Author Topic: New Knots discovery timeline.  (Read 5873 times)

ParlainthTownie

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
New Knots discovery timeline.
« on: April 29, 2020, 09:48:42 PM »
With COVID around I have had more time.  I have been practicing my knots. 
I have an old book from the Boy Scouts.  "knots and how to tie them" by evidently the Boy Scouts.
It was published in 2005 and I have a 2009 reprint.  On page 11 it says that the Hunter's Bend is one of only 3 knots discovered during the last century. 

What are the other 2?

I have been doing a lot of searching and cannot find a timeline or a place that has this knowledge.
I have learned about Hunter's/Rigger's bend and that history. 
I think the Gleipnir was invented after this book came out or was since edited.  Gleipnir was invented in 2009?

Are there 2 others?  Are there more?  I have heard of Gleipnir variations.  What counts as a new knot versus a variation?

Is there a central posted source or book for a Knot Discovery Timeline?

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1926
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2020, 03:57:07 AM »
With COVID around I have had more time.  I have been practicing my knots. 
I have an old book from the Boy Scouts.  "knots and how to tie them" by evidently the Boy Scouts.
It was published in 2005 and I have a 2009 reprint.  On page 11 it says that the Hunter's Bend is one of only 3 knots discovered during the last century. 

What are the other 2?

I have been doing a lot of searching and cannot find a timeline or a place that has this knowledge.
I have learned about Hunter's/Rigger's bend and that history. 
I think the Gleipnir was invented after this book came out or was since edited.  Gleipnir was invented in 2009?

Are there 2 others?  Are there more?  I have heard of Gleipnir variations.  What counts as a new knot versus a variation?

Is there a central posted source or book for a Knot Discovery Timeline?

There are huge numbers of new knots that often don't get much if any circulation, but then again, many of them aren't terribly remarkable or should be forgotten.  There are also many supposedly "new" knots that aren't really new.  Without complete knowledge of everything, this problem of uncertainty is inevitable.

On variants: https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1246.msg8511#msg8511

If you'd like to try your hand at finding new knots, there are some methods that make it less daunting:

https://notableknotindex.webs.com/knotdiscovery.html
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".

Notable Knot Index

ParlainthTownie

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2020, 04:51:28 AM »
Thank you for the links.  Very interesting.

So the author is talking in error.  I thought that the Zeppelin or Blimp knot obviously gives the clues in its name that it is recent.  Saw a reference to an Eastern Zeppelin Knot.  That is where my confusion about variation versus new Knot started. 

I hate it when a write says a thing is one of 3 (or another specific number) important things and then moves on without then at least in passing mentioning the other things.  It is very disorienting and always leaves me wondering about the other things in relation to what I am reading about.

It seemed to me, based on  all the publicity over the Hunter's Bend, that the other knots would be well known. 

This society has the final or most authoritative say over what is considered a new knot?  Why don't they have a published list? 

« Last Edit: May 02, 2020, 10:58:22 PM by ParlainthTownie »

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1926
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2020, 09:59:07 PM »
This society has the final or most authoritative say over what is considered a new knot?  Why don't they have a published list?
The IGKT is a hobby group.  I don't know that they present themselves as a some sort of final authority on knots or would even wish to do so... especially if their pronouncement on some matter of discovery turns out to be wrong.  I think the best anyone can do is state what they believe to be the date of discovery for a knot based on the evidence available at the time.

Even defining discovery requires some deliberation.  If at some time in the past, some computer programmer successfully automated the production of the simplest 500 million knots in an image database, few knot tyers would consider this as true discovery.  Sifting the wheat from the chaff by testing and determining properties is something most knot tyers would consider to be essential.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2020, 10:04:52 PM by roo »
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".

Notable Knot Index

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4278
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2020, 01:40:11 AM »
So the author is talking in error.
There's WAY too much of that, in knots books.
(And not at all balanced by really good info.)

Quote
I thought that the Zeppelin or Blimp knot obviously gives the clues in its name that it is recent.  Saw a reference to an EasterN Zeppelin Knot.  That is where my confusion about variation versus new Knot started.
Note the purple "n" --that should be the name you saw.

