| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TKiel
Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 292
Location: Kalamazoo, MI
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 11:50 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | | After giving it a bit of thought, I'm pretty sure a "Color Wing Wrap" is not logically possible. |
It seems to me the term 'color wrap' is applied when a simple coloring chain 'wraps' around on itself and shows two of the same polarity in the same group, which we know then must be the false polarity. This actually makes an assignment of a digit as opposed to an exclusion. What about a situation where each polarity from one chain shares a group with one polarity from a second?
| Code: |
*-----------------------------------------------------------*
| 4 8 27A | 127B 1279 1279 | 6 3 5 |
| 1 9 6 | 345 34 35 | 7 8 2 |
| 27a 5 3 | 6 278 278 | 4 9 1 |
|-------------------+-------------------+-------------------|
| 8 3 4 | 127b 127 6 | 12A 5 9 |
| 27A 17 9 | 8 5 4 | 3 12a 6 |
| 5 6 12 | 9 123 123 | 8 4 7 |
|-------------------+-------------------+-------------------|
| 6 147 8 | 45 1247 1257 | 9 12A 3 |
| 3 2 17 | 17 89 89 | 5 6 4 |
| 9 14 5 | 34 6 123A | 12a 7 8 |
*-----------------------------------------------------------*
|
We know that the A cells must be false as they see both ends of the B-b chain. How is this not one chain 'wrapping' around on the other? How can it matter how many chains are involved? It seems to be a matter of splitting some very fine hairs to limit the term to only simple coloring. Just because nobody ever used it in that context before doesn't mean that it can't or shouldn't apply.
(See here for the entire thread). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Asellus
Joined: 05 Jun 2007
Posts: 865
Location: Sonoma County, CA, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Tracy,
I concede that the example you have presented can be viewed as using a "wrap" type of reasoning. However, all of the eliminations can be justified using only the "Color Wing" logic. For instance, based on the AB bridge in R1, the <2> at R4C7 is eliminated since is "sees" both "a" and "b". Also, you could have colored the <2> at R6C3 as "a", resulting in elimination of the <2>s in R6C56. (This is just a Skyscraper, which is often a form of "Color Wing.") In either case, all of the "A" <2>s vanish as a consequence.
I thought you were claiming that there could be a multi-cluster "wrap" that would create eliminations that were different from any that would result by applying the Color Wing concept. I'm still not sure that such a creature exists.
But, I await a counter-example! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
