to me what you're saying sounds like a 5 beat airwrap, gyrated in an antispin pattern?

Tank - AW and Hyperloop as specific names for specific things depends on who you ask. Perhaps you are aware that in the early days of HoP (2001-2002~ish I think) "hyperloop was used to describe many different types of tangle, and a "Maxiplus hyperloop" was what most people today refer to as "hyperloop"... in the same way that waist wraps are an entire familly of patterns, but many people use the name to refer to a BTB waistwrap.

It may be that in a particular region people have a more agreed upon definition of specifically what a name means, but It is not that simple and specific. The community consistently to this day hasn't been able to agree upon what they mean and what the important attributes are (ie, the age old does the tangle nexus move or not, blah blah)

That is why I periodically reiterate it is better to emphasis talking about tangles and explain what it is doing to the best of your ability. You can say "I would" or "some people would" call this an AW or HL, but being able to explain what it is doing is more important. That is exactly what Loki is coming up against, since he is dealing with things much more complicated than just a wall-plane bellow the arms AW, or maxiplus HL.

Concerning Atomics in general: Ever since atomics really started getting discussed, it they have always been linked with plane-bending and changing planes. People like Arashi, Andy Haus, SpiralX, Ruggs {NX}, Matt Terry, and plenty of others that I can't recall right now have contributed much to the discussion and as far as I can remember, they all included some aspect of plane bending. However, they also pointed out that you can stay in fixed atomic and box plane poi orientation relationships.

As far as I can tell there are 2 basic topological sets of FIXED atomic plane-intersects for all mesh or clash states. The rest is just how the heck you get your arms out of the way and the spacial orientation of the atomic plane-intersect structure (X) to your body and the rest of space.

That said you need to bend/change planes to move between parallel plane same direction, atomic intersect A, opposites, Atomic intersect B, etc, etc. So once again it is about seeing that these 4 orientation states are just boundary conditions, between which you have trinity and dynamic plane orientation/intersect manipulation.

So I would reword your statement about "... a proper atomic tangle ..." to refer to a proper FIXED plane intersect atomic tangle (if you guys can suggest a shorter more elegant name I'm all ears). You can also have atomic or trinity tangles, that exit in different plane orientations then they started. In fact, almost all tangles are based on subtle bending into a plane intersect situation, ie for at least a moment they are playing by atomic or trinity rules. Arashi was trying to show me this back in something like 2004 when I 1st met him at the Texas renfest.

From a geometric-model dominant perspective it makes sense to say "...direction is not a timing change, its a plane change." Although I'd want to say plane Orientation change, to differentiate from body plane interaction. We are isolating our observation to the relation between the 2 poi's plane orientation and intersect, as opposed to poi/body relationships, ie wheel, wall, floor (sagittal, coronal, transverse).

However, when looking at it from a geometric-centric view you have to remember not to take for granted that you are constantly adjusting the force you apply to the poi in order to cancel out the force of gravity and keep the poi within the same geometric form.

I think Loki is coming form a more force experiential point of view where you apply these feelings of forces and the outcome is movement from one geometric form to another. This can also be a valid point of view. The challenge is to eventually these 2 points of view into a more cohesive one, where we can more easily switch between the 2 wile maintaining continuity in our understand and descriptions, and ultimately see the whole thing.

I disagree that the most comprehensive way to describe any tangle, let alone most poi is simply through timing and direction. It is ok as a simple starting position, but once again it is really just describing boundary conditions. Loki is essentially pointing this out because he is playing with more complex 3D interactions in between those boundary conditions.

Personally I think to get more accurate you at least need to be able to brake it down into wave oscillations in X, Y and Z, and then sometimes you will have to transpose your coordinate system to another orientation. You need to stop focussing on "beats" and start thinking in rotations, orbits, and cycles.

What most people refer to as timing-direction is simply the T&D IN A PARALLEL PLANAR RELATIONSHIP. to expand upon what I said about 4 plane intersect boundaries: you have the 2 perpendicular ones, and you have the 2 planar ones: same dir and opposite. In between all that you have a gradient of trinity interactions. Parallel planes are a big lie, unless you are thinking of them as boundary conditions only. The only time you are spinning in planes at all is when you have no movement of the hand perpendicular (normal to) the spin plane of that poi. The rest of the time the path that the poi traces is in fact a manifold in 3d space. when you spin a basic figure 8 crossover, it only touches upon the 2 parallel plane boundaries for a moment on each side. Your hand is also moving in a roughly sinusoidal way normal to those parallel spin planes. When the sine wave is near the peak or trough (oriented sideways if you are doing a vertical 2-beat) it was decelerated the rate of change very close to allowing the poi to be in a parallel spin plane. When the poi is going through it's cross point, that is where you have accelerated the most, the steep slope between the peaks and troughs. At that point your poi head is traveling at an angle different than the boundary planes we like to focus on. If you stop your hand there and force your body NOT to do the automatic plane correction that we've all trained our selves to do, you will be spinning in a plane at for example 30 degrees off vertical. That is essentially how I was doing that thing in the Arizona video:
www.youtube.com/watch

As stated earlier, tangles are almost never a strongly flatland interaction, cuz guess what, you can never get 2 things in parallel planes to interact assuming they can't be in the same place at the same time physically. It is a mathematical impossibility for knots or tangles to exist in 2D. As illustrated with the 30 deg off pitch example above, when you are actually moving your hand out of plane, you have a transient plane change (if you still want to try and think in planes). Most tangles rely on this as subtle plane bending to create a clash state. Even if you are using a speed change of one poi and very subtle sliding or floating of the poi into each other to initiate the tangle, as soon as they start to create a tangle nexus the tension in the system is redistributed to the nexus and the poi end up in a nonparallel situation.

Right ok, I'm gonna stop carrying on and get ready to fly to NYC. Point is the flat-land model is only boundary conditions. It is only a slice (admittedly an important one) of what is going on in 3d.

+Alien Jon

so call it the McTwist....
er... wait thats already been taken.

"i really prefer the "check out this nifty thinger here" naming system"

I'm with you. You guys think about this stuff a lot, don't you? I know the feeling. I think as long as you can describe what you are doing and demonstrate it in a way that someone else can understand it, then you are communicating effectively. After all, what's the point of developing your own naming system/terminolgy, only to have to stop and explain THAT to someone who is unfamiliar with it. Why not just show them they move, and break it down into pieces that they can understand. Or, just confuse the shit out of them and watch them squirm. That can be fun also.

I drew out a tangle chart for entry vs exit points.
basically if you enter in space 1 you have to exit in space 2
and if you enter in space 3 you have to exit in space 4
and vice versa.
now 3 dimensionalize in your head for floor and ceiling plane.
tinypic.com/r/669hs1/4

open for modification.