Its an application of basic geometry. If the struts of the triangle are made of materials that do not stretch, compress, or flex (outside of acceptable parameters for the construction in question), then the triangle is *stable*--even if the joints are frictionless pivots. This is essentially because the struts hold their opposing joints at fixed angles--something no other 2d arrangement does.
So, I guess you could say that the stability of a triangle is an emergent property of the geometry. Then again, I"m not a wise man. ~~James On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Nicholas Thompson<[email protected]> wrote: > On a recent friday, as part of my worrying about emergence, I was trying to > find out what sort of language wise people use when they explain the greater > resistance of triangles to compression. it seemed to me that that example > provided all the complexity we needed for a thorough-going discussion of > emergence. So if I could learn how wise people talked about it, perhaps I > could learn how to talk about emergence in general. > > In what field, I wonder, do they discuss the greater strength of some > configurations of members vis -a vis others. SOMEBODY offered me the answer > to that question, but I have forgotten what the answer was. Some sort of > mechanics .... elementary? Can anybody remember or provide the information > again? Why are triangles strong? > > > Nick ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
