Time Is Only Dimension

Author: ebuc

Posts

Total: 192
Topic's author
#1
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
......960.03..."Time is the only dimension. In synergetics time-size is expressible as frequency.".... Bucky Fuller

Time as motion, ergo, spin of minimal 3D { volumetric } tetra{4}hedron ---other fundamental motions are, orbit, precession, inside-outing, torque/tist, expand-contract---. 

Time as Meta-space 2D lattice has four lines of a minimally consideration, as a quasi-linear, numerically associated, irregular { asymmetrical } and, regular { symmetrical } set if sine-wave associations /\/\/ or as ^v^v^v^v.

Time quantised as a 3D vector { magnitude and direction } matrix is at minimum, a set of two or more, intersecting,/interfering, spiral helixes , that,  when defining a torus { outer positive curvature (  ) and inner negative curvature )(, surface set of nodal events }, with two dipolar invaginations { > in < }, that,  complete the volumetric body of the quantum space-time set,  as a frequency of intersecting and interfering quantum space-time tori phenomena.

(  O  ) = birds-eye-view of the outer and inner great circle planes of a torus surface, ex a doughnut sitting on counter

(   (  (  O    )  )   ) = two bold lines are the are the two great circles defined by two peaks of sine-wave as volumetric body { inside-the-tube } of quantum space-time torus

------  ------ = four great circle, 2D  planes bisecting above stated spiral helix torus, as seen from side-view of quantum space-time torus { doughnut } sitting on counter and here again the bold is representative of the inside-the-tube sine-wave plane as volumetric body of quantum space-time torus.

+  = two of the above planes  --ie. from two quantum space-time tori--  intersecting/interfering with each other, at 90 degree orientation to each other





#2
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
I thought rainbow was the only dimension.

#3
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Hi Ebuc.

I've no doubt said this before.


Time is that which allows an event to have duration

Space is that which allows an event to occur.

Matter is that which requires events with duration.


And I prefer jam doughnuts to ring doughnuts.

So thank GOD for giving us the time and space to cook doughnuts.


GOD principle, rather than a floaty about Middle Eastern Bloke.
#4
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,594
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@ebuc
There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man.
It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity.
It is the middle ground between light and shadow,
between science and superstition,
and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge.
This is the dimension of imagination.
It is an area which we call . . . the Twilight Zone.


#5
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@FLRW
Nice.
Topic's author
#6
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Time is that which allows an event to have duration
Time is not an entity that allows or dissallows like a guard at a gate.

And event is duration ergo and event is observed quantised time, and inherent --if not also apriori-- to our finite,  occupied space Universe. The is no outside God or entity called "time" that allows or dissallows and event.

Space is that which allows an event to occur.
And more specifically 3D volumetric space, that is inherently inclusive of 2D and 1D,and the minimal 3D volume can have not less than then the characteristics of a tetra{4}hedron.

Matter is that which requires events with duration.
Fermionic matter and bosonic forces, as ive pointed out to you previously over the years.

You dont seemed to understand that yet.

So thank GOD for giving us the time and space to cook doughnuts. GOD principle, rather than a floaty about Middle Eastern Bloke.

There is no God entity outside of ---or prior to-- the existence of our finite, occupied space Universe. 
Ive pointed that out to you also, you seem to understand that yet. The only God is our finite, occupied space Universe. You may come to grasp and accept this truth some day I will not hold my breath.

The truth of that is in the evidence of our finite, occupied space Universe and the lack of any evidence of the other two you mention.

You get and E for effort.

Topic's author
#7
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@FLRW
It is an area which we call . . . the Twilight Zone.
Ok and it is called that which existed in the mind of Roger Zelazny and his Nine Princes of Amber series. Great Stuff!

Remmeber 2D area is included aspect  of 3D volume and never exists seperately except in the mind of Jacob Bekenstien, Leonard Susskind and others who grasp the fundamental  mathematics associated  black hole holographic phenomena, ergo comments by Jacob ...' we appear  to be 2D creatures having an illusion of 3D '.....

