Just watched Conan the Barbarian. It crys out for a re-make. I suggest it be done with minifigs.
'Legon the Barbarian' !!
All I need now is a James Earl Jones minifig, and lots of little suits of armour.
Lego as atoms...
The smallest possible lego is a legon; a one-stud block one thickness high; it comes in square and round. I shall consider colours to be trivial.
The legons can be stacked to form 2/3rd height blocks, which are very close to useless. A 3/3 block is homologous with a 1 stud full height block.
A 4/3 block is also un-natural.
There are several combinations of round and square legons; I presume the size of the resulting block is the average of the component shapes.
Either way, the legon combinations become either barrel or square one stud bricks.
Two stud bricks are followed by three stud, four stud, six stud, eight stud and ten stud.
The same rule applies to the 2 by x brick, where x=(1,2,3,4,6,8,10, 12, 16)
5 and 7 appear to be forbidden.
Also, certain shapes appear forbidden. While an L shaped 3 stud brick exists(fitting the space of a 4 stud) , there is no five stud or seven stud brick that would fit a six stud or a eight stud space respectively.
There is an L shaped 12 stud brick that would fit a 8x8 space.
Oddly, there is a several 1 by x bricks that are 5 units high (or 15 legons).
But the 2 by x bricks are 2, 3, and 4 units high! (6, 9, and 12 legons high).
Also, if 3 is such an important number (bricks are 3 legons high, there are three stud bricks in every category) is 3x3 or 9 forbidden?
An elementary table may follow.
The smallest possible lego is a legon; a one-stud block one thickness high; it comes in square and round. I shall consider colours to be trivial.
The legons can be stacked to form 2/3rd height blocks, which are very close to useless. A 3/3 block is homologous with a 1 stud full height block.
A 4/3 block is also un-natural.
There are several combinations of round and square legons; I presume the size of the resulting block is the average of the component shapes.
Either way, the legon combinations become either barrel or square one stud bricks.
Two stud bricks are followed by three stud, four stud, six stud, eight stud and ten stud.The same rule applies to the 2 by x brick, where x=(1,2,3,4,6,8,10, 12, 16)
5 and 7 appear to be forbidden.
Also, certain shapes appear forbidden. While an L shaped 3 stud brick exists(fitting the space of a 4 stud) , there is no five stud or seven stud brick that would fit a six stud or a eight stud space respectively.
There is an L shaped 12 stud brick that would fit a 8x8 space.
Oddly, there is a several 1 by x bricks that are 5 units high (or 15 legons).
But the 2 by x bricks are 2, 3, and 4 units high! (6, 9, and 12 legons high).
Also, if 3 is such an important number (bricks are 3 legons high, there are three stud bricks in every category) is 3x3 or 9 forbidden?
An elementary table may follow.
Strength and Weakness;
Lego's secret weakness... At first glance, it appears to provide swift, easy prototyping of anything imaginable. On second glance, a few caveats appear. Upon examination, the problem gets worse.
What Lego lacks is elegance. It makes up for it with accuracy and speed of assembly.
Versatility appears to be present, but the constraints are merely hidden.
I had my box of Technic spilled out on the table, and was assembling a steerable caster.
True to Lego's promise, I had one in my hand within minutes. But I didn't like it.
Inelegant. Not strong enough. Too many parts.
I redesigned.
A suggestion of elegance, of efficency, became overshadowed with a connection problem. I unraveled the problem, but like moving a wrinkle in a rug, it merely drifted farther up the device.
Legos need to stay oriented. You choose the plane of orientation ; traditionally its with the studs on top. But you don't consistantly change the plane as you move through the device.
There are adaptors, but they add a part and further complexity.
After a half hour, I had pushed the metaphorical wrinkles to the far edge of the device, and they stuck there.
And I was stuck.
Possible to do, but not with a simple part list.
Lego will not be bent. It offers bends, in certain fixed degrees.
...Bricks are indeed the correct name.
