At 08:27 pm 25-02-05 -0800, you wrote:
>Waxing philosophical on ZPE and the divine architecture of
>hidden reality this weekend (aren't all vortexians?) ...
>
>Item ... the day-to-day practice of earth-bound Architecture
>can tell us more about reality than is evident from graceful
>lines and soaring spaces.
>
>"God is in the details,"
> --attributed to the architect Mies van der Rohe
>
>contrast that with
>
>"The devils is in the details,"
> --attributed to the architect Buckminster Fuller
>
>Both views are correct in their own way, and the two are not
>really antithetical any more than are gender differences (OK
>maybe that's not such a good example of the point I am
>trying to make) but many dualities are demonstrative of the
>janus-like visage and the self-same-ness of ostensibly
>contradictory identities
>.
>Item. This should come as no surprise to anyone who has
>studied the science of "Chaos". After all, self-organization
>and extropy often coalesce from the chasm of randomness by
>means of a polarity-seed - a tiny bit attraction and
>repulsion, a tentative bifurcation expanding into the
>"butterfly effect" and the famous "Lorentz attractor."
>Therefore, it can be said that emergent dualities are the
>very sine-qua-non of extropy. Mirrored-contrast, as is seen
>in opposites is ubiquitous below the surface of reality, and
>there is a very good reason for that in the vacuum of space,
>wherein lies the original duality - the grand-daddy of them
>all, the epo pair. Aha, once again, it all gets back to the
>epo.
>
>We see this basic similarity-of-extremes reflected
>everywhere in life - specially in religion, science and
>government. Were the Catholic popes of the inquisition any
>less consumed with evil than the godless Stalin, for
>instance? There is no doubt that many cops would be crooks
>if they couldn't be cops. But roles can switch in mid
>stream, and north become south (as will likely happen on
>Gaia soon). But this probably cannot happen when one polar
>extreme looses its extropy potential and becomes so doused
>with entropy as to be intransigent - as in the profound
>pig-headedness of the modern-day Luddites like Bob Park and
>his ilk, which are in contrast to the brilliant and
>open-minded horizons of eminent scientists like Brian
>Josephson and the late Julian Schwinger.
>
>Item. What are architects trying to tell us that transcends
>beautiful spaces? It is not *just* that both the grandest
>constructions projects depends for their success on a
>plethora of seemingly insignificant components. But it is
>also that getting the details right can create the
>"emergent" property from simplicity itself. When one is able
>to reiterate enough simple tasks like the tiny off-on
>switches of digital electronics, then a beautiful picture
>can emerge on a computer screen. Or, as Bucky Fuller also
>opined on many occasions, "The whole becomes far greater
>than the sum of its parts."
>
>Chaos theory was a big thing on the pop-sci scene almost two
>decades ago, following James Glieck's book (1987) which
>precipitated a trend that is ongoing today. Are there any
>lessons to be had there for the vortex "Zepmeister" (the
>tamer of the "west-wind" aether) either in "Chaos" or in the
>properly organizing the "details," which can be interpreted
>here to mean imposing an intelligent structure on a spatial
>geometry of a few nanometers?
>
>Perhaps... (and finally getting to the point).
>
>The story which precipitated this flight into philosophical
>fancy and endless rambling can be found at:
>http://www.physorg.com/news2996.html
>
>If is kind of the nano-version of the old tuning-fork
>scheme. You remember, the old Keely talk about when one
>excited tuning fork, placed in a room of hundreds of
>thousands of resonant tuning forks, would cause all the
>other forks to resonate to a similar intensity, thus
>multiplying the energy expressed by this assemblage into
>mechanical overunity.
>
>In the case of the team of Boston University physicists, led
>by Pritiraj Mohanty (thank Vishnu for foreign-born
>engineers), who developed the nanomechanical oscillator
>mentioned in the reference above, which set a record at for
>mechanical vibration of 1.49 gHz, when pushed to the limit.
>In this case, God is in the details. I find it immensely
>interesting, in reading the particulars, that the technique
>works at very **cold** temperature, not hot, and that the
>vibration in the vicinity of a spectrum where this
>particular observer is on record as expecting to finding
>OU - which is 1.42 Ghz.
>
>Are we getting closer to ZPE coherence, step-by-step and in
>fits-and-pieces?
>
>More later. Looks like I'm almost out of threadbare idioms
>for today...
>
>Jones
>
>... the people who are crazy enough to think they can change
>the world, are often the ones who do."
>
> -- from "Think Different," an Apple Computer Ad
I can see there's hope for you yet Monsieur Flambeau. ;-)
Perhaps you have followed Chaplin's link to Glastonbury and
the mystical significance of that weird Vesica Pisces
coincidence is slowly filtering in.
I can't believe that someone with your poetic sensitivities
is entirely immune from such influence. ;-)
Cheers,
Frank
================================================
THE VESICA PISCES:-
------------------------------------------------
Two Circles share a common radius AB ( = 1 )
The intersecting circles create a Vesica Pisces.
AB is the minor axis of this Vesica Pisces.
CD is the major axis.
CD intersects the minor axis at mutual midpoint E.
The major axis (CD) = the square root of three
PROOF:
In right triangle (EBC),
EB = 1/2 AB
CB = AB = 1.
Therefore:
EB^2 + CE^2 = CB^2
(1/2)^2 + CE^2 = 1^2
CE^2 = 1 - 1/4 = 3/4
CE = (3^(1/2))/2
CE is 1/2 of the major axis CD
2.CE = CD
CD = 3^(1/2)
================================================