Go figure and get back to me. Ive many times shown geometrically, how that would seemingly occur.
#8
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
For sure.

And I will give you an E/C for EbuccubE.

Have a nice day.
Topic's author
#9
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
For sure.
For sure what?  I dont think you grasp much of what Ive presented to you in regards to post # 7 above.

1} eternal  existence of finite, occupied space Universe ergo not created not destroyed only eternally transforming phases or states of existence, aka Spirit-2, 3 and 4,

2} eternally existent, macro-infinite and truly non-occupied space, outside of the above mentioned Universe,

------------------------conceptual line-of-demarcation-------------------------

3} Spirit-1, Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego { i/identity } accessed by human nervous system ex abstract concepts of Time, God, Universe, Dogs, Triangles/Math, Toyota's, etc i.e. Meta-space is not an occupied space,--written out-there in the sky/cosmos--  it is abstract concept of Space, and all other.

This above is the Cosmic Primary Set and any concept or occupied space something falls within context of the above Cosmic Trinary Set.  None will ever have a more fundamental primary set of wholistic existence, then this three ive laid out clearly for some 10 or more years now. Simple, not complex to grasp.

Then the there is the more specific,  trinary sub-catagories of the above, more generalized,  Cosmic Trinary Set.

Ex what are the sub-catagories of macro-infinite non-occupied space?

2a} macro-infinite, 2b} micro-infinite, and a 2c} shape, defined by the finite, occupied space Universe, that, is embraced by the macro-infinite, and truly non-occupied space.

If that space, is a true vacuum, the shouldnt it be sucking the finite Universe apart?  h,mmm?
Topic's author
#10
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
And I will give you an E/C for EbuccubE.
Non-stable cube [  ] = 8 trinary { Y } vertexial events { 8 viewpoints }
..................................12 lines-of-relationship { vectors? }
.....................................6 openings

Stable cube = 12 opening diagonals { triangulation } aka 12 lines-of-relationship { vectors? }, creates 6 quadratic { X }  vertexial viewpoints 
.........................4 volumetric diagonals { diameter between corners }, plus 3 diameter lines-of-relationship --not involved with structural stability--, between the 6, square  opening central vertexes  [  x  ]
.........................24  triangular surface area openings,
..........................1 volumetric vertexial viewpoint { 4 lines-of-relationship create the 1 nuclear { x } quadratic/quatenary crossing }.

The total set of trinary { Y } vertexes is 8..........YY  YY  YY  YY  YY....
The total set of quadratic/quatenary [ X } vertexial events is 7 { this includes the nuclear vertex } .....X X  X  x  X X X   ......
   
The total lines-of-relationship { individual vectors } and 28 and 28 / 4 = 7....3 { structural } + 4 { systemic } = 7 and 7 is the 4th prime number in a linear sequence { 2,3-5-7 }.

#11
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Space can't be a vacuum because it's full of stuff.

And for sure, 2D is a hypothetical property of a 3D assumption.

in so much as we think we know, but we can't be 100% certain.
Topic's author
#12
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Space can't be a vacuum because it's full of stuff.
Apparrently Zed, your not really reading what I presented.  I stated macro-infinite non-occupied space as a true vacuum, not occupied space Universe.  Maybe you can grasp the differrence between the words occupied and non-occupied, even tho Ive offerred much clarity over the years. Just yesterday i entered a public restroom that had several stalls and each door there as a vacant { non-occupied } and in-use { occupied } writing on the turn-knob, so as folks do not try to enter if occupied.

That is old news and Ive explained about the man who invented the technique

And for sure, 2D is a hypothetical property of a 3D assumption.
Your words, not what i stated.

in so much as we think we know, but we can't be 100% certain.
Logical deductions --along with the facts---  are often used by humans to arrive at a conclusion, and moving forward with an action.
We have evidence for finite Universe. We have no evidence for infinite occupied space Universe.