The name and supposed history of the Z. has been put
into serious doubt; Roo & I (et al.) would luv to dig out the
truth on it.  (That 1976 article allegedly reporting one
former USNavy man's favor of this supposed used-on-zep.s
knot was subsequently cast in doubt by one of the then
authors claiming that the supposed commander who
insisted upon it had written to say he didn't know of
it!!)

In any case, NOT in doubt is the discovery of it by
the late Bob THRUN, a caver & physicist, who published
it in a small, local to east-coast/mid-atlantic Washington
D.C. caving newsletter, in 1966 --a decade prior to the
other article, though well later than rumored zep. use.
(Odd that the USNavy has not had any documentation
about it, no --if it had indeed been in use!?  The Speir
knot
DOES show up in some military literature,
along with a like-named magazine article of about
the same period (though pointing back to the Korean
War).)

I invented --"discovered on my own"-- SmitHunter's bend
in 1977, and since then have *invented* hundreds of
*new* knots (some even worthwhile  :D ), but mostly
they remain unknown at large.  In this forum, one
can find many more (and sometimes better organized).

Publicity is a fickle thing, often by some particular
effort or chance (coupled with ignorance or vanity),
and not indicative of merit.
 
Quote
It seemed to me, based on  all the publicity over the Hunter's Bend,
that the other knots would be well known.

Heck, one could likely pull many knots right out
of Ashley's Book of Knots and present them as
new and many people wouldn't know otherwise.
Regardless of that, one can question the value
of *new* based on how many UN-new knots there
are that get no attention.

But, back to "new" :: nylon and other new rope
materials were born ca. 1930ff, and so the angling
community and some others have had to revamp
their knotting inventory to handle the new stuff
--and esp. for angling knots, I think one can find
MANY (most?) of the current repertoire has arisen
only after these materials came into use.

Quote
This society has the final or most authoritative say
over what is considered a new knot?
Why don't they have a published list?
1) As Roo noted, the IGKT is not all so authoritative.
(In a Letter to Knotting Matters, I recently chided the
claims given yet again in a recent KM article by "one
of us" about how many knots are in our supposed "bible"
(the aforementioned book), STILL --3/4 century later--
when by now there should be a much better-informed
count.  (The ridiculous promulgated count of "over/nearly
4,000" is based on the 3854 IMAGE #s, w/o regard that
many knots are featured in several such numbered
images, and many other images don't show knots,
and so on.)

For a while I ran a new-knots-claims assessment
group for the IGKT, but that became pretty much
a solo job, and the stuff that came in was, well,
seldom anything to celebrate.  Newness for its
own sake is lame.  After some years, that pretty
much petered out, and is better served by posts
coming here, thankfully.  <whew>

Practical knotting is a poorly explored field, I'm afraid.
In some of the applications, one can find good info,
but then less awareness of the greater knots world.
(Me, I'm still trying to figure out how/why re the
yet-published sheepshank (which I have in fact
used myself, rarely)!)

But perhaps things will change.
And I now have another Letter to KM (or article)
to write, about some other knotty confusion(s)
& explorations (which can indeed confuse!).


From behind the facemask,
--dl*
====

ParlainthTownie

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #5 on: May 02, 2020, 11:00:21 PM »
Thank you Dan for DESTROYING MY BUDDING HOPE IN EASTER ZEPPELINS!  lol.  Yes, of course Eastern Zeppelin. Thanks for this history as well. 

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1470
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2020, 12:48:57 AM »
Hello ParlainthTownie,

If you are interested in knots and history, please go to this link:
http://www.paci.com.au/knots.php

In particular, look at #5 and #6 in the table.

There is a huge volume of interesting content I have released into the general public internet space.
Feel free to browse and download :)

ParlainthTownie

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2020, 04:06:34 PM »
Wow, very cool.  Thank you very much.

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4278
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2020, 06:58:02 PM »
If you are interested in knots and history, please go to this link:
http://www.paci.com.au/knots.php

In particular, look at #5 and #6 in the table.
In the latter --SmitHunter's history--, you write
that "studieS" (plural) indicate a 4.0kN jamming threshold,
but don't specify which size rope --that CE standard covers
"A" & "B" ropes, and a broad size range for "A" --8.5-16mm(!!).

You claim that the knot "fails to perform" in this case,
but if I'm reading data/specs right, the particular
figure you cite (for how many ropes tested?) is well
ABOVE the safe working load given for such ropes,
which IMO gives some reason to regard the knot
as at least half-decent!

As for "towing", YMMV per cordage used on that, methinks.
I'll only surmise that ropes that don't so much compress
& flatten as kernmantle ones can
will stay more-easily-loosen-able to higher loads.
And, as you note, the better version of the knot
("crossed tails") better resists jamming, perhaps
*entirely* --meaning, to rupture-- in some rope.

Re this version, you write :
Quote
"The idea of crossing tails is derived from ... .
// No peer-reviewed theory has been advanced
to explain why... ."
Let me contribute, here.
Firstly, where something is "derived" from is jumping
to a conclusion betraying a presumed history which
we cannot know --and for particular knots fiddlers,
the *derivation* such as it is might've gone in the
opposite direction.  I'm only aware of Harry Asher's
published play with such knots, and he presents
this version in his 1986-pub'd A New System of Knotting
(V.1, Fig.19) but dismisses it (!)as "of no great importance,
but rather like a Rigger." [<-Phil Smith's name]
Bah on Harry for not recognizing it as a improvement
on the Rigger.
Which I DID, in coming around to it (so, fitting to your
flow of derivation) as my #19791203s09:15 knot.

And re Why...,
it's because the tails when crossed will push out
the surrounding collars sufficiently to impede their
getting to a position to severely bind against
the SParts.  (And the cross also puts in some
bit of deflection in the SParts, which might boost
strength --my lone test of this had comparative
values for the two versions of 62% & 65%,
possibly just *noise* difference, but at least
consistent w/the crossed-tails version being stronger.
1/4" nylon (softish) laid rope )

Btw, though **crossing** tails in the zeppelin knot
yields asymmetric knot, there IS a variation that
you currently don't recognize in which each side's
tucked tail is pushed/dressed-into-being towards
the opposite SPart, and held there by the draw
of the SParts; this version seems to give a bit
of curve to the SParts better than the other
(YMMV per cordage & setting).  (And another
good interlocked-overhands knot to compare
with the z. is Ashley's #1408, which also gives
wide collars & easy untying (and more dramatic
difference in position of tails!).


--dl*
====

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1470
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2020, 01:37:31 AM »
Dan, thanks for your feedback on my new paper on #1425A Riggers bend.
However, this is straying off topic - so I started a new topic thread in relation to Riggers bend (in Knotting concepts & explorations).

KC

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 492
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2020, 10:55:40 AM »
i kinda favor crossed tails and have played with these so.
Especially favor , crossed in stiffer/larger rope for BFly.
i think while forming in terms of purposefully placing parts this way targeting to these :utilities
>>soften arc curves: efficiency/'strength'
>>give What Knot-ish: security
"Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed" -Sir Francis Bacon[/color]
East meets West: again and again, cos:sine is the value pair of yin/yang dimensions
>>of benchmark aspect and it's non(e), defining total sum of the whole.
We now return you to the safety of normal thinking peoples

ParlainthTownie

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2022, 06:43:44 AM »
a-HAH! Victory! I found it.  So the original post was about a book called Knots, and How to Tie Them by the Boyscouts of America

"With COVID around I have had more time.  I have been practicing my knots.
I have an old book from the Boy Scouts.  "knots and how to tie them" by evidently the Boy Scouts.
It was published in 2005 and I have a 2009 reprint.  On page 11 it says that the Hunter's Bend is one of only 3 knots discovered during the last century."

It turns out my Father-in-Law has an earlier edition of the book from 1983.  The book goes back to the 1940's in its early editions.
The passage in this edition of the book is more full listing the 2 other knots.

They are the Constrictor Knot and the Tarbuck Knot. 

I do not know why they would have included the passage about "Only 3 knots created in 20th Century" statement and not include the names of the other two knots.  Especially since the statement itself if probably false as well as the knots named after Zeppelins being around.  I guess Zeppelins were technically around in the 1800's but didn't really get going until 1909 or so. 

