As much as I have despised Eights in the past, I will admit that they are easy targets. Sixes on the other hand, are quite slippery, and besides, their scan lines are long and sometimes difficult to detect. Regardless of the situation, I can locate a Six when I need to. Scanning for a string of seven Sixes is easier than sorting for Eights, but I came up empty. Again.
Out of frustration more that patience, I began scanning for anything that had a total of seven Sixes and one Seven. Forget the Eights, since they might have gone dancing with their Ones. Ratcheting up the resolution to look for shorter sequences of Sixes, I was beginning to get discouraged after the population of four atom chains of Sixes turned up at nearly zero. I registered nil until I looked for the dreaded singles and pairs, which are pretty much anywhere and everywhere.
That's when I spotted the Seven connected to three singleton Sixes and a pair. That crafty Seven had worked its way into a gaggle of Sixes and held four of them at bay. The singletons each had a full complement of three Ones, whereas, the other end of the doubleton Sixes terminated in a connection to a structural Eight which had another pair of Sixes on the other side. That makes for a total of seven Sixes. When you count the the second Eight that is double-tight with Six number Six, it looks like we found all the right parts, just in different places.
February 6, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment