One more puzzle?

[Willeke]

This is a puzzle of a different kind.
It is also a test of the power of the word. So even if there are already answers given, please try to solve the puzzle and tell me what knot it is, or where you got stuck in the instructions.

It is a well known knot, but maybe a different version than you are used to tie or a different way of tying.
To tie it, take a piece of string, at least 50 cm (20") about 5 mm (1/3") diameter, longer when thicker.
These instructions can be used for either left and right hand.

Hold one hand in front of you, inside facing you, thumb sticking up, index finger stretched, the other three fingers closed. (We used to hold our hands like this playing we were shooting a pistol.)

1- Take your string, and place it over your hand so that 2/5 is on the front, grab that in the closed fingers, and 3/5 is hanging down at the back of your hand, touching your knuckles.

2- Grab hold of your string, at the back of your hand, just below the outstreched index finger, and pull it under that finger forwards, over the second finger, towards your wrist.
Your string now makes a loop around your index finger.

3- Now move the string up on the wrist side of the thumb and on around it till the end is on the inside of your hand again, pointing downwards.
You now have a loop around your index finger and one around your thumb.

4- Bend your thumb till the tip is on the loop around the index finger. Move the loop round the thumb down till it rests on the index finger round the tip of the thumb.
One end of your string is in the closed fingers, the other end rests on the outside of these same fingers.

5- Take hold on both ends of the string with your free hand and open the fingers with which you hold the string. Now twist both strings so that the one you formerly held stays closesth to your hand and moves towards your index finger to lay along it, the other string moves on the outside and now rests in the palm of your hand, hold it with your fingers.
On your index finger there are three 'strings', the middle one is being hold by your thumb, underneat is one. One end is hold by your fingers, (till now the working end,) and one end is sticking out away from you, next to your index finger. (This will be the working end in the next move.)

6- Holding the end of your string, formerly holded by your closed fingers, and bring the tip (bitter end) to the top of your index finger, on the inside of your hand. Now go over the first string, under the one you hold under your thumb and over the last one again, and pull lightly till the end is through, but not tight.
When you take away your thumb there is now a 'figure of eight' like structure on your finger, and one loop underneat. If the figure is sloppy you might pull a little more on either string, but do not close the knot.

(Alternative instructions for part 6 above.
6b- Take hold of the end of your string, the one that used to be hold by your fingers, and move your hand to the tip of your stretched index finger.
Counting from the tip of your finger you will find a string which used to be the loop around your thumb, a string held under your thumb, (used to be and still is the loop around your index finger,) and as last the second string of what used to be the loop around your thumb. You have now arrived where your fingers meet.
So starting from the tip of your fingers, go over the first string, under the string under your thumb, (you can remove your thumb now or go besides it,)  and over the last string.
Pull lightly on your string till all the length is through.
When you take away your thumb there is now a 'figure of eight' like structure on your finger, and one loop underneat. If the figure is sloppy you might pull a little more on either string, but do not close the knot. )

7- One end is hold by your fingers, let go and move the end of this string round to the tips of your now stretched fingers, away from you, round the string around your index finger, and next underneat the knot on your finger till the very center of that knot, a square opening. Come up through that opening.
Take the string that is sticking out behind your thumb and move it forward, round the loop around your finger, underneat to the center of the knot and up through the same hole as the other.
So both strings go round one side of the loop round your index finger and up through the knot.

8- Now pull lightly on both ends sticking out of the knot (individually and together) and on the loop round your finger till the knots shapes itself.
Most likely there will be one or two loops on the side of the knot, move the slack on till it comes out in either the loop or one of the ends.

(9- Post a message here which knot this is, under any of its names or numbers.)

Willeke

[squarerigger]

Hi Willeke,

I got one of the instructions wrong the first time, but then I got it, I think - the knife lanyard knot - what a lot of explanation you went through - well done!

Thanks for the puzzle,
Lindsey

[nautile]

Hi Willeke!

Don't mistake my words for criticism at any moment, there are none, absolutely none.

Thank you for this puzzle and the ingenuity of a new "recipe" but....

...I am terribly sorry to see such magnificent use of worded instructions
vanquished by the power of "graphics" communication.
...Unless the sole object of he exercise  was to see if you could give instructions with words only.

In a case as this one  it is no real contest between the power of representation versus
the power of depiction  as to speed and economy of data transferring : image wins too easily,
so to speak " without even trying".

