Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #05490
To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: Richard Piotter richfile@rconnect.com
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 21:13:50 -0500
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: Another contest entry!
rotary symetry I mean.
Tom Edwards wrote:
>
> >From: Richard Piotter
> >I think it follows the definition of "symet" perfectly. It's a 3 way
> >symmetrical robot that does not have any defined forward...
> >Exactly what a symet really is!
>
> Richard --
>
> I'll agree only that there is an extremely limited degree of bilateral
> symmetry when you "cut" the robot along any of the three motor axes.
> However, when you "cut" the robot along any of the infinitude of other
> diameters, the result is quite asymmetric.
>
> Sorry to disagree so strongly, but it -is- stretching the definition of a
> symet.
>
> TomCat
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
--
Richard Piotter
richfile@rconnect.com
The Richfiles Robotics & TI web page:
http://richfiles.calc.org
For the BEAM Robotics list:
BEAM Robotics Tek FAQ
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/bushbo/beam/FAQ.html
5491 Fri, 30 Jul 1999 22:17:51 EDT [alt-beam] Re: Another contest entry! alt-beam@egroups.com BMWerness@aol.com TomCat,
If you cut a standard symet that is balanced on 3 capacitors has the same
problem that you seem to think makes the LEM not a real symet. I think that
the LEM is a symet, and a cool on at that. I also feel stongly about this.
~Brent
5492 Fri, 30 Jul 1999 21:17:19 -0500 [alt-beam] Re: Another contest entry! beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Richard Piotter Oh yeah, besides, is the average 3 capacitor/balance symet symetrical in
the way you say either. Symets are symetrical around the center, not
like a "mirror" type symetrical.
Either way, what you say also says most one motor symets are not symetrical.
Rotary Symetry
Tom Edwards wrote:
>
> >From: Richard Piotter
> >I think it follows the definition of "symet" perfectly. It's a 3 way
> >symmetrical robot that does not have any defined forward...
> >Exactly what a symet really is!
>
> Richard --
>
> I'll agree only that there is an extremely limited degree of bilateral
> symmetry when you "cut" the robot along any of the three motor axes.
> However, when you "cut" the robot along any of the infinitude of other
> diameters, the result is quite asymmetric.
>
> Sorry to disagree so strongly, but it -is- stretching the definition of a
> symet.
>
> TomCat
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
--
Richard Piotter
richfile@rconnect.com
The Richfiles Robotics & TI web page:
http://richfiles.calc.org
For the BEAM Robotics list:
BEAM Robotics Tek FAQ
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/bushbo/beam/FAQ.html
5493 Fri, 30 Jul 1999 23:36:53 -0400 [alt-beam] Re: Another contest entry! beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Bob Shannon Tom Edwards wrote:
> >From: Richard Piotter
> >I think it follows the definition of "symet" perfectly. It's a 3 way
> >symmetrical robot that does not have any defined forward...
> >Exactly what a symet really is!
>
> Richard --
>
> I'll agree only that there is an extremely limited degree of bilateral
> symmetry when you "cut" the robot along any of the three motor axes.
> However, when you "cut" the robot along any of the infinitude of other
> diameters, the result is quite asymmetric.
>
> Sorry to disagree so strongly, but it -is- stretching the definition of a
> symet.
>
> TomCat
Sorry Tomcat, but what you say is true for every trilateral BEAM symet,
including
those made by Tilden himself.
If you want a 'true' (3D) Symet, build a 4 motor tetrahedral LEM!
Home