Even if the statement and premise are false it is still satisfying to get the answer to the statement the author was trying to make.  I was never really satisfied with past outcome but had to drop it because all leads had dried up.  I am also fascinated that the knots listed ended up being completely different.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2022, 08:08:43 AM by ParlainthTownie »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4278
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2022, 09:03:41 PM »
...
On page 11 it says that the Hunter's Bend is one of only 3 knots discovered during the last century."

It turns out my Father-in-Law has an earlier edition of the book from 1983.  The book goes back to the 1940's in its early editions.
The passage in this edition of the book is more full listing the 2 other knots.

They are the Constrictor Knot and the Tarbuck Knot.
The former has roots arguably preceding 1850,
and the latter is, well, something that can be seen
easily as a version of an old knot --and I'm unaware
of any published testing to support its supposed
benefit of dynamic load mitigation.

Quote
Especially since the statement itself if probably false
as well as the knots named after Zeppelins being around.
I guess Zeppelins were technically around in the 1800's
but didn't really get going until 1909 or so.
The assertion is clearly false, and the place to see that
is in angling/fishing knots, where the advent of nylon
monofilament necessitated new knots to handle its
slickness; and more, with the even slipperier stuff.

Friction hitches useful for ascending ropes --gripping
yes like the Tarbuck but able to release & slide & RE-grip--
came along with climbers/cavers/arborists during the
period after nylon, too.

As for zeppelins, the claim that anyone actually new
about and used the magazine-named "zeppelin knot"
has been seriously challenged.  I've not seen any
Navy information to support that (whereas there IS
some such support for the Speir knot, captured in
a Field Manual <=> Technical Manual of USA military).

Meanwhile, I have only recently discovered a "new BWL"
("bowline") in some arbor tape guy lines of newly plugged
into a walk saplings :: which is simply Ashley's #1010
loaded by its tail (drawn back in opposition to the eye
such that it forms a nipping loop (around but one diameter),
not an arch --and one not other direction relative to the
knot drawing the tail backwards, too.

Of such an old and well-known knot,
this other one hiding in plain sight,
to my awareness at least.  Clearly,
SOMEbody somehow came to use it
--I'd dearly like to know who/how/why!


--dl*
====

ParlainthTownie

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2022, 10:02:32 PM »
Huh.  Clearly this is the place for you.  Thank you for translating 1 term  (BWL) in that highly technical post.

I cannot count how many times I have relearned how to tie a basic bowline. And I am an Eagle Scout. It is truly the King of Knots as they say.  I tore down a mostly sawed through tree that was hanging with a trapped chainsaw blade at a tilt.  I used a MiniVan and some really thick rope with a bowline looped around the trailer hitch.  I would pull until I ran out of space and then have to backup and reset the knot several feet down the line.  The last pull was almost more tension then the traction of the van on rough concrete could handle.  Even after all that tension untying it was effortless. 

This was more of a detective search for me.  I hate it when people say This is one of a number of things to establish a beginning point of a narrative but then do not actually list those other things.   This was the place to ask questions about knots so that is why I signed up.  Quickly and logically it became apparent that the premise of only 3 knots being discovered in the 20th century was false when: inversions, right versus left handed and what constitutes a new knot versus a variation was pointed out. 

It seemed to make sense initially because there are "Over 3900 knots" in the...here it goes... ABOK!  Yes, I am using knot terminology now.  I mean how many times can you possibly loop a rope around itself and other things?  Well, it turns out, quite a lot.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2022, 11:04:11 PM by ParlainthTownie »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4278
Re: New Knots discovery timeline.
« Reply #14 on: February 19, 2022, 05:10:35 PM »
It seemed to make sense initially because there are "Over 3900 knots" in the...here it goes... ABOK!
Which common assertion is dismayingly inaccurate of something
rather simple --the rough estimate, i.e..  My count, done with
hopes of reigning in such nonsense, is given here:
https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=7102.0
So, roughly half the too-oft'quoted number,
with notes of how much of that is of a decorative
nature possibly not thought to be counted, by some
who look for some count.

Beyond that, I can say that I've illustrated some 2,000
& counting "new" knots --of often dubious stature, but
... they are points in the knots universe.  So, to come
to seeing the tail-loaded BWL so late in my experience
--and I'm unaware of others knowing it; but clearly SOMEbody
tied it!--, is quite interesting.


--dl*
====