Comment by thaumasiotes a day ago
Here, suppose you've got a rigid sensor attached to your hand by a string of yarn.
You walk in one direction, then turn around and start walking in a different direction, but as you turn the sensor slams into something.
Does it fail to take damage because the yarn is flexible?
> I gently bounce ("slam"?) that chopstick off of a thing
Hey, remember when I said this?
>>>> Think of the rigidity of the whiskers as being traded off against your maximum movement speed.
Appendages on a moving object can't contact anything gently. They have to strike at whatever speed they're moving at.
Yes, you've successfully confirmed: We're quite clearly speaking different languages.
(Good luck with...whatever it is that you may be talking about. My diction is good. I don't have time or patience to explain it for outliers who aren't following along well and who also insist that it must somehow be wrong. I apologize for this; I am actually sorry.)
Huh?
Suppose I've got an assembly with a chopstick attached to a gimbal with some minor centering springs and sensors (potentiometers) inside. The chopstick has many degrees of free angular movement provided by this gimbal and overall assembly.
I gently bounce ("slam"?) that chopstick off of a thing, and this results in the feedback loop that provides positioning control to provide immediate instruction to back off in the opposite direction of the apparent impact.
Does the chopstick take damage? Does the gimbal take damage? Does the greater assembly take damage?
Why, or why not?
(I feel like we're speaking two different languages here. Have you ever looked at how a PS3 analog stick works, or have you not? It's not new tech. It wasn't even new when it was new, and it's very nearly 20 years old now in PS3 form.)