/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11934710
but I'm largely unbaised as the 12 spheres of closest packing make the cubooctahedron

>>11920994
you'll like this video OP
https://www.reddit.com/r/holofractal/comments/7oyo8s/john_dee_buckminster_fuller_and_vortex_based_math/

This process is described by fuller as Indigging, and seems to be a common process in those keen to seek out 'natures operating system' like Tesla

>>11903758
>The day/night cycle and seasons?
One of those constraints that make less sense as more and more clocks are thrust out of the atmosphere.

Sounds pixel perfect OP, continue

>>11823317

Am I sure? rarely, I've learned two unknowns for every known for too

>what do you mean by this?
http://www.rexresearch.com/rodin/13-rodinopeningblckhole.pdf (11-12)

I mean to describe that the rules his math system lays out can be generalized to higher dimensionality, and still provide perfect vector compression at the center of the circle, sphere, hypersphere etc.
2D ->3D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unqKSfZfzho

>and this?
continuity or smoothness if you will, generally requires infinity divisible numbers, stretching to infinite domains. Which of course forms an original sin of the modern maths becoming divorced from engineering, for there is no infinite divisibility in nature.

Marko Rodins number system generates a differentiable and integratible vector field composed of just whole numbers.

>what about this?
The cuboctahedron, the balance of all forces.
In a 1984, BNW fashion, does one think it odd we use something to represent nothing? 0, zero, text, information, entropy, all to explain the lack of it. Doublethink if you ask me. No zeroness, in any meaningful quantity, could only be used to describe the canceling out of forces.

https://fullerfuture.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/buckminsterfuller-synergetics.pdf (96)

>>11801004
nice pic, i'll expand, zero isn't a number it the balance of all numbers, a vector equilibrium, well represented by the cuboctahedron

>>11771271
0 and emptiness is a double edged sword, yes now computation becomes easier for human minds, but I think the ancients didn't include it for a reason, because nature doesn't consider or compute empty sets. I have recently concluded 0 to be a mathematical crutch and it takes math away from describing the domain of nature to an abstract domain of thought