re the number line
kirby urner
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Robert Hansen <b...@rsccore.com> wrote:
> I think this is becoming semantical. But I will play along anyways.;)
>
I'm fine with all this N < Z < Q < R < C stuff, but we're skirting other issues.
How does a line have "no thickness"? That's *not* like a stick.
There's a bait and switch here that's costly, in terms of cognitive dissonance.
Q: A line with no thickness. Do we need it?
A: The dogmatic answer is "yes of course" but that dogma has been
questioned (including by Kant?), and an interesting math course might
take up this controversy.
But then math is rarely taught as rife with controversy. It's more a
tool of the state whereby a certain kind of authoritarianism is
purveyed, these days a "teach to the test" regime.
Controversy suggests cracks in the edifice and the non-eternity of
institutions. That's usually not a message one delivers to the young
and wild.
Math gets abused by authoritarians is what I'm saying, but that's
hardly like a new development. Are rats new to ships?
In any case, once we get to a number line with thickness, we can start
talking about volume, way truer to energetic real life experience.
Like, when was the last time you met a number line for real?
You're supposed to say you've never seen one, only imagined one. Yet
you're not supposed to call it religion (principal's office if you
insist).
I know, I know, grownup humans are weird.
They've invented a lot of sorry ass stuff and now they're really proud
of it and want you to take it all lying down.
Welcome to Planet Earth.
John Brawley
(Seems less problematic than a line with no thickness, eh? At least we have
*extent* in two dimensions instead of just one, hence it's much easier to
imagine (sheet of paper, thinner than thin unto no thickness at all, but at
least still minds-eye visible, unlike a 'line with no thickness').)
Waddaya gonna do when they get to imagining a volume with no content, eh?
"It's full of points" (pardons to 2001 a Space Odyssey).
Of course, like Alice, I'm used to imagining six impossible things before
breakfast....
(*g*)
--JBw
.
kirby urner
> How about a plane with no thickness? Do we need that?
>
That's a good question. And if we need it, how much? Can we both
have it and not have it, meaning we have it when we need it, but not
when we don't?
> (Seems less problematic than a line with no thickness, eh? At least we have
> *extent* in two dimensions instead of just one, hence it's much easier to
> imagine (sheet of paper, thinner than thin unto no thickness at all, but at
> least still minds-eye visible, unlike a 'line with no thickness').)
>
It's just easy to have sticks, sheets, blobs. What are blobs made of?
Blobs are blobs.
Any less primitive than a point then?
A geometry of blobs might get somewhere.
Does it have to be either / or?
> Waddaya gonna do when they get to imagining a volume with no content, eh?
> "It's full of points" (pardons to 2001 a Space Odyssey).
>
> Of course, like Alice, I'm used to imagining six impossible things before
> breakfast....
> (*g*)
>
> --JBw
Pretending to precision we don't need, nor even have... the illusion
of precision, pseudo precision.
What may keep us from thinking precisely to faux / pseudo over-precision.
Kirby
John Brawley
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 5:00 PM, John Brawley <j...@tetrahedraverse.com>
> wrote:
>> How about a plane with no thickness? Do we need that?
>
> That's a good question. And if we need it, how much? Can we both
> have it and not have it, meaning we have it when we need it, but not
> when we don't?
Why not? It's all mental anyway (neurons, charge, patterns of cells...).
>> (Seems less problematic than a line with no thickness, eh? At least we
>> have
>> *extent* in two dimensions instead of just one, hence it's much easier to
>> imagine (sheet of paper, thinner than thin unto no thickness at all, but
>> at
>> least still minds-eye visible, unlike a 'line with no thickness').)
>
> It's just easy to have sticks, sheets, blobs. What are blobs made of?
> Blobs are blobs.
> Any less primitive than a point then?
Nah. More (less) primitive than a point is only nothing (NoThing).
(*g*)
> A geometry of blobs might get somewhere.
> Does it have to be either / or?
Nope. Use the proper tool for the task at hand.
>> Waddaya gonna do when they get to imagining a volume with no content, eh?
>> "It's full of points" (pardons to 2001 a Space Odyssey).
>> Of course, like Alice, I'm used to imagining six impossible things before
>> breakfast....
>> (*g*)
>>
>> --JBw
>
> Pretending to precision we don't need, nor even have... the illusion
> of precision, pseudo precision.
All in the mind is illusion anyway....
> What may keep us from thinking precisely to faux / pseudo over-precision.
> Kirby
Thems as can, does; thems as can't, tells thems as can that they can't.
(*g*)
--JBw
kirby urner
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "kirby urner" <kirby...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: re the number line
>
>
>
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 5:00 PM, John Brawley <j...@tetrahedraverse.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> How about a plane with no thickness? Do we need that?
