Scioly.org

Flavorflav wrote:If you are simultaneously scoring points for the pulley and the ramp, how is that not a single action contributing to two scoreable tasks? Even if they have the pulley drag the object up the ramp for 10cm before lifting it 5 additional cm, it would seem to me that the ramp is not causing the next action , it is simply continuing.

ETA: I could see scoring both IFF there were another task in between - i.e., if the object triggered another action at the top of the ramp and stopped the pulley, and then some other action started the pulley again. Otherwise, it would seem to be either double-counting or parallel. Your thoughts, gentlemen?

To me it is the same as every other action in the full device contributing to the final task. Looked at as a whole system, you technically shouldn't be able to distinguish between the pulling of the initial string and the mass lifting at the end, the only thing that really separates everything is time (sometimes only a little, sometimes a lot) and the occasional interlock (switches, etc).

Presumably the string going through the pulley will end in either some sort of loop or hook, as the mass being raised up the ramp must be removable. If I were judging this event somewhere (which I currently have no plans to do), I would consider the loop/hook the mass raised at least 5cm for task 4.e and the removable mass as being pulled up the ramp by said loop/hook for task 4.l.

It is absolutely not parallel, as the pulley could fail in several ways (the physical pulley breaks, the string hops off the track, the loop fails, the string breaks, etc) and the chain of events would cease. The issue is double-counting tasks/actions, which I do not believe would be the case here.

Flavorflav wrote:If you are simultaneously scoring points for the pulley and the ramp, how is that not a single action contributing to two scoreable tasks? Even if they have the pulley drag the object up the ramp for 10cm before lifting it 5 additional cm, it would seem to me that the ramp is not causing the next action , it is simply continuing.

ETA: I could see scoring both IFF there were another task in between - i.e., if the object triggered another action at the top of the ramp and stopped the pulley, and then some other action started the pulley again. Otherwise, it would seem to be either double-counting or parallel. Your thoughts, gentlemen?

To clarify my original response, I don't see this as an issue with 'parallel' tasks, and agree with my brother that as described these aren't parallel. What I do see a problem with though is nicely summed up by Flavorflav. I think any reasonable person would look at a mass being pulled up a ramp and say it's only 1 action for the entire duration of the pulling. Thus you can only have it contribute to 1 scoreable task. if you somehow break it into 2 distinct 'pulls' with something else happening in between, then you might be ok. Standard caveat this is not the place for official clarifications of course.....

To clarify mine, I was suggesting that it would be parallel if the mass activated the next task but did not turn off the pulley, so that the pulley continued to raise the mass while the next task was operating. Stopping the pulley would not stop the other task, so you have parallel paths. If you don't have another task initiated at the top of the ramp (and therefore before the pulley lift) then you haven't really fulfilled 4.l, because the mass going up the ramp did not cause the next action - the mass would be lifted by a pulley which was already turning.

See here.

I think it's valid.

Does the ramp have to be tilted? Can it be up 180 degrees because no matter how hard you try you can never get anything perfectly strait so would that count as tilted?

chalker wrote:

Flavorflav wrote:If you are simultaneously scoring points for the pulley and the ramp, how is that not a single action contributing to two scoreable tasks? Even if they have the pulley drag the object up the ramp for 10cm before lifting it 5 additional cm, it would seem to me that the ramp is not causing the next action , it is simply continuing.

ETA: I could see scoring both IFF there were another task in between - i.e., if the object triggered another action at the top of the ramp and stopped the pulley, and then some other action started the pulley again. Otherwise, it would seem to be either double-counting or parallel. Your thoughts, gentlemen?

To clarify my original response, I don't see this as an issue with 'parallel' tasks, and agree with my brother that as described these aren't parallel. What I do see a problem with though is nicely summed up by Flavorflav. I think any reasonable person would look at a mass being pulled up a ramp and say it's only 1 action for the entire duration of the pulling. Thus you can only have it contribute to 1 scoreable task. if you somehow break it into 2 distinct 'pulls' with something else happening in between, then you might be ok. Standard caveat this is not the place for official clarifications of course.....

so is this legal?

@first post. It's fine, as long as you can get the thing to stay in contact with the ramp.

@second. I did it and it's fine.

knittingfrenzy18 wrote:@first post. It's fine, as long as you can get the thing to stay in contact with the ramp.

@second. I did it and it's fine.

wat? i dnt understand. Im trying to say that if i have a pulley system with an IMA greater than one which is connected to the string which pulls the mass up the ramp will i get scored for both tasks?

rmp509 wrote:

knittingfrenzy18 wrote:@first post. It's fine, as long as you can get the thing to stay in contact with the ramp.

@second. I did it and it's fine.

wat? i dnt understand. Im trying to say that if i have a pulley system with an IMA greater than one which is connected to the string which pulls the mass up the ramp will i get scored for both tasks?

oh wait nm i get it now knittingfrenzy18 thnx haha