> As you well know, my tendency toward pugilism has not disappeared - just > evolved. > > For example -- > > I have been until now resisting sparring with you as to Fullerian > geometry. There seems to be an obsession with regularity - in the > Euclidian sense. Rigid motions of regular shapes - and in that sense it > always seems to me to represent a pre-modern (non-Kleinian) conception > of geometry.
Sparring OK by me. There's a filter here: what's easy enough for Kirby to program? That narrows things drastically. I focus on the regular stuff because that's what's easiest for me to code. Fuller's goal, on the other hand, was to come up with a coherent geometric language (a prose form) that'd describe whatever: trees, stars, dust mites... The concentric hierarchy stuff I dwell on in my hypertoons is regular/rigid (except the jitterbug plays on joint flexibility) and embeds in a frozen lattice of CCP spheres. Crystallography mostly. Plus a basic grounding in coordinate systems and spatial relationships. Geometry 101. http://www.mathforum.com/kb/plaintext.jspa?messageID=3696497 Kirby _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
