Prev: Resources for a Career Switcher?
Next: Are natural numbers isomorphic to complex numbers?
From: Tim Golden BandTech.com on 1 Jun 2010 08:57
On Jun 1, 3:23 am, "Clifford J. Nelson" <cjnels...(a)verizon.net> wrote:
> > > Well, here at least we have a little something
> > left
> > > to discuss. I
> > > would like to understand what the difference is in
> > > synergetic
> > > coordinates of the following:
> > > ( 1, 1, 1, 1 )
> > > ( 1, 0, 0, 0 )
> > > ( 0, 1, 0, 0 )
> > > I can see that there are some edge length
> > differences
> > > since the first
> > > will have an edge length of 4, whereas the others
> > > will have an edge
> > > length of 1. I honestly have no idea how to
> > > interperet these
> > > synergetic corrdinates from your description. Are
> > > they positions
> > > relative to an origin? Is this possible through
> > the
> > > synergetic system?
> > > Can I label the three instances I gave above A, B,
> > > and C and actually
> > > graph something?
>
> > > - Tim
>
> > Yes you can graph them. My description is at the web
> > site and in the Mathematica Notebook.
>
> > Partial Mathematica Notebook saved as HTML
> >http://mysite.verizon.net/cjnelson9/index.htm
>
> > SynergeticsAppTen.nb (540.1 KB) - Mathematica
> > Notebook
> >http://library.wolfram.com/infocenter/MathSource/6
>
> That should be.
>
> http://library.wolfram.com/infocenter/MathSource/600
>
> > I still don't know why you won't read them.
>
> > Cliff Nelson

Cliff, I have gone to your links. There is no such description that I
am asking of you.
How difficult can it be for you to tell me what is the meaning of
( 1, 0, 0, 0 )
within your language? It seems that by your language this is not a
point position in space but is instead a tetrahedron of edge length
one, but this interpretation carries no geometrical makeup that I can
make heads or tails of. If I could take out some paper and a pencil
and draw something like this and label it A, then do the same for
( 0, 1, 0, 0 )
and label this one B then I might be able to come to some
understanding of your construction.

I am always willing to reexpress these situations within polysign, if
only for the reason that subtle variations sometimes help in
communication. Perhaps you will find this a helpful exercise, based on
the description at your website:
"Bucky advised not to work alone and he wrote that this coordinate
system, or something like it, is very important."

I happen to agree with this sentiment and argue that the 'something
like it' is the polysign numbers, and that spacetime itself and
physics lay there, and you are near the doorstep.

Still, I am not afraid to hold my feet close to the fire. Whether you
are willing to do the same will be loosely proven in your next post.

- Tim
From: spudnik on 1 Jun 2010 22:56
the other thing, it's in pseudocode.
From: Clifford J. Nelson on 1 Jun 2010 22:35
>
> it's interesting that hte length of the edges is the
> sum
> of the coordinates of the four vertices, and I don't
> get it, and
> I'm not much of a mathematician, either.
>

The length of the edges of the sum of the four coordinates, not the sum of the vertices.

Sheesh, I don't know what I'm doing wrong. It's all very simple; child's play.

Cliff Nelson
>
> > You can closest pack equal diameter spheres instead
> of cubes and label the planes of spheres that are
> perpendicular to four directions ABCD. Each plane is
> divided into a grid of equilateral triangles when the
> centers of the spheres are connected to the centers
> of their neighbors by vectors and the spheres
> removed. The angle between any two directions A, B,
> C, and D, is ArcCos[-1/3], approximately 109 degrees
> 28 minutes. The Synergetics coordinate system uses
> four-tuples of numbers (a,b,c,d), the intersections
> of four planes, to represent the location of a point
> in four-dimensional space, a regular tetrahedron.
> >
> > The edge length of the regular tetrahedron
> (a,b,c,d) is the absolute value of a+b+c+d. The total
> a+b+c+d can be positive, negative or zero. Negative
> values of a+b+c+d are tetrahedrons that are upside
> down and inside out.
>
From: Clifford J. Nelson on 2 Jun 2010 07:23
I don't understand what you don't understand. I don't know why the simple algorithms don't get through to you.

The Synergetics coordinates of the vertices of (1,0,0,0) are
(1, 0, 0, -1)
(1, 0, -1, 0)
(1, -1, 0, 0)
(0, 0, 0, 0).

The Cartesian coordinates of the vertices of (1,0,0,0) are
(1/2, 1/(2*Sqrt[3]), Sqrt[2/3])
(1/2, Sqrt[3]/2, 0)
(1, 0, 0)
(0, 0, 0).

