Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

2980[sl] Re: cubical Holy of Holies

Expand Messages
  • super_romeman
    May 11, 2002
      i am rather distressed that i should have posted anything that would
      provoke such a violent reaction.

      i actually have no interest at all in defending the writer who i
      quoted, who may indeed be full of hot air as you suggest. the
      observations just seemed to me to stimulate thought (as they clearly
      did in your case).

      my impression of the areas of study that we are involved in is that
      they may begin by seeming something very strange or absurd and yet
      may end up communicating profound understandings of ourselves and the
      world around us.

      however, even if the writer's comments are way off base, as you say
      they are, they can still bear fruit. as sherlock holmes said to
      watson in sir arthur conan doyle's novel "the hound of the

      "I am afraid, my dear Watson, that most of your conclusions were
      erroneous. When I said that you stimulated me I meant, to be frank,
      that in noting your fallacies I was occasionally guided towards the

      thank you for your useful observations and accept my apologies for
      having offended you.

      best, romeman

      --- In sacredlandscapelist@y..., "Mark G. Ryan" <mgryan@c...> wrote:
      > super_romeman@y... wrote on Fri, 10 May 2002 10:29:49 -0000:
      > >
      > > "In the fourth dimension the infinite number of solids in the
      > > Universe are in relationship with each other through time and
      > > energy. ... The Fourth Dimension is portrayed geometrically by
      > Time? Energy? WTH!! This is completely vague and says nothing.
      > Time and energy actually mean something in physics. They are not
      > just impressive-sounding words.
      > > fractals and by the Hypercube. The Hypercube is the symbol used
      > Not a symbol. It is a geometrical solid: a mathematical object
      > just as understandable as the cube.
      > > mathematics to try and represent the fourth dimension in two
      > > dimensions (a drawing on a piece of paper - a plane). From the
      > Incorrect. The hypercube is the trace in 3-dim. of a 4-dim. cube.
      > It is no more "infinite" or "symbolic" than the square, which
      > to be the trace in 2-dim of a 3-dim cube.
      > > of the Hypercube through its 8 diagonals the Hypercube is related
      > > everything in the Universe. The infinity in the Fourth Dimension
      > > in the infinity of relations."
      > "Infinity" actually means something in mathematics. It is possible
      > talk about it with complete precision. It is not just a fancy word
      > used to impress people and a peg on which to hang New Age nonesense.
      > >
      > > http://www.fractalwisdom.com/FractalWisdom/fourth.html
      > >
      > I'm very impressed by most of what is posted to this list and
      > just lurk, but this was such a puff of hot air that I had to
      > Mark
    • Show all 7 messages in this topic