>>
>>
>> That's a good question. And if we need it, how much? Can we both
>> have it and not have it, meaning we have it when we need it, but not
>> when we don't?
>
>
> Why not? It's all mental anyway (neurons, charge, patterns of cells...).
>
>
Right. So there's like another TV network in town. IVM broadcasts
its own version of 'Sesame Street' including the adult versions (TV-14
on through MA).
XYZ is the older tower and we're used to its programming. IVM stuff
seems edgier, but also funnier. "More incisive" perhaps.
That's partly how Bucky's writing came across to me: both more
definite and ideogrammatic.
By "definite" I mean it wasn't the policy glop language that's
non-committal, takes no positions, neither attacks nor defends.
Fuller said definite things clearly.
But to read the commentators, one would think he just talked garble.
Well yeah, his speech could be a little hard to understand. But I'm
talking about writings.
They way he was verbose and made up a lot of words. The ratio of
committed words to accomplishment is still being computed however, so
the jury is still out (might as well stay out, as a judgment is not
critical to getting further work done).
>>> (Seems less problematic than a line with no thickness, eh? At least we
>>> have
>>> *extent* in two dimensions instead of just one, hence it's much easier to
>>> imagine (sheet of paper, thinner than thin unto no thickness at all, but
>>> at
>>> least still minds-eye visible, unlike a 'line with no thickness').)
>>
>>
>> It's just easy to have sticks, sheets, blobs. What are blobs made of?
>> Blobs are blobs.
>> Any less primitive than a point then?
>
>
> Nah. More (less) primitive than a point is only nothing (NoThing).
> (*g*)
>
You fall into infant babble as usual. At the "heart" of your
ethnicity is the same thing we always find: hard-wired ways of
talking. They have a half-life.
>
>> A geometry of blobs might get somewhere.
>> Does it have to be either / or?
>
>
> Nope. Use the proper tool for the task at hand.
>
Right. In ray tracing we expect "things" (entities) to reflect light.
Nothing "dimensionless" is required.
Light *sources*, on the other hand, are as pointy as we like.
As it gets brighter and brighter towards a source, where does one say
the "point" is? We have our coordinate system, that's all we need.
>
>>> Waddaya gonna do when they get to imagining a volume with no content, eh?
>>> "It's full of points" (pardons to 2001 a Space Odyssey).
>>> Of course, like Alice, I'm used to imagining six impossible things before
>>> breakfast....
>>> (*g*)
>>>
>>> --JBw
>>
>>
>> Pretending to precision we don't need, nor even have... the illusion
>> of precision, pseudo precision.
>
>
> All in the mind is illusion anyway....
>
"Illusion of what?" as Rorty would say. The concept "illusion" has
been defined again "an illusion of" much as "mirage" relates to
"oasis" (especially in cartoons).
illusion : what's so :: mirage : oasis
I might be more inclinde to say "all in the mind is delusion
anyway..." as a way of introducing "aberrational" which is like
Fuller's favorite word for "warped".
His "reality" (experience / scenarios / time tunnels) are warpages
aberrating in the vector equilibrium, the latter being an ocean of
possibility as it were, a non-event in itself.
>
>> What may keep us from thinking precisely to faux / pseudo over-precision.
>> Kirby
>
I said it wrongly again:
What may keep us from thinking precisely is trying to live up to some
imaginary standard that's based in faux and/or pseudo precision
(affected precision).
Another way of saying it: one's projection of "what a genius is" may
be the cause of one's own idiocy
The Spock character on Star Trek typified a kind of intellectual
demeanor. A scary responsibility for Leonard sometimes, as so many
pathologies stalk these halls (it's like Star Trek out there).
>
> Thems as can, does; thems as can't, tells thems as can that they can't.
> (*g*)
>
> --JBw
(*g*)
WKTU TV
<< signing off >>
speaking of signing off, like when a TV channel would go down for the
night, rather than aim for some plain vanilla lowering of the flag,
I'd sometimes have this be an Islamic nation, other times Christian,
other times Buddhist, other times non-Theo-centric (who's theo?),
other times Sub-Genius (wave to Friends).... so as the flag comes
down, you hear a Gospel Choir one night, an Imam minaret call another.
Not that we do channel shut offs as much, but some remember the
genre, so these could be YouTubes "as if" and inserted wherever in
real time broadcasts (in pull media but also push as when queued for
coffee shop LCDs, like a play list).
John Brawley
----- Original Message -----
From: "kirby urner" <kirby...@gmail.com>
To: <r-buckminster-fuller...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: re the number line
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:54 AM, John Brawley <j...@tetrahedraverse.com>
> wrote:
>>>> How about a plane with no thickness? Do we need that?