The algorithms are given at:

Partial Mathematica Notebook saved as HTML at
http://mysite.verizon.net/cjnelson9/index.htm

SynergeticsAppTen.nb (540.1 KB) - Mathematica Notebook at
http://library.wolfram.com/infocenter/MathSource/600/

Cliff Nelson
>
> Cliff, I have gone to your links. There is no such
> description that I
> am asking of you.
> How difficult can it be for you to tell me what is
> the meaning of
> ( 1, 0, 0, 0 )
> within your language? It seems that by your language
> this is not a
> point position in space but is instead a tetrahedron
> of edge length
> one, but this interpretation carries no geometrical
> makeup that I can
> make heads or tails of. If I could take out some
> paper and a pencil
> and draw something like this and label it A, then do
> the same for
> ( 0, 1, 0, 0 )
> and label this one B then I might be able to come to
> some
> understanding of your construction.
>
> I am always willing to reexpress these situations
> within polysign, if
> only for the reason that subtle variations sometimes
> help in
> communication. Perhaps you will find this a helpful
> exercise, based on
> the description at your website:
> "Bucky advised not to work alone and he wrote that
> hat this coordinate
> system, or something like it, is very important."
>
> I happen to agree with this sentiment and argue that
> the 'something
> like it' is the polysign numbers, and that spacetime
> itself and
> physics lay there, and you are near the doorstep.
>
> Still, I am not afraid to hold my feet close to the
> fire. Whether you
> are willing to do the same will be loosely proven in
> your next post.
>
> - Tim
From: spudnik on 2 Jun 2010 15:58
that doesn't really parse; what do you mean to say, and
have you proven it -- if implimentation in Wolframatism and/
or pseudocode constitutes a proof, say that's what y'got.

an old result in Plucker coordinates is that
(infinite) lines in space are 4D, and Lie algebras & groups came
out of that & tetrahedra. not yet in my bag, either, and
if you insist upon interpolating your terse discussion of your math
with pseudocode, some of us won't follow it. folks like,
I dare say, Bucky Fuller.

I may not be an accomplished amateur, but I am a mathematician:
*mathematica* is four subjects!... polysignosis doesn't get that,
either; he clipped a formula about "n-dimensions"
from Coxeter or some webscam, and claims comprehension, and
wants to dialog with you -- what a privelege!

> The length of the edges of the sum of the four coordinates, not the sum of the vertices.

thusNso:
"travel 'in' time" is "travel" in one dimension; travel requires
time!...
and, Minkowski's God-am pants didn't help, at all.

thusNso:
yes, but your "dynamical 3-space" is just a euphemism; others,
however, choose to believe in an absolute vacuum -- and that sucks!
> my papers mainly deal with simpler cases of non-turbulent flow.

thusNso:
the introduction sounded good; I'll read it, later.
http://research.physics.illinois.edu/qi/photonics/papers/QuantumCakes...

thusNso:
ladies & germs, nature abhors a refractive index equal to 1.0000...,
and I thank Pascal for his dyscovery of it, and
damn Einstein for his damn "photon" reification
of Newton's God-am corpuscle -- so, let's get on with it!

thusNso:
Michelson and Morely did not get no results,
as has been amply demonstrated by follow-on researchers,
and documented by "surfer" herein.
Minkowsi's silly statement about time & space
--then, he died-- has been hobbling minds, ever since;
it is just a phase-space, clearly elaborated with quaternions
(and the language of "vectors" that Hamilton created thereby .-)

thusNso:
clearly, NeinStein#9 doesn't know what *mathematica* is;
it's not just a "visualization programme" from the Wolframites!
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/LightMill/light-mill.html

Dear Editor;
The staff report on plastic bags, given when SM considered a ban,
before, refused to list the actual fraction of a penny, paid for them
by bulk users like grocers & farmers at markets. Any rational EIR
would show that, at a fraction of a gram of "fossilized fuel (TM)" per
bag, a)
they require far less energy & materiel than a paper bag, and b)
that recycling them is impractical, beyond reusing the clean ones for
carrying & garbage,
as many responsible folks do.

As I stated at that meeting, perhaps coastal communities *should* ban
them -- except at farmers' markets -- because they are such efficient
examples of "tensional integrity," that they can clog stormdrains by
catching all sorts of leaves, twigs & paper. But, a statewide ban is
just too much of an environmental & economic burden.

--Stop British Petroleum's capNtrade rip-off;
tell your legislators, a tiny tax on carbon could achieve the result,
instead of "let the arbitrageurs/hedgies/daytrippers make
as much money as they can on CO2 credits!"
http://wlym.com
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Resources for a Career Switcher?
Next: Are natural numbers isomorphic to complex numbers?