Buckminster Fuller

[pianoman1976]

Bucky on myspace:

 

www.myspace.com/buckyfuller

 

I'm proud to have him as a friend!

[Turtle]

Bucky on myspace:

 

MySpace.com - www.myspace.com/buckyfuller

 

I'm proud to have him as a friend!

 

Given the underwhelming response that this thread has generated in the 2 years since starting, I'll take whatever I can get. :D

 

So Pianoman; have you discussed Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking with your friend? Anything written here in the thread about it that stirs a memory of an intimate moment with Bucky? Did you know he prefers to be called Trimtab now that he's dead? :)

 

Anything? Anyone? :( ;)

[pianoman1976]

Anything written here in the thread about it that stirs a memory of an intimate moment with Bucky? Did you know he prefers to be called Trimtab now that he's dead? :D

 

Trimtab. That's my ferrets name.

 

I can't say I know a whole lot about Bucky's work. I was more interested in his person. He was a good guy. He made great ableskivers. I still have his recipe. If you'd like me to post it - I'll type it up.

 

RR ;)

[Turtle]

Trimtab. That's my ferrets name.

 

I can't say I know a whole lot about Bucky's work. I was more interested in his person. He was a good guy. He made great ableskivers. I still have his recipe. If you'd like me to post it - I'll type it up.

 

RR :)

 

Well...as I say, I have to take what I can get, and this is the Watercooler so post away. I had to look up ableskivers, but they sound great. Possibly similar to Swedish anglespoons? Now there's a pastry with geometry! From a thin dough strip, an interior slot is cut and an end pulled through; then it's fried and sprinkled with powdered sugar. They puff up rather than stay flat.

 

Any other Trimtab recipes? Did he keep pets? ;) :dog: ;)

 

Here's is some of our friends writing that uses his 'good guy' selfatude to tastily introduce us to geometry. :D100.00 SYNERGY

[Turtle]

From another thread:

OK' date=' is this something more relevant, or germane, or non-perturbative?:

 

 

A serious problem is how to select a microstructure where each state is a priori "equally likely". This is not a trivial, especially if you try to understand this in a context where you want all constructs to be induced from real observations.

 

 

600.03 A structure is a system of dynamically stabilized self-interfering and thus self- localizing and recentering, inherently regenerative constellar association of a minimum set of four energy events. ...

 

600.00 STRUCTURE

 

Nothing more perterbative it appears than discussing Fuller's geometry. :) :hihi:

[Turtle]

Food for Sunday thought from Trimtab:

 

505.41 One of the things we have to make clear for society is the intellectual dilemma of the Max Planck-descended scientists: the way they do their problems, they can have either a wave or a particle but not both simultaneously. Heisenberg has the same dilemma. They make the error of thinking of a wave as a physical continuity rather than as a metaphysical, weightless pattern integrity, experimentally detectable only by virtue of the medium of the locally displaced, frequency tuned, physical phenomenon__a principle operating utterly independent of any physical medium. (See Secs. 973.30 and 1009.36.)

 

Fig. 505.41

[Turtle]

I see by the ol' timepiece that it's time again to bump up Bucky for the newer crowd. Any Bucky bashers out there in the audience? Ardent supporters? :circle:

 

Let's pick a bit and have a go.

 

...The tangentially passing energy events are always and only moving in lines that are at nearest moment perpendicular to the radii of the observer, which means that the multiplicity of his real events does not produce chaos: it produces discretely apprehendable experience increments, all of which can be chartingly identified by angle and frequency data therewith to permit predictable reinterpositioning events and environmental transformations .

1001.13 The observer's unfamiliarity with the phenomena he is observing, the multiplicity of items of interaction and their velocity of transformations, and their omniengulfing occurrences tend to dismay the observer's hope of immediate or reasonable comprehension. Therefore, observers are often induced to discontinue their attempts at technical comprehension of their experience, in a surrender of the drive to comprehend. This fills the potential comprehension void of the observer with a sense of chaos, which sensation he then subconsciously converts into a false rationale by explaining to himself that the environment is inherently chaotic, ergo, inherently incomprehensible. Thus he satisfies himself that he is being super-reasonably "realistic" and that Universe is just annoyingly disorderly__ergo, frequently dismissible__which seemingly warrants his invention of whatever kind of make-believe Universe seems momentarily most satisfying to him. ...

1000.00 OMNITOPOLOGY

 

I boldened the bit that sounds peculiarly like something our beloved Dr. Dick might say. :eek: Ready...set...go!