Lego's secret weakness... At first glance, it appears to provide swift, easy prototyping of anything imaginable. On second glance, a few caveats appear. Upon examination, the problem gets worse.
What Lego lacks is elegance. It makes up for it with accuracy and speed of assembly.
Versatility appears to be present, but the constraints are merely hidden.
I had my box of Technic spilled out on the table, and was assembling a steerable caster.
True to Lego's promise, I had one in my hand within minutes. But I didn't like it.
Inelegant. Not strong enough. Too many parts.
I redesigned.
A suggestion of elegance, of efficency, became overshadowed with a connection problem. I unraveled the problem, but like moving a wrinkle in a rug, it merely drifted farther up the device.
Legos need to stay oriented. You choose the plane of orientation ; traditionally its with the studs on top. But you don't consistantly change the plane as you move through the device.
There are adaptors, but they add a part and further complexity.
After a half hour, I had pushed the metaphorical wrinkles to the far edge of the device, and they stuck there.
And I was stuck.
Possible to do, but not with a simple part list.
Lego will not be bent. It offers bends, in certain fixed degrees.
...Bricks are indeed the correct name.
Fitting the ViviCam 3826 with a stop between the lens and the CCD dealt with the overexposure.
The stop's diameter is 1 cm. With the subjects lit by 60 watts of incandescent, the pictures seemed well lit. I haven't had a chance to use it in full sunlight yet, but I suspect I may need to go smaller yet - perhaps 0.25 cm or smaller. But seeing as most of my work is done indoors, the sensativity suits me fine.
The most critical part of this project has been the spacing between the manual lens and the CCD. Trial and error in lieu of learning any optical theory...and further refinement seems probable.
The stop's diameter is 1 cm. With the subjects lit by 60 watts of incandescent, the pictures seemed well lit. I haven't had a chance to use it in full sunlight yet, but I suspect I may need to go smaller yet - perhaps 0.25 cm or smaller. But seeing as most of my work is done indoors, the sensativity suits me fine.
The most critical part of this project has been the spacing between the manual lens and the CCD. Trial and error in lieu of learning any optical theory...and further refinement seems probable.
Another feature that most reconstructers of the Nautilus miss is the triangular cross-section at the bow. The Nautilus was equipped with a ram, which was capable of leaving a triangular hole two meters across. This width leads me to beleive that while the Nautilus's midships crosssection is circular, the ram is not, and the two forms blend into each other.
The hole punched in the Scotia's hull is described as two and a half meters below her waterline, but Nemo comments that he was submerged two meters below the surface when the collision occurred. This means the Nautilus's centerline was more than six meters deep. So like a U-Boat, the bow rises upwards.
Nemo never hesitates to use the Nautilus as a ram. This means that he would have removed every possible feature that would have jammed or hung up if a ram attack failed to drive the Nautilus completely through her enemy.
The other critical detail is that when on the surface, the Nautilus is frequently mistaken for the back of a great whale. This error of identity continues under a variety of sightings until Aronnax, Land, and Conseil actually climb aboard it!
This means that no windows or portholes are visible. All our adventurers can find is two rings, presumably the lifting points for the wheelhouse and the lighthouse. The railing telescopes down into the hull. The hatch is almost invisible.
The hole punched in the Scotia's hull is described as two and a half meters below her waterline, but Nemo comments that he was submerged two meters below the surface when the collision occurred. This means the Nautilus's centerline was more than six meters deep. So like a U-Boat, the bow rises upwards.
Nemo never hesitates to use the Nautilus as a ram. This means that he would have removed every possible feature that would have jammed or hung up if a ram attack failed to drive the Nautilus completely through her enemy.
The other critical detail is that when on the surface, the Nautilus is frequently mistaken for the back of a great whale. This error of identity continues under a variety of sightings until Aronnax, Land, and Conseil actually climb aboard it!
This means that no windows or portholes are visible. All our adventurers can find is two rings, presumably the lifting points for the wheelhouse and the lighthouse. The railing telescopes down into the hull. The hatch is almost invisible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