Again, you get an E for effort, yet lacking seemingly lacking on some of your reading comprehension skills. Maybe short on time, distracted or tired. Who knows.



#13
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
So, I grasp the concept of occupied and unoccupied space. Universe and beyond as it were.

Are you suggesting that the potential of unoccupied space is a separate compartment?

As a concept space can be potentially infinite without boundaries.

Or not.

But to me, the or not option is not so conceptually obvious. Universe in a bubble type thing.

As I see it a universe is only bounded by it's ongoing potential.


Theoretical physicists are fine in theory.

Though tomorrow there will be one with a new big idea.


Though, I assume that all might or might not one day lead to a conclusion.
Topic's author
#14
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
So, I grasp the concept of occupied and unoccupied space. Universe and beyond as it were.
Great to hear Zed! It is rather simple set of concepts yet so few can grasp, much less accept.

Are you suggesting that the potential of unoccupied space is a separate compartment?
Macro-infinite, truly non-occupied space is not a " compartment ". A  compartment is finite container. Read what i present. There is no reason to go off on in some other direction. More respectful if you address directly what is stated

Meta-space is a catagory, as would be found in a ' Table of Contents ' at the beginning of any well designed educational book,  not a "compartment".   A compartment is more likened to an actual container.

As a concept space can be potentially infinite without boundaries.
Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego { i/identity } include concepts of Space, Time, Dogs, God, Universe, etc.
Yes, and I presented several times over the years, infinite space concept, of truly non-occupied space.

We can have concept of infinite occupied space, and again, you do not address what ive stated to you in those regards, erg, I have to restate.....we have no evidence of a macro-infinite, occupied space Universe, and their is no shred of logic, common sense critical thinking to support such. This old news ive been stating here and elsewhere for years.

But to me, the or not option is not so conceptually obvious. Universe in a bubble type thing.
Eternally existent, finite, occupied space Universe is dynamic ergo, a transformative/changing shape, to whatever degree.

A dynamically lumpy spherical is my best guess. Since it is composed of ultra-high number overlapping and interfering, quantum space-time tori (  o  ) l

As I see it a universe is only bounded by it's ongoing potential.
1} Eternally existent, finite, occupied space Universe. What part of that do you not grasp?

2} potential for what specifically? To expand and contract? Be specific with your "potential".  If you going to go off on potential to be macro--infinite, then all evidence and logic, common sense critical thinking is opposed to such concepts.  And you certainly offer no logic, common sense for and macro-infinite expanding occupied space Universe, nor,

3} do you offer any evidence or logic, common sense for a finite or infinite Universe that has an origin ---i.e. a occupied space something from nothing----.

Theoretical physicists are fine in theory.
Ive yet to see address any evidence, much any such evidence in addition with logic, common sense critical thinking, that, is associated with physical laws and cosmic principles we know exist in complement to finite, occupied space Universe.

Though tomorrow there will be one with a new big idea.
Huh? Zed, this appears to me as your trying to have poetry, not any logical common sense critical thinking. Yes new stuff is discovered. The latest "big idea " that are coming into more clarity is quantum entanglement between two or more black holes. Ive posted various vids with Leornard Susskind and others  in these regards of new data.

Though, I assume that all might or might not one day lead to a conclusion.
For humans, that " conclusion " is to find a Grand Theory of Everything { GTOE }.  For some years now, many have cut loose of such being possible, however, access to understanding/comprhending quantum entanglement --saka pooky-action-at a seemingly no-time-at-all for any distance---  is giving hope to many who believe there is a GTOE.

Those who quit did so because they could not see anyway to have Gravity and all else in the same theory working together.

#15
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
I used the word compartment to represent the non-vacuum/vacuum idea.
Topic's author
#16
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
I used the word compartment to represent the non-vacuum/vacuum idea.
Compartment in reality is finite volume ex compartment of train is where people sleep, eat, drink, small group, or larger public group.

