Talk:U-turner hasslers

p140 / p280

Since the reduced form of the p280 with p8 supports doesn't allow for a p140 with 2x U-turners, should the p140 with p7 supports be added to the list?

Personally, I would put it next to the p280 with a caption like "p140 version with additional U-turner", given that the p140 is just the unoptimized form of the p280 with another U-turner thrown in there. But you can do whatever you feel is best. User:C28 (talk) 13:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm not even sure that the p140 form should be considered hassler. Since the two U-turners don't interact with each other, it feels to me like "two hassler oscillators with shared hassling structure". (The p280 is certainly a hassler.) Confocal (talk) 15:58, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

"I'm not even sure that the p140 form should be considered hassler" - By that logic, this p93 r-hassler doesn't count either? Chris857 (talk) 16:04, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Correct; by that logic, both oscillators would be "variants of hasslers that are not hasslers". (Both oscillators are interesting to me -- it's just that I'm not sure whether describing them as hasslers is illuminating.) Confocal (talk) 16:12, 15 August 2023 (UTC)