The ratio :  ink used to data conveyed ( a good indication of the "compactness and efficiency ")
is a disaster with words instructions as opposed to an image .

User needs to understand the words, and often interpret  the meaning and intent
of the author :  - Babel effect guaranteed!- while image has 'direct' non-verbal access to the brain.

We are wired for " visual" communication as soon as three weeks after fecundation
but we must  waited (for the best of us 4 years, nowadays more like 8 to 9 ) after birth to have reading abilities.

It took me 30 to 40 times as much time to follow your words
as it would have to use a carefully devised drawing.
Without even going  into analyzing precision, clarity, fluidity, concision you words are beyond reproach.

It is no fault of yours it is just the human brain - not just mine -. ( BTW IF something is to be
done by IGKT per function this is a point to keep in mind : graphics communication has its
own rules and they must be obeyed to keep their advantage over words 'internationaly')

As a demonstration far removed form knots for the doubters :
- - just try to describe   this object  with words in such a manner
that a good draughstman could make an exact drawing and then do the same test by showing him this image.
See which is the winner : words or image.


Just another demonstration : just to convey same quantity of data to transform
into the same level of information translatable into knowledge this
this simple graphic representation  - in fact the best or one of the 2 best "graphic"
ever done give you as much as a WHOLE book.  The other is a magnificent epidemiology map.
http://www.phi.org/images/johnsnow2.gif  in  http://www.phi.org/ph101-casestudy.html, the man who
established than only a good brain and a good pair of shoes could make for outstanding research.


Cheers.

Nautile

PS : May be I misunderstood your purpose,may be knowing very well a drawing would be much more performant,
you chose to 'complicate' the puzzle a bit by going only with words so as to make it a bit more tricky to solve.
Waiting for your next. Kind regards.

[Willeke]

Nautile,
While I like using pictures, we must remember that not everybody can use them. (Blind people among them.) And on top of that there is the possebility that in a certain situation pictures can not be used.
The first time I had to use these instructions I was on the phone with a friend who is not a knot tyer but needed this knot that day. While there are phones with cameras now, I had not one then.

And I feel that we need to use both words and pictures to instruct people, they do enhance each other.

This was a training in using the written word and at the same time a show how clumsy just written words are.

As an other sample, the reefknot (square knot) is commonly refered to by left over right, right over left. One of my scouts did not understand that that stood for left over right and tuck, right over left and tuck.
(He was also not able to 'read' the picture instructions.)

But I would like to see one of the other knottyers on this forum to write one knots in just words. And so it can be tied by everyone who reads English.

Willeke

[Willeke]

Second puzzle.
This time I just used the words of instructions with words and pictures.

Version 1
Start with a loop, crossing over your string.

Bend the end backwards.

Through the loop and out to the side, over the string.
And pull tight.

Version 2, the mirror image.
Through the loop and out to the side, over the string.
And pull tight.

Bend the end over, forwards.

Through the loop and out to the side, under the string.
And pull tight.

Willeke

[nautile]

Problem with words is that all[/]B] the following is compulsory
Unfortunately they are  not really met in each and every instance of verbal instruction
( just think about the last user manual coming form a translation you used : did not you resort to the pictures to clarify ?
Is it just  for the pleasure of making graphics that so many research and investment is put in visual/graphics communication
in the most serious applications -  If words were enough why do you think a botanist cannot very well identify your vegetable with your verbal
description but will readily when you show him a photography or a well done drawing ?
Words for every day use we all know how to use but words for 'formal technical instruction" need a bit - understatement!-
of training and using of convention upon which sender and receiver are well agreed.

- precision,
- clarity,
- fluidity,
- concision

applied to a glossary  :
- well defined
-  not culture-linked
- exhaustive :  no forgotten/missing word -
- no "duplicate notion/ synonym" : each word is exclusive of any of the other ones

.....       are but some of the characteristics that must be met .
Plus :
the instruction must given with a perfectly defined frame of reference ans to 'orientation' not dependent on the author 'inspiration for the moment'
As example :

- all instructions are given for a knot lying flat on an horizontal surface.
- on a sagital direction the nearest side is South, the furthest is North
- on a transversal direction the East and West are deduced ( careful there because there is an  inversion in astronomical map orientation )
- What goes well below the horizon of the plane of reference is Low and what goes well  above the plane of reference is High.

please
no backward/ forward which is perfect for the way you throw your knot but will translate in mine as up and down for example.
no toward the extremity of fingers without stating that your reference is the right or the left hand.
no towards the thumb could me towards while passing on the palmar side of the hand of on the other side
no 'on the side'

no instruction that are culture-linked


In the new puzzle  you give I am sorry to say that the instructions for the "mirror" knot leave my brain in a quandary.
For my poor neuronal pathways there is no "mirroring" in the structure of your sentences as should be the case, I think,  for a "mirrored" knot.

I am sure that a drawing  would have been clearer and faster.

"a loop, crossing over your string."  Over, OK but "Z" or "S" ?

"Version 2, the mirror image.  
Through the loop and out to the side, over the string.
And pull tight. "       through the loop ? ok but there is 2 faces to your loop, which is the entering one and which is the exit one, which side ?


Every one seem to forget that blind people READ every hour of every day : there are special printing techniques for them  -
there are even "special printers" for the blind for  computer, even special ink that give a relief.
A  linear drawing would even be  easier than "letters" or "digits" to decipher.
Many people cannot read. Many people have problem - your child seems to have that - of 'lateralization" : orienting in a 3D space, and words
do nor alleviate this problem while a diagram they "just follow" is  usable for them.

Verbal ( oral-written)  instruction for a blind person if not obeying at least all - an some more - of the characteristics I underlined would be no clearer than
for a person with unaltered vision.

Do not misunderstand me : I do know words and I do use them, but when I was still in private practice for foreigners not understanding my "words" prescriptions
I would draw a sun rising - morning', a sun high above the line of horizon -mid day, a setting sun early evening and even a star and the crescent of a moon for bed time
plus some tablets or syringe.
A plate to say " meal" and a tablet before ( careful , with an Arab patient : they read from left to right so be courteous and use the same )
or after the plate or in the plate to mean before-during-after. A hand with "stick finger" is perfect to give the umber of tablet)
You see so they understood and obeyed a prescription that did not have words for them but only for French laws and the chemist!
I do believe in words but I know how fast and well "drawings" work.

Thank you for giving the occasion to state some point about depiction versus description.
Remember the oldest " writing" is "drawing" "image", "picture".
In one word : representation. Why ? easy : this is the easiest way for our brain.

Cheers.

[DerekSmith]

Charles,

I must argue with your comments on data efficiency for text vs graphics.

Willeke's whole description of how to tie the knot took a total of 3,747 bytes of data to transmit.

To transmit one highly compressed picture would take at least 15,000 bytes and that would be for one single image.  In order to transmit the whole sequence of how to tie the knot in this manner would take one image covering every action.  Possibly you could transmit enough graphical information in say 5 pictures or ca 75,000bytes.

Clearly on a data quantity basis, text is of far greater efficiency.

However, given a series of pictures I could probably have tied this knot.  Given these words alone, I failed.  So it could rightly be argued that although the text route was much more data efficient, because it failed to transmit to me the desired method, it was in fact totally inneficient.

From another perspective.  Even if I had been able to follow the instructions and tied the knot correctly, If I had never seen a picture of the knot before, I could not have named it, and if the only thing I had ever seen was the text instruction of how to tie it, then I would never be able to compare the final knot with its name from purely a description of one of the ways to tie the knot.

For accuracy and clarity, I do not believe that we should attempt to restrict these sort of directions to one form or another.  We must make use of the value of both and take every oportunity to ensure that we have made not just efficient, but also effective communication.

[squarerigger]

Hi Willeke,

Good to see your submission, and I think I get the idea of what you are conveying.  Nautile's point about the human eye seeing the image is a very good point.  The image is a truly universal language, using pictures, raised tracings or perhaps pictographs but not always.  As for the size of the data bytes conveyed, the human brain can easily assimilate the size and detail of a picture; what you are describing, Derek, with the number of bytes,  appears to be a one-sided view, that of the computer, and therefore your comments about efficiency of time in sending and/or receiving are perfectly correct.  If Willeke had sent you a postcard of the knot in black-on-white in the mail, is that not a comprehensible method, albeit a little slow, just as you had pointed out?  That makes it inefficient if time is the measure, but how is it for the audience of a visual individual if clarity is the measure?  For a non-visual or non-verbal individual, a raised image would be of great benefit or perhaps a sound description, using sounds that change tone when off the line.  You are also absolutely right when you say that a combination is going to prove very effective, albeit you do need to know your audience as to whether or not they understand the oral language, have vision or have hearing or touch.

