Author Topic: Trident Loop  (Read 6409 times)

Nadiral

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
Trident Loop
« on: March 21, 2008, 02:34:32 AM »
I recently heard about the trident loop, googled it but only found two different references, one from the Wikipedia and the other one from here:

http://library.wustl.edu/~manynote/trident.gif

The thing is...,  both of them are different!  Although they both are neat and elegant, I don?t know which of them is the "true trident loop", or to which of them the tests mentioned in the Wikipedia article apply.

Thanks...

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
Re: Trident Loop
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2008, 05:52:50 PM »
I recently heard about the trident loop, googled it but only found two different references,
one from the Wikipedia and the other one from here:
http://library.wustl.edu/~manynote/trident.gif

The thing is...,  both of them are different!  Although they both are neat and elegant, I don't know which of them
is the "true trident loop", or to which of them the tests mentioned in the Wikipedia article apply.
Thanks...
Dave Fred has done a good job of bringing rigor re knots to Wikipedia; the presentation
there, taken from one of Budworth's many books, is accurate.  The image in your cited
other source differs in the topmost two crossings--one by the '3' and the one left of it at
an arrow point, which both should be reversed re Over/Under of parts (yielding an Overhand
of the same handedness as that formed in the SPart--which isn't immediately obvious in
the image, but note where the eye bight is drawn from:  that makes the Overhand).

Apparently, Robert Wolfe communicated this loopknot idea to Budworth but it never (?)
made the pages of Knotting Matters--at least, I've not found it in a quick search of
issues immediately preceding GB's particular book ('97).  However, at km58:28-9 (Winter
1998), Wolfe does present a quite similarly formed loopknot which he (or the editer)
calls "Pyramid Loop?".

It's worth remarking that the so-called "Trident" LK follows the rule of association of bend
& LK that is imputed for the Butterfly siblings:  i.e., the LK is formed by joining BOTH ENDS
of the bend.  Compare this with the imputed kinship of Bowline & Sheetbend, as well as
Rosendahl's Zeppelin Bend with a LK promoted as its sibling--where the SPart's end forms
the eye and re-enters the knot qua opposing SPart of the bend.  Only just yesterday it
occurred to me to question both of these sorts of correspondences, and think that e.g.
Ashley's #1016 Single Bwl on a Bight is the match to the "Left-Handed" Sheet Bend
--where BOTH legs of the eye assume the posture of an opposing SPart of the bend.
(And so I've now a few fiddled corresondents for Rosendahl's Bend, and the variation
for the (right-handed) Bwl, to sketch.  In this line of thinking, one might find that the
Overhand & Fig.8 LKs naturally have this sort of relation of parts, though a full imple-
mentation of the concept would put in another & encombering course of parts.)
Frankly, I rather like the LK for #1452 that reeves the end back into the SPart's
Overhand as though it is the opposing SPart of the bend.

--dl*
====
« Last Edit: March 21, 2008, 10:04:44 PM by Dan_Lehman »

Nadiral

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
Well, Dan, then...
« Reply #2 on: March 22, 2008, 01:30:56 AM »
This is a picture from the one that is not the trident loop:



You can see that viewing it's rear the difference is quite notorius; both the front and back of the trident are similar.

There's a drawback, however, if you pull the working end (the left one in the first shot) together with the left part of the loop, you'll get an inch or so of slack.

Bye the way, I recently discovered your Lehman8, I've used it and its OK...

Thanks.