General Discussion : 55800


General / 55800	55799 \| 55801

Subject:	Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
Newsgroups:	lugnet.general
Date:	Thu, 1 Mar 2012 04:16:06 GMT
Viewed:	20521 times

In lugnet.general, Dave Schuler wrote:

I’ve been sort of pondering this, and I’ve concluded that the researcher’s conclusion makes more sense if we use as a sample 100 random elements chosen from the “classic” LEGO era vs 100 random elements from the newer Ninjago era. Whatever the merits of Bionicle masks, I submit that they lack the generic versatility of a 2x4 brick, so perhaps that’s what he’s driving at.

Also, I’m not especially perturbed by his use of “LEGOs” as a designator, since that’s how approximately 100% of non AFOLs refer to them. Coin of the realm, so to speak.

I think it’s the higher ratio of piece types to set size that leads him to conclude the sets are not as useful for free-form building as they once were. The argument he makes is that if you have a set of 100 unique pieces, it has less flexibility than a 100-piece set made up of all one piece type.

He has to ignore questions of how “pretty” a connection between two pieces might be in order to measure this, because that introduces a subjective element. For his analysis, he only considers whether pieces fit together, not whether they create a useful or attractive result.

This is why it is ridiculous for him to make a logical leap from this data to a claim about usefulness. His original research only made a suggestion about connections between pieces, not whether they were “useful” connections. You would not substitute a Bionicle mask for a wheel in a vehicle you wanted to roll smoothly, but you might stick it on an axle as an architectural feature in a storefront model. Either way, it connects securely and is consistent with the proportions of the system, which is all that matters in his initial analysis.

Message has 1 Reply:

		Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
(...) If the author is worried about maximum variation with minimal parts... go play with Silly-Putty. LEGO is not, at the heart, about combinatorics, it's about creations. Perhaps he should do more building and less math. Or, visit a convention (...) (13 years ago, 12-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
(...) I've been sort of pondering this, and I've concluded that the researcher's conclusion makes more sense if we use as a sample 100 random elements chosen from the "classic" LEGO era vs 100 random elements from the newer Ninjago era. Whatever the (...) (13 years ago, 29-Feb-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)

34 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search