[Moontanman]

If I ever get to build a house Bucky's geodesic dome will be a big contender here in this hurricane zone! A company called American Ingenuity makes a great dome:)

[Turtle]

If I ever get to build a house Bucky's geodesic dome will be a big contender here in this hurricane zone! A company called American Ingenuity makes a great dome:)

 

Sweet! Was it this quote of Fuller's that convinced you?

...The tangentially passing energy events are always and only moving in lines that are at nearest moment perpendicular to the radii of the observer' date=' which means that the multiplicity of his real events does not produce chaos: it produces discretely apprehendable experience increments, all of which can be chartingly identified by angle and frequency data therewith to permit predictable reinterpositioning events and environmental transformations. ...[/quote']

 

If you read a bit further in the section on Omnitopology, you find this exercise in practical geodesics. >>

1001.23 When using string to secure the cover on a cubical box whose edges are two feet long, people spontaneously surround the box in a direction perpendicular to the cube's edges and, having run the string completely around the cubical box in one direction, they do so again in a plane at right angle to the first wind-around. This takes 16 feet of string and a pair of mid-top and mid-bottoms knots to securely bind-in all six faces of the cube. However, all six faces can be surrounded and the cover held secure almost twice as economically by using only one string eight-and-one-half-feet long and following the geodesic line that winds around the corners of the cube from midedge to adjacent mid- edge to produce an equiedged hexagon whose length of line-of-string-reach-around is the shortest distance around all six faces of a cube, wherefore the string cannot slide off the cube. To make this most economical path dynamically evident, hold a cube between the index fingers of your left and right hands with the left index finger pressed against one top corner of the cube and your right index finger pressed against the corner of the bottom of the cube most diagonally opposite the first corner pressed. Now, holding the box firmly between the two index fingers and stretching your arms in front of you with your fingers at the same level above the floor, ask someone to spin the box around the axis between your two fingers; as they do so, you will see the top and bottom profile of the spinning box and its six free corners rotating in two pairs of three each to produce two hills in the top and bottom profiles of the revolving box with a valley between them running around the box's equator of spinning. Along the bottom-most valley runs the hexagonally wound eight-and-one-half-feet-long string in its geodesic valley of least distance around all six faces. ...

1000.00 OMNITOPOLOGY

[Moontanman]

Sweet! Was it this quote of Fuller's that convinced you?

 

If you read a bit further in the section on Omnitopology, you find this exercise in practical geodesics. >>1000.00 OMNITOPOLOGY

 

No, actually it was the ability of the geodesic dome to survive extreme weather conditions compared to more standard buildings that convinced me. during hurricane Andrew in many places, even on the beach, the only building left standing were concrete domes. Even when F5 tornadoes accompanying the storm winds passed through areas of close set homes the domes stood alone with all the other structures being wiped from the face of the Earth! these domes have stood up to everything including earth quakes. Not to mention they are guaranteed to hold up to any and all weather conditions. During the worst hurricanes had to offer these domes even survived storm surge (not the insides, just the outside) So if resistance to weather is a criteria then the concrete dome is the way to go!

[Turtle]

No, actually it was the ability of the geodesic dome to survive extreme weather conditions compared to more standard buildings that convinced me. during hurricane Andrew in many places, even on the beach, the only building left standing were concrete domes. Even when F5 tornadoes accompanying the storm winds passed through areas of close set homes the domes stood alone with all the other structures being wiped from the face of the Earth! these domes have stood up to everything including earth quakes. Not to mention they are guaranteed to hold up to any and all weather conditions. During the worst hurricanes had to offer these domes even survived storm surge (not the insides, just the outside) So if resistance to weather is a criteria then the concrete dome is the way to go!

 

Yes I know. :hihi: I'm trying to lure you into discussing the underpinnings of those abilities as Fuller describes them. If you come to understand the how & why, you can better apply & adapt the principles to your specific project(s). Fuller has given us a garden and all we can seem to do is piddle in it. :(

[Moontanman]

Yes I know. :hihi: I'm trying to lure you into discussing the underpinnings of those abilities as Fuller describes them. If you come to understand the how & why, you can better apply & adapt the principles to your specific project(s). Fuller has given us a garden and all we can seem to do is piddle in it. :(

 

Oh I have an armchair understanding of why a dome is stronger than a box or almost any other possible structure. I would like to build a true geodesic sphere home, I've drawn up simple plans for one but unless I find a way to get rich quick this is unlikely to happen. A dome, either monolithic or geodesic is a very strong structure and more efficient to heat and cool. Unfortunately it's not what most people want to live in, too far from the norm. My second choice would a be log type house but I will probably live and die in a ranch style house like most other people in my area.

[Turtle]

Oh I have an armchair understanding of why a dome is stronger than a box or almost any other possible structure. I would like to build a true geodesic sphere home, I've drawn up simple plans for one but unless I find a way to get rich quick this is unlikely to happen. A dome, either monolithic or geodesic is a very strong structure and more efficient to heat and cool. Unfortunately it's not what most people want to live in, too far from the norm. My second choice would a be log type house but I will probably live and die in a ranch style house like most other people in my area.

 

Are you giving me an obtuse joshing from that thar chair?

No! :( :D I want armchair understanding and discussion of Fuller's book Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking . Don't be afraid to explore the bid bad scary book on your own just because it presents complex ideas :Alien:; Fuller leads you as a parent leads a child. Scan the index and find a section that looks interesting, then read it, then return with a scathing report. :hihi::hyper:

 

 

Here's the online version: >> R. Buckminster Fuller's SYNERGETICS

[Moontanman]

Are you giving me an obtuse joshing from that thar chair?

No! :( :D I want armchair understanding and discussion of Fuller's book Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking . Don't be afraid to explore the bid bad scary book on your own just because it presents complex ideas :Alien:; Fuller leads you as a parent leads a child. Scan the index and find a section that looks interesting, then read it, then return with a scathing report. :hihi::hyper:

 

 

Here's the online version: >> R. Buckminster Fuller's SYNERGETICS

 

I'll give it a read, when I say arm chair understanding I am saying it's something I've looked into in some detail. before I was taken out of contention in the rat race I was actively looking for some land to put my dome home on. I looked into the details of the science behind the dome closely to make sue I wasn't just being mislead by the flavor of the year home design. I'll give the book a read when I can and get back to you.

[Turtle]

I'll give it a read, when I say arm chair understanding I am saying it's something I've looked into in some detail. before I was taken out of contention in the rat race I was actively looking for some land to put my dome home on. I looked into the details of the science behind the dome closely to make sure I wasn't just being mislead by the flavor of the year home design. I'll give the book a read when I can and get back to you.

 

There's a good & reasonable fella. Einstein is reported to have personally told Fuller, [paraphrase]"Young man, I wish I had done things as useful as you."* Even if Albert was just being polite, I want to know what about Fuller was worth being polite. No better source than the ol' dead horse's mouth. R. Buckminster Fuller's SYNERGETICS

 

*actual Einstein quote from post #12: "Young man, you amaze me. I cannot conceive of anything I have ever done, having the slightest practical application."

[freeztar]

I see by the ol' timepiece that it's time again to bump up Bucky for the newer crowd. Any Bucky bashers out there in the audience? Ardent supporters? :circle:

 

Let's pick a bit and have a go. :doh:

 

1000.00 OMNITOPOLOGY

 

I boldened the bit that sounds peculiarly like something our beloved Dr. Dick might say. :eek: Ready...set...go! ;)

 

Perhaps if you translated this into English, more people would discuss it. :xx:

[Turtle]

Perhaps if you translated this into English, more people would discuss it. :circle:

 

1001.22 Within the total cosmic complexity the directions taken by each and all of the moving bodies are always the paths of least resistance. Because the paths are those of least resistance, all events of all transforming and traveling entities require the least energy to accomplish their complex action programmed passages__ergo, their accomplished curvilinear courses are always the most economical lines of travel. These most economical routes of travel are known as geodesic lines. Geodesics are not only nature's most economical lines of interrelationship travel, but ipso facto they are also nature's shortest- time-of-travel lines. ...

1000.00 OMNITOPOLOGY

 

Oh sure! Make the turtle do it.

 

Rough translation: Whether you know it or not, the Universe is behaving efficiently and on time.

 

Certainly one difficulty in starting with this section is that it follows all the explanatory material for the terms & concepts used. As you can see, I have little success in getting anyone to read Synergetics from the git-go. :doh: What I find equally puzzling is the paucity of response to some of these specifics I have given that bear hard & fast on many of the topics here that folks like to debate, such as what is time etcetera.

 

Anyway, here is as good a starting place for Synergetics as there is: ;) R. Buckminster Fuller's SYNERGETICS