Do tell us, Willeke, did you have a particular task in mind when asking the questions?

Lindsey

[Willeke]

My main reason to put the puzzles here is to amuse people.
A secondary reason is to test my ability to describe and yours to read.
I would therefor like to hear where people did loose the way.
I could have used less words, leaving out the visual check in each step, but it would be more of a puzzle.

The second puzzle was not written to be text standing alone and with the pictures, in the context of my website, words like forward and backward are easily understood because of being part of a descibtion to go with pictures. More correct forms like down or north will be confusing.

Willeke

[nautile]

Hi Willeke

Not only you provide amusementbut you also provide food for thought.
So we get " the butter and the money for the butter", winning both ways.
IMO this kind of discussion can help for the "new Igkt project" ;-)

Hi Squarerigger

You read me correctly :
I was speaking of 'image' acquisition by the human brain
and not of the computer ways.
There is nothing 'graphics' or 'text' for computers,
only for the language human devised for'contacting' the basic binary language.

Human brain cannot ( must not ) be likened to a computer.

In fact the "bytes" have been 'calculated' by
physiologists and psychologist and are hugely in favor of image.

Speed and quantity transfered are better for an
image 'read' as a whole than for a text
which of necessity is accessed words by words, no
gestalt perception with text. ( Advantage of
Nature (vision ) over Nurture ( verbal ).
This explain why control panels in aircraft say,
are more and more massively "graphics" than text.

Even with the best disposition : 50 characters per
line  and the best chosen font ( or speech)verbal cannot beat the
speed of acquisition of an image by the human brain

Appreciation of spatial relationship if much better
an image than with words.

As for quality then there are "optical" mistakes that
happen for both text and image - not the same sort.

I was careful to write 'ink'.
I had in mind more brain/ paper that brain/computer
but I stand by my words for the computer too :
There are too many physiological and psychological
verified facts  that lead in that direction :-0)

A good web site or paper publication must always be reader's oriented
not only in style but even to the point of choosing colours or fonts
that will not hinder readers with vision defect.

As for the text it is 'the very basic move' to write always in a "reader's oriented" manner.
One write for readers not for oneself.
So...to get published and to get read + easily retained one must obey/learn some rules.



But DerekSmith has a point ( ancient ;-)):
the first computers were not colours and when too much colours  are used it make
for heavy computer acquisition of files.The first 'coloured-PC'
had processors that were not 'up to it'.
Hence a certain 'bias' for some people.
Plus there is a more ' intellectual' or 'academic' aspect to verbal versus ' image'
and much more social pressure and incentive towards words mastery.
Still we are born to images and trained to words.


E.g : but anyway in diagrams ( graphics communication versus graphics aesthetics)A
one is well advised not to get a fireworks display of colours.

One do not add a colour if it does not add
to the data-content and give a  better noise/signal ratio.

Why do people thinks that ABOK of Cyrus Day books are so "readers friendly" ?
IMO simple : images.

If someone wants to see how a person can intelligently get
a very adequately functional mix of words and pictures just look at Lindsey Philpott books.
Not wanting to do that without his express permission I do not put here a picture of one of the pages.



Hi DerekSmith

I am not really sure you made me change a mind. It has been set after personal experiences
and reading quite a lot( communication people, graphists but more so scientists) plus my
colleagues in the military : huge use of 'visual' )about text image and the advantage of one over the other.

I have yet to see one study saying that a text is more efficient 'intrinsically' than an image.
Why do you think most people prefer a diagrammatic map of the way to follow than verbal instruction?

Have you look at the picture of the Grande Armée Russia campain I put in my previous post ?:
it summarize several chapters of a written book.

The data on the epidemic exposed in one 'map'
will need several pages to be related in full.
Moreover the ' conclusion' is just more 'obvious' with such a representation.

A well thought text can be worth many bad image.
A well thought about/conceived image following the rules
of graphics communication of data can be worth many well written words.

Just a test ( diagrams are 'ugly' and could be made much more performant ) I propose:
with this diagram nobody complained of being unable to do the knot with ease.
it is ABOK#1391.
Picture is 800 x 582 not overly small and 7/10 in compression factor.

I ask you :

-  to write verbal instruction for a non-reading person or a non English-speaking person
that you will send to that person and further clarify on the phone afterwards
( that is silly problem in fact : reduction ad absurdum)

-  to give verbal instruction over the phone so the person do not commit even one mistake in laying it.

We will see how you both you and that person will fare.
In fact it is not fair of me : picture has already won.

so the conclusion is :
you are right in your own set of mind  and sure of it,
I am right in my own set of mind and sure of it
and we both stay with our personal conviction.


See the first knot Willeke describe here in diagram.
:
Who says that I must use several drawings ?


I think this (ugly/unrefined ) representation is faster than verbal in conveying'how to do it'.


I do not want to go in a  dispute or be over-boring so will let this matter rest.

Cheers

Nautile


PS:

ABOK#1391 :  I can get it made by someone with whom I do not have a word in common.

I can convey to you with one image what I could not even begin to write about( even using my own language )
image = direct tap into the brain.( that is what make them 'dangerous')

In the middle age ( see St Marc of Venice in Italy ) the "religious teaching"  
( the sole available to "the plebe" was by images and certainly not by 'print'

[DerekSmith]

Charles,

We are not of different minds, we in fact share the same opinion.  I agree totally that an image conveys information far more effectively and economically than words spoken or written.

My comments on bytes transfered stemmed from my misunderstanding of your comment -

the power of representation versus
the power of depiction  as to speed and economy of data transferring

I did not understand that you were refering to data transfered into the mind.  I wrongly took your comment to mean the electronic transmission via the internet - my mistake.

My only other exception to your comments related to the fact that an image captures a configuration in fixed time, whereas a proceedure requires the passage of time in order to depict the sequence of events unfolding.

I believe that Willeke's point was not only to finish up with a given knot, but also to transmit a very specific method of creating it.  Showing the finished knot (even in exploded format) does not transfer the additional information of the steps Willeke wanted me to take in order to create it.  To do that you either need a video or a series of stills showing the intermediate steps.  As I added, I feel the optimum is a combination of both image for efficient perception and text/words to convey the proceedure.

Our minds are in agreement - pictures are best.

Regards
Derek

[DerekSmith]

Willeke,

You asked where the instructions broke down.

For me, I followed up to step 6 then failed.

6- Holding the end of your string, formerly holded by your closed fingers, and bring the tip (bitter end) to the top of your index finger, on the inside of your hand. Now go over the first string, under the one you hold under your thumb and over the last one again, and pull lightly till the end is through, but not tight.  
When you take away your thumb there is now a 'figure of eight' like structure on your finger, and one loop underneat. If the figure is sloppy you might pull a little more on either string, but do not close the knot.

These questions were triggered, and of course written instruction cannot answer me.

Where is the 'top' of my index finger?
Which was the 'first string'?
How do I go 'under the string held under my thumb'?
How do I go 'over the last one again' when I havn't been over it yet and which is the last one?
Pull lightly until the end is through what?

So at that point I failed to go further.  I do not know if any of the other steps would have stopped me again because I never got past 6.

[nautile]

Hi DerekSmith

That is a VERY good point that one about the additional data of conveying of " a new method".

You see Willeke your puzzle was very amusing indeed,
since 'thinking about something and exchanging point of view ,
going " cross pollinating"  is amusing too, or so I think.
( with "cross-pollination"  I unashamedly steal a notion that I find
very useful and found on a climber's thread about 'anchors'-
Thanks go to that person whose name I forgot  )

[Willeke]

Thanks Derek,
In part 6 I used too many words that are often used in knot describtions and some poorly translated Dutch words.
So I have rewritten the part.
I hope this way it is easier to understand.

You are right about the special way, it is the traditional way for Chinese tailors to make this knot, and girls might make strings of these knots to have them ready for the next dress they need to make.

6b- Take hold of the end of your string, the one that used to be hold by your fingers, and move your hand to the tip of your stretched index finger.
Counting from the tip of your finger you will find a string which used to be the loop around your thumb, a string held under your thumb, (used to be and still is the loop around your index finger,) and as last the second string of what used to be the loop around your thumb. You have now arrived where your fingers meet.
So starting from the tip of your fingers, go over the first string, under the string under your thumb, (you can remove your thumb now or go besides it,)  and over the last string.
Pull lightly on your string till all the length is through.
When you take away your thumb there is now a 'figure of eight' like structure on your finger, and one loop underneat. If the figure is sloppy you might pull a little more on either string, but do not close the knot.

I will also add the new part to the first post of this thread.

Willeke

[nautile]

Hi

Go

http://www.stellaceleste.com/htm/knots/buttonknotwith2cords.htm

Cheers