>>>
>>> That's a good question. And if we need it, how much? Can we both
>>> have it and not have it, meaning we have it when we need it, but not
>>> when we don't?
>>
>> Why not? It's all mental anyway (neurons, charge, patterns of cells...).
>>
>
> Right. So there's like another TV network in town. IVM broadcasts
> its own version of 'Sesame Street' including the adult versions (TV-14
> on through MA).
>
> XYZ is the older tower and we're used to its programming. IVM stuff
> seems edgier, but also funnier. "More incisive" perhaps.
There's only one TV station in town.
Geometric,
Topological,
It's all the same stuff, just versions and preferences thereof and thereto.
IVM and XYZ, no difference in principle, only in choice of tuning.
--JBw
kirby urner
There's only one TV station in town.
Geometric,
Topological,
It's all the same stuff, just versions and preferences thereof and thereto.
IVM and XYZ, no difference in principle, only in choice of tuning.
--JBw
Yet the fact of two stations is getting more real I think.
Another subculture crystallizes.
Kirby
John Brawley
the world.
Sure, subcultures are entertaining, and their proliferation produces
exquisite diversity, but in the end there's nothing more valuable (besides
truth) than harmony.
--JBw
----- Original Message -----
From: "kirby urner" <kirby...@gmail.com>
To: <r-buckminster-fuller...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 1:35 AM
Subject: Re: re the number line
kirby urner
The more subcultures crystallize, the more division and disharmony arise in the world.
That's what dominating or insecure subcultures tend to say. Diversity is the spice of life. Biodiversity is the key to long term survival.
Sure, subcultures are entertaining, and their proliferation produces exquisite diversity, but in the end there's nothing more valuable (besides truth) than harmony.
That sounds like some kind of imperialism. Those other "ethnics" are quaint but at the end of the day we all want our tea and crumpets.
The IVMers are bringing many new skills and teachings to the Earthling meme pool that the XYZers were not and could not provide.
Humanity is glad of its IVMer heritage. Old fart XYZers have their place as well, though when it comes to control, they're going to learn more about sharing.
Kirby
--JBw
John Brawley
> <j...@tetrahedraverse.com>wrote:
>
>> The more subcultures crystallize, the more division and disharmony arise
>> in the world.
>
> That's what dominating or insecure subcultures tend to say. Diversity is
> the spice of life. Biodiversity is the key to long term survival.
>> Sure, subcultures are entertaining, and their proliferation produces
>> exquisite diversity, but in the end there's nothing more valuable
>> (besides
>> truth) than harmony.
>>
> That sounds like some kind of imperialism. Those other "ethnics" are
> quaint but at the end of the day we all want our tea and crumpets.
That's not harmony; it's externally managed discord.
I shall keep my tea and crumpets, while others take coffee and doughnuts.
(Recently it's been more like fish'n'chips. A new Irish pub and ale house
just opened locally, and one of the barmaids is *utterly* bewitching. (The
other barmaid is my daughter.))
> The IVMers are bringing many new skills and teachings to the Earthling
> meme
> pool that the XYZers were not and could not provide.
I demur.
One may arrange points (to you, 'vertices') any way one chooses.
> Humanity is glad of its IVMer heritage. Old fart XYZers have their place
> as well, though when it comes to control, they're going to learn more
> about
> sharing.
--JBw
kirby urner
>> That sounds like some kind of imperialism. Those other "ethnics" are
>> quaint but at the end of the day we all want our tea and crumpets.
>
>
> Imperialism might force harmony.
> That's not harmony; it's externally managed discord.
definition (oxy in the sense of bullheadedly dense, morons in the
sense of morons).
> I shall keep my tea and crumpets, while others take coffee and doughnuts.
> (Recently it's been more like fish'n'chips. A new Irish pub and ale house
> just opened locally, and one of the barmaids is *utterly* bewitching. (The
> other barmaid is my daughter.))
>
well. Parallel universe dontcha know.
>
>> The IVMers are bringing many new skills and teachings to the Earthling
>> meme
>> pool that the XYZers were not and could not provide.
>
>
> Ah, but you assume, from them not, that they can't or could not.
it out from our side. They become the new "has beens" in some ways.
Not like we can't use XYZ. Another tool in the tool box. Just it's
not such a dominant source of fascination.
A lot of their "dimension" talk gets relegated to a frequency we often
tune out -- have better things to attend to sometimes.
Their use of "dimension" is linked to a sense of spirituality in a
somewhat incohate way.
Live and let live.
Kirby