippy to see one systole
twisting in place while the others detach and reattach
but I don't understand how that makes anything more
clear. The pure vertex earthquake twist is more
symmetric and I'd expect it would be easier to
understand, no? Maybe you're even making it more
difficult on yourself to support those non-detaching
earthquake twists. Was that a big part of what made the
implementation difficult? In the current case of one
rotating systole and the rest moving, I'm often reminded
of the href=3D"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DuFvizAQHJz8"
target=3D"_blank">Grand Staircase in the Harry
Potter movies in which the ends of particular staircases
detach and reattach to different landings.
e
easier to understand, and would be more easily interpreted
as vertex-centered.=C2=A0 I think my wording was confusing.=
div>
really hoping for a twist that slid along the 3 systoles
and didn't detach anywhere.=C2=A0 I'd like to be wrong, but
that seems to be impossible.
Except for the simple genus 1 (torus) case, I'm not certain but I
think you're right. For some surfaces I think you can slide two of
the systoles but no more.
cite=3D"mid:CAEMuGXp2ZHA8YfkdNZJjavNhyNVdNzd2vZFzkHbtPB3t0XkkrQ@mail.gmail.=
com"
type=3D"cite">
=A0
These twists affect a large number of tiles and stickers
at once on the universal cover, which is where the engine
is doing it's internal drawing.=C2=A0 I had to parallelize so=
me
parts of puzzle building to deal with the fallout of that,
and had to profile and make various optimizations to get
it to run reasonably well.=C2=A0 In fact, there are some
rendering artifacts I haven't eradicated.=C2=A0 It would be
easy to switch to the symmetric vertex-centered earthquake
now, but I probably would have had to deal with the same
sorts of performance issues if I had started there.=C2=A0 The
v2 engine is so much better than my first MagicTile
attempt, but this puzzle pushed it's boundaries.=C2=A0 At thi=
s
point, I think I have a sense of how a better v3 engine
could be designed, but I doubt I'll ever do it.
apt!
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
crazy idea. In trying to imagine both the 2D and 3D
aspects together, I imagined the current 2D view as a
plane in 3-space, intersected by 3D arches. One could
initiate earthquake twists on the 3D structure, and 2D
twists in the plane. Looked at this way it bares a
striking resemblance to that amazing rendering you did
called href=3D"http://gallery.bridgesmathart.org/exhibitions/2015-joint-mathematic=
s-meetings/roice3"
target=3D"_blank">Hyperbolic Catacombs. I never did
follow what that thing was so I have no idea if shares
any connection with this puzzle, but if it does, then it
suggests the possibility of a wonderfully immersive VR
puzzle.
twists are like 3D rotation twists out of the plane.=C2=A0
Perhaps these earthquake twists are also
"higher-dimensional" in this sense, and maybe there is
some natural out-of-plane representation like you are
describing which would be cool.
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
would be an edge-centered earthquake.
Exactly. The only missing analog would be an
earthquake face twist. On this puzzle, that's equivalent
to a twist of the opposite vertex but in larger puzzles
may be interesting though the UI challenges makes me
think it's probably not worth attempting.<=
br>
case yet, but using href=3D"http://www.math.univ-toulouse.fr/%7Echeritat/Applet=
sDivers/Klein/">Arnaud's
applet I just convinced myself there is no possible
earthquake face-twist, at least not based on systoles.=C2=A0
Click the "systolic pants decomp" option there and look
at, say, the white "pair of pants" in the center.=C2=A0 A twi=
st
will move material within that pair of pants, but at the
end of the twist the new location of all the shuffled
material will need to cover the same original area.=C2=A0 If
you pan certain heptagon vertices or edges to the center
of the view, you can see that this works.=C2=A0 If you move a
heptagon center to the center of the view, it doesn't -
there's no way to make a 1/7th turn and get the pants to
return to covering the original area.
OK, well now I'm having an out-of-pants experience but it made me
realize that I didn't previously make myself clear. Once I clarify
myself, you may conclude that I indeed have gone off into the weeds
regarding catacombs. When talking about the "meta" puzzle, I was
referring to the topology of the surface itself as opposed to the
puzzle within it though maybe they're always identical. In the case
of KQ, the genus is 3 making the topology that of a ball-and-stick
model of a tetrahedron. When I talk about vertex twisting at the
meta level I'm talking about cuts through the arms of href=3D"http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/pentacontihexahedron2.jpg">this
tetrahedron. So your current twists appear to cut three arms,
twist one of them in place by 180 degrees while swapping the other
two. What I called the pure "vertex" twist would sever three arms
that meet at a meta-vertex, rotate that whole unit 120 degrees and
reattach them all. The "edge" twist cuts 4 arms straight through the
center of the tetrahedron and rotates one half by 180 degrees. By
now you probably understand what I mean about "face" twists, which
in the case of KQ is identical to a pure vertex twist opposite a
given systolic triangle.
-Melinda
--------------34B856496E0DCC8B46F11D6E--
From: Roice Nelson <roice3@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 14:32:11 -0500
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Earthquake Puzzle
--94eb2c034a0adaecae053aae1a61
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>
> I hadn't thought through the face-centered earthquake case yet, but using Arnaud's
> applet
> I just convinced myself there is no possible earthquake face-twist, at
> least not based on systoles. Click the "systolic pants decomp" option
> there and look at, say, the white "pair of pants" in the center. A twist
> will move material within that pair of pants, but at the end of the twist
> the new location of all the shuffled material will need to cover the same
> original area. If you pan certain heptagon vertices or edges to the center
> of the view, you can see that this works. If you move a heptagon center to
> the center of the view, it doesn't - there's no way to make a 1/7th turn
> and get the pants to return to covering the original area.
>
>
> OK, well now I'm having an out-of-pants experience but it made me realize
> that I didn't previously make myself clear. Once I clarify myself, you may
> conclude that I indeed have gone off into the weeds regarding catacombs.
> When talking about the "meta" puzzle, I was referring to the topology of
> the surface itself as opposed to the puzzle within it though maybe they're
> always identical. In the case of KQ, the genus is 3 making the topology
> that of a ball-and-stick model of a tetrahedron. When I talk about vertex
> twisting at the meta level I'm talking about cuts through the arms of this
> tetrahedron
> your current twists appear to cut three arms, twist one of them in place by
> 180 degrees while swapping the other two. What I called the pure "vertex"
> twist would sever three arms that meet at a meta-vertex, rotate that whole
> unit 120 degrees and reattach them all. The "edge" twist cuts 4 arms
> straight through the center of the tetrahedron and rotates one half by 180
> degrees. By now you probably understand what I mean about "face" twists,
> which in the case of KQ is identical to a pure vertex twist opposite a
> given systolic triangle.
>
I think we have been picturing things really similarly. I was also
thinking of how the vertex and edge earthquake twists affected that
thickened "tetrahedron", just like you. If you map the KQ surface to that
tetrahedron such that a heptagon vertex maps to a tetrahedron vertex, it
does work identically. And similarly for mapping a heptagon edge to a
tetrahedron edge.
I hadn't understood what you meant by a face being opposite a vertex
before, but now I get that (on the KQ surface itself, each vertex has one
opposite vertex and each face has two opposite faces). There is (of
course) no way to map a heptagon center to a tetrahedron face, since the
latter is not part of the surface, so the equivalence between this topology
perspective and the surface perspective breaks down.
Here's some more intuition as to why the equivalence breaks down in the
face-centered case. The KQ surface has a lot more symmetries than a
tetrahedron, but the symmetry group of the tetrahedron is a subgroup of the
symmetry group of the KQ. A symmetry that rotates 1/7th a turn about a
heptagon center is one of the KQ symmetries that is not a symmetry of the
tetrahedral subgroup, whereas the vertex-centered and edge-centered twists
are symmetries of both. Maybe this is also the reason why you can't have a
face-centered earthquake twist (on the surface), because the systoles are
arranged with tetrahedral symmetry. I bet I'm being clear as mud, but
hopefully this adds something.
Cheers,
Roice
--94eb2c034a0adaecae053aae1a61
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">te" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204=
);padding-left:1ex">
=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20
case yet, but using fr/%7Echeritat/AppletsDivers/Klein/" target=3D"_blank">Arnaud's
applet I just convinced myself there is no possible
earthquake face-twist, at least not based on systoles.=C2=A0
Click the "systolic pants decomp" option there and =
look
at, say, the white "pair of pants" in the center.=
=C2=A0 A twist
will move material within that pair of pants, but at the
end of the twist the new location of all the shuffled
material will need to cover the same original area.=C2=A0 If
you pan certain heptagon vertices or edges to the center
of the view, you can see that this works.=C2=A0 If you move a
heptagon center to the center of the view, it doesn't -
there's no way to make a 1/7th turn and get the pants to
return to covering the original area.
OK, well now I'm having an out-of-pants experience but it made me
realize that I didn't previously make myself clear. Once I clarify
myself, you may conclude that I indeed have gone off into the weeds
regarding catacombs. When talking about the "meta" puzzle, I =
was
referring to the topology of the surface itself as opposed to the
puzzle within it though maybe they're always identical. In the case
of KQ, the genus is 3 making the topology that of a ball-and-stick
model of a tetrahedron. When I talk about vertex twisting at the
meta level I'm talking about cuts through the arms of tp://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/pentacontihexahedron2.jpg" target=3D"_blank">th=
is
tetrahedron. So your current twists appear to cut three arms,
twist one of them in place by 180 degrees while swapping the other
two. What I called the pure "vertex" twist would sever three =
arms
that meet at a meta-vertex, rotate that whole unit 120 degrees and
reattach them all. The "edge" twist cuts 4 arms straight thro=
ugh the
center of the tetrahedron and rotates one half by 180 degrees. By
now you probably understand what I mean about "face" twists, =
which
in the case of KQ is identical to a pure vertex twist opposite a
given systolic triangle.
v>
also thinking of how the vertex and edge earthquake twists affected that th=
ickened "tetrahedron", just like you.=C2=A0 If you map the KQ sur=
face to that tetrahedron such that a heptagon vertex maps to a tetrahedron =
vertex, it does work identically.=C2=A0 And similarly for mapping a heptago=
n edge to a tetrahedron edge.
ood what you meant by a face being opposite a vertex before, but now I get =
that (on the KQ surface itself, each vertex has one opposite vertex and eac=
h face has two opposite faces).=C2=A0 There is (of course) no way to map a =
heptagon center to a tetrahedron face, since the latter is not part of the =
surface, so the equivalence between this topology perspective and the surfa=
ce perspective breaks down.
ntuition as to why the equivalence breaks down in the face-centered case. T=
he KQ surface has a lot more symmetries than a tetrahedron, but the symmetr=
y group of the tetrahedron is a subgroup of the symmetry group of the KQ.=
=C2=A0 A symmetry that rotates 1/7th a turn about a heptagon center is one =
of the KQ symmetries that is not a symmetry of the tetrahedral subgroup, wh=
ereas the vertex-centered and edge-centered twists are symmetries of both.=
=C2=A0 Maybe this is also the reason why you can't have a face-centered=
earthquake twist (on the surface), because the systoles are arranged with =
tetrahedral symmetry.=C2=A0 I bet I'm being clear as mud, but hopefully=
this adds something.
=A0
--94eb2c034a0adaecae053aae1a61--