I understand how any words can be used for physical reality space and/or conceptual Meta-space in conversation, however, some words are more refined to more clearly represent the concepts of consideration.

Catagory =  ex, table of contents of a book

Compartment = this is your compartment for duration of the trains journey to its final  destination.

This is partly why new words come into existence, to better reflect the specifics of the concept were trying to convey, ergo, getting closer and closer to an absolute truth, and further from a relative truth.  More refined instead of less refined. More pure instead of less pure.

A Grand Unified Theory of Everything { GUTOE } is the final Meta-space conclusion understanding the cosmos/Universe.

There is no final conclusion to the existence of our eternally existent, finite, occupied space Universe, only transformations aka phase changes or states of existence.

Naught is created nor destroyed, only transformed......see associated physical law of conservation.
#17
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
GUTOE.

Isn't an ultimate theory, still only a theory.

And therefore falls short of a Complete And Final Knowledge Of Everything.....CAFKOE.


If there is any purpose to material development and decline and redevelopment, then wouldn't CAFKOE be vital to the resurrection of the process.

Naught is created or destroyed, but failed to reinitiate. As it might be.
Topic's author
#18
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
GUTOE. Isn't an ultimate theory, still only a theory.

Yes, and Ive never stated otherwise. Ive been clear with my comments in this thread. Time is the only dimension according to Fuller, at least on the day he wrote those words in Synergetics

And therefore falls short of a Complete And Final Knowledge Of Everything.....CAFKOE.
Your the one whose brought the words 'conclusion' into this conversation, not me. All I did was tell you what concept of humans would be considered as the conclusion to humans search of understanding Universe. Ive been very clear on this on in this conversation.

If there is any purpose to material development and decline and redevelopment, then wouldn't CAFKOE be vital to the resurrection of the process.
WTF are you going on about Zed? This is totally irrelevant to what weve been talking about. I have no idea what it is your even going on about this above last comment so again WTF?

Naught is created or destroyed, but failed to reinitiate. As it might be.
Huh? This appears as meangingless dribble to me Zed. WTF are you going on about with this " failed to reinitiate" comment in regards to my previous comment --regarding a physical law--  that you put in the same sentence.  You really lack in clarity in two place in these replies above Zed.  I think your in way over your head, as you are with you God principle rehtoric.

Meaningless and no specific logic, common sense critical thinking explanation for some of your comments. :--( You get an E for effort, but like anyone else, your not going to have anything to offer that invalidates any of my cosmic ideas Ive laid out clearly for years at DArt and Dart, as well as many other places.  Please share when can offer some logic, common sense critical thinking for at least two of the comments above I reproach you about.
#19
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
You yourself stated that:    

A. Naught is created and naught is destroyed, only transformed.


Now, I can happily run with that principle, within the context of apparently existent and ongoing matter.

I was simply asking whether a process of transformation/material development has a purpose and necessary outcome  relative to intellectual input.

I was further suggesting that perhaps CAFKOE was vital to an ongoing sequence/process of transformation/material development.

If not then from an intellectual perspective, wherein lies any real intellectual purpose. 


NB. From an intellectual perspective it is also not possible to ignore the something from nothing principle.

Which despite principle A, is a basic an recurring intellectual  consideration of uncaused matter.


Topic's author
#20
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
You yourself stated that:    A. Naught is created and naught is destroyed, only transformed.
Yes, and that is been around for 100 years or more, whereas your "failed to reinitiate" is meaningless to me.
It makes not logical sense to me.  I await further clarity from you  Zed.

Now, I can happily run with that principle, within the context of apparently existent and ongoing matter.
Again, you dont seem to read what I state clearly. It is a physical law that humans discovered, with not one shred of evidence that is not a inviolate physical law.
I await further clarity from you on this "failed to reinitiate" comment Zed.

