Buckminster Fuller

[Turtle]

Just dropping by to leave my current signature here. I like this Fuller observation inasmuch as I contend probabilty is based on a false assumption.:D

 

Probability is not a reliable anticipatory tool; it is stronger than "possibility" but crude in comparison to "navigation" and "astronomy." If probability were reliable, there would not be a stock market or a horse race. R. Buckminster Fuller-Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking-503.02

[Turtle]

I noticed in another thread that one of our members has actually personally met Bucky before he moved on to the as-yet-unexperienced lower vibrations.

It wasn't a pleasant encounter by all accounts. So let's poke at that aspect with our sticks, like all good scientists do.

How was that lecture as far as content Mystery-Member-Who-Met-Fuller? How was it before a lousy meeting? Is it Fuller's personality that keeps people from engaging his work [and this thread]?

From as much as I have studied of Synergetics, the geometry is...well, rigorous. Just looking for some cogent interactivity on science in a science forum; yeah...that's the ticket.:cup:

[Turtle]

Unabashed Bump For Trimtab

/forums/images/smilies/banana_sign.gif

 

Never heard of this geometry?

Heard Fuller's a crackpot?

Can't follow the writing?

Too tired to fire off an insulting post?

?????????????????????????

[TheBigDog]

Never heard of this geometry?

Heard Fuller's a crackpot?

Can't follow the writing?

Too tired to fire off an insulting post?

?????????????????????????

An insult eh? OK...

 

Your shell makes you look geodesint.(sp?)

 

Ha! That will learn ya! And while I am here, what is the essential Fuller to read Turtle. I am not going to jump out and read it right off, but I want to add one to the bookshelf for occational perusal and want to make sure I pick the correct one.

 

Thanks!

 

Bill

[Turtle]

An insult eh? OK...

 

Your shell makes you look geodesint.(sp?)

 

Ha! That will learn ya! And while I am here, what is the essential Fuller to read Turtle. I am not going to jump out and read it right off, but I want to add one to the bookshelf for occational perusal and want to make sure I pick the correct one.

 

Thanks!

 

Bill

Thank you for noticing my shell BD! Geodesic it is indeed.

I recommend SYNERGETICS :Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking

by R. Buckminster Fuller. A complete online free copy is available here:

http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/synergetics.html

Plenty to read & consider whether you decide to buy a hard copy (2 book set) or not.

As for your prompt reply BigDog...:)

[Racoon]

Fuller made no comments on chemistry. C60's discoverers Kroto and Smalley enjoyed the "AHA!" of a soccerball. That C60 was a geodesic dome came later. C60 is buckminsterfullerene.

 

also known as the Buckyball.

60 Carbon atoms arranged in 12 pentagons and 20 hexagons, forming a perfect sphere.

 

bumpin' threads,

Rac

[Turtle]

Here's a bit from Bucky on orbits. You gotta love the inclusion of dancing!;)

 

400.654__ Orbit: No path of travel may be 180-degree linear in a multibodied, gravity-cohered, omnimotional Universe. The initial reality of all travel is orbital as a composite resultant of all tensive restraints. As the Sun's pull on the Earth produces orbiting, orbiting electrons produce directional field pulls. As 99.99 percent of the bodies in motion in physical Universe are operating orbitally, orbiting must be thought of as normal. (Spinning and orbiting together is dancing.) Orbits are regenerative feedback circuits.

http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s04/p0065.html

[CraigD]

___Take a moment to cogitate on Fuller's Dymaxion Map:

http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s11/figs/f0102.html

:lol:

I cogitated a little on this back when Turtle posted the link on 2005/10/6, but, having a perfectly good spherical globe (that doubles as a geeky table lamp!) gave it little thought beyond “it’d be fun to print this, cut it out, and make an unusual globe out of it and “the x-y to longitude & latitude transformation for this thing’s a bit tricky – maybe I’ll work on it someday.”

 

Of late, my wife has taken to watching a lot of architecture and home design TV shows, often while I sit nearby with the TV in the edge of my vision. Today, as she watched an episode of “Dream builders”, what should my peripheral vision catch but an actual dymaxion map, made into a globe, sitting on a curio shelf of the architecturally distinct Palo Alto home of Bill and Karen Moggridge. This one is the more popular 20 equilateral triangle faced Platonic solid version, not the 8 equilateral triangle and 6 square faces version that Fuller originally patented.

 

Funny how things like this stick in your head, to leap out at the least expected trigger, and keep you coming back to think of them some more. :cup:

[Turtle]

Funny how things like this stick in your head, to leap out at the least expected trigger, and keep you coming back to think of them some more. ;)

 

So true! Boy that Bucky can write so a thing sticks in your head! To whit:

501.20 Cosmic Timetable of Cyclic Events

501.21 An angle is a convergent-divergent pattern: in terms of human experience it is a directionally focused happening__an event__an eVe-nt__a conVening__interference eVent whose V-angle of conVergence is a linear crossing fiX and, as such, is mentally conceptual and finitely think-about-able independent of the outwardly extendable length of the two lines. Even though the lines diverge outwardly__inferentially toward infinity__the angle formed by their inwardly converging lines is finite.

*source

[Turtle]

Here's Bucky poking his stick at Newton's soft parts:

120.00 Mass Interattraction

120.01 Synergy is disclosed by the interattraction for one another of two or more separate objects. But any two masses will demonstrate that halving the distance between them will fourfold their attraction for each other. (Which is the way Newton might have said it, but did not.) He discovered the mathematical gain in attraction, but he stated it "inversely," which is awkward and nonspontaneously illuminating. The inverseness led him to speak in terms of progressive diminution of the attraction: as the distance away was multiplied by two, the attraction diminished by four; ergo, he could speak of it as "squared." The attraction of one mass for the other increases as the second power of the rate of increase of their proximity to one another: halve the distance and the interaction is fourfolded.

*source

B)

[Turtle]

Here's Bucky showing his pragmatic social awareness:

We are in an age that assumes the narrowing trends of specialization to be logical, natural, and desirable. Consequently, society expects all earnestly responsible communication to be crisply brief. Advancing science has now discovered that all the known cases of biological extinction have been caused by overspecialization, whose concentration of only selected genes sacrifices general adaptability. Thus the specialist's brief for pinpointing brevity is dubious. In the meantime, humanity has been deprived of comprehensive understanding. Specialization has bred feelings of isolation, futility, and confusion in individuals. It has also resulted in the individual's leaving responsibility for thinking and social action to others. Specialization breeds biases that ultimately aggregate as international and ideological discord, which, in turn, leads to war.

 

http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/intro/well.html

 

I am always at a loss as to the reason(s) people don't know about Fuller or his writings. :shrug: Maybe it's because I'm not a specialist.:doh:

[Dyothelite]

Hey I've got a basic multi-dimensional geometry question. If it is fair to say you are essentially squaring and adding a dimension of space to 3D by graphing ....say distance by time as velocity, is it then fair to say that by squaring time you get 5D (as in acceleration D/T2)? And then would not acceleration be reflective of 5D space? I've been reading M-theory and DGP theory (i think?.. branes) and I keep hearing them say gravity is 4D but wouldn't considering it's natural state is gravitational acceleration, it be more like 5D, a square in time or velocity?

[Turtle]

Hey I've got a basic multi-dimensional geometry question. If it is fair to say you are essentially squaring and adding a dimension of space to 3D by graphing ....say distance by time as velocity, is it then fair to say that by squaring time you get 5D (as in acceleration D/T2)? And then would not acceleration be reflective of 5D space? I've been reading M-theory and DGP theory (i think?.. branes) and I keep hearing them say gravity is 4D but wouldn't considering it's natural state is gravitational acceleration, it be more like 5D, a square in time or velocity?

 

It is fair to say that I don't know the answer to that question, but also to say that Fuller does not invoke more than the three spacial dimensions. It is Fuller's description of what constitutes the nature of those dimensions that characterizes Synergetics. For example, while affirming some of the geometric analysis of Euler, he chastises him for leaving out the inward/outward component. Similarly, as I understand him to write, Fuller characterizes gravity as the inward acting symmetric relation of outward acting radiation.

:cup:

[Turtle]

At the risk of bringing up science, I continue to read Trimtab's Synergetics.

 

801.03 Let us imagine a scientifically conducted experiment designed to disclose the unique behavioral characteristics of each of those four prime sensing faculties without which we could not apprehend Universe and could not have sense of being.

http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s08/p0000.html

 

;)

[Turtle]

501.08 We may hypothesize that information as it increases exponentially__explodes. Conceptuality implodes, becoming increasingly more simplified.

http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s05/p0000.html#501.00

 

It isn't clear to me if Fuller means to say conceptuality implodes exponentially as well, or at some other rate? Can anyone clarify this for me? :hihi:

[Turtle]

:(

 

400.23 Maximum system complexity consists of a dissimilarly quantified inventory of unique and nonintersubstitutable components. That is, Euler's irreducible-system aspects of vertexes, areas, and edges exhibit the respective dissimilar quantities 4, 4, and 6 in the minimum prime system, the tetrahedron. This demonstrates the inherent synergy of all systems, since their minimum overall inventory of inherent characteristics is unpredicted and unpredictable by any of the parts taken separately. Systems are unpredicted by oneness, twoness, or threeness. This explains how it happens that general systems theory is a new branch of science. (See Sec. 537.30.)

400.00 SYSTEM

 

this seems a rare bit that hints of prognostication. :) can't say as i recall hearing about 'general systems theory', so it's off to read up on its current status. i get the general sense Bucky's ideas either go unrecognized or take a long time to bloom. can't hurt to start with wiki i suppose. :D :hihi: Systems theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Turtle]

http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s04/p0000.html#400.20 400.23 Maximum system complexity consists of a dissimilarly quantified inventory of unique and nonintersubstitutable components. That is, Euler's irreducible-system aspects of vertexes, areas, and edges exhibit the respective dissimilar quantities 4, 4, and 6 in the minimum prime system, the tetrahedron. This demonstrates the inherent synergy of all systems, since their minimum overall inventory of inherent characteristics is unpredicted and unpredictable by any of the parts taken separately. Systems are unpredicted by oneness, twoness, or threeness. This explains how it happens that general systems theory is a new branch of science. (See Sec. 537.30.)

400.00 SYSTEM

 

this seems a rare bit that hints of prognostication. :) can't say as i recall hearing about 'general systems theory', so it's off to read up on its current status. i get the general sense Bucky's ideas either go unrecognized or take a long time to bloom. can't hurt to start with wiki i suppose. :) :shrug: Systems theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

Inasmuch as Fuller's term 'synergy' is synonymous with 'emergence', and inasmuch as i just watched a segment on PBS on 'emergent complexity', I find Fuller's phrasing all the more interesting. time then to go back & read a bit that precedes the section i quoted from Synergetics. :cup: :)

 

PBS program >> NOVA | scienceNOW | Emergence | PBS

 

web search emergent complexity >> Web Results 1 - 10 of about 5,700,000 for emergent complexity

 

Fuller's Synergetics >> R. Buckminster Fuller's SYNERGETICS