I was simply asking whether a process of transformation/material development has a purpose and necessary outcome  relative to intellectual input.
I said nothing about "material" Zed.  Please try and actually read my lips/text as presented to you. Can you do that? This last statement above ..."process of transformation/material development has a purpose and necessary outcome  relative to intellectual input."......also appears to  me as meaningless dribble.

I was further suggesting that perhaps CAFKOE was vital to an ongoing sequence/process of transformation/material development.
Again, for 2nd time, I I have no idea what this "CSFKOE" is supposed to me i.e. again you give no specifics, no clarity of explanation as too wtf your going on  about. ergo meaningless dribble to me as is the rest of the above comment.

If not then from an intellectual perspective, wherein lies any real intellectual purpose. 
Huh? Wtf are going on about Zed?

NB. From an intellectual perspective it is also not possible to ignore the something from nothing principle.
Zed, you have nothing valid to say, so you revert to meaningless dribble with absolutely no clarity or explanation. 

Naught is created = something from nothing. You have no valid response so you create mind-game bubble gum with no logic, common sense critical thinking explanation.  I expected better from you, and now it is obvious your falling way short of my expectations. E for effort, not effort-less

Which despite principle A, is a basic an recurring intellectual  consideration of uncaused matter.
Wtf? More meaingless dribble Zed.  Naught is created nor destroyed is something you cant seem to comprehend ergo you above repeated lack of logic, common sense critical thinking.

Naught is created nor destroyed = eternally existent.  Get you yourself and dictionary and research what the word eternal means.

Your "uncaused " comment means that you think Universe has a purpose, and it does not.  Humans apply their purpose to this that, and other things, like Universe.

This above is just more of other ways for you to invoke your ' God principle ' --whatever you may think that means ',  only your using differrent words of cause or uncaused instead.  There is no God principle Zed. It is meaningless dribble. You dont seem to grasp that.

(@) = Universe

*(@)* = concept of a biological God outside of Universe as in ..humans are made in image of bilateral God...etc type Biblical words

/* i  *\ = bilateral { eyes/ears } female woman { internalized ovaries

*Y* =  bilateral male man { externallised testes } that also has potential for access to ego/identity

i = Meta-space { Spirit-1 } identity ergo ego

(  ) = positive geodesic curvature of meta-physical { non-quantised } Gravity { Spirit-3 }

)( = negative geodesic curvature of meta-physical { non-quantised } Dark Energy { Spirit-4 }

>< = invaginations from outer Gravity and inner Dark Energy, as found in quantum space-time tori

/\/\/ or as ^v^v^ = sine-wave pattering associated with Spirit-2 ---aka physical reality or observed{ quantised } time aka fermionic matter and  bosonic forces

....................space(> * <) i  (> *<)space.............................. or as,

....................space(/\/\/) i  (/\/\/)space.............................or as,

....................space(^v^v^) i  (^v^v^)space............................wherein, physical reality is inside the quantum space-time torus i.e. reality is the volumetric body of the torus, whereas ultra-micro Gravity and Dark Energy are the outer and inner set of nodal surface events, diametrically in opposition to each other


Topic's author
#21
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
There exist degrees of consciousness and degrees of access to Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts.

(@) Universe is ...."moderation/modulation of angle and frequency"....Bucky Fuller.....or as I present (/ \ / )(/ \ / )

 Via angle and frequency we get shapes of tori, sphericals, biologics, planets, chemical elements etc

To be clear tho, Richard P. Feynman says, ..forget anything others told you about a photon { electro-magnetic radiation } being a wave, as it only appears to us as a discreet particle unit of energy.....

 A wave is a Meta-space pattern. A wave is not the water or any other occupied space medium.

^v^v^v and / \ / \ = Meta-space pattern of a wave, composed of discreet particles of atoms, collectively called a pixel/pixels on our screen. Our occupied space eyes see the particles and our Meta-space access to mind discerns the wave pattern.

Here is another way for others to grasp the distinction between particle and wave.Hold your arm hand out in front of you, now move it laterally back and forth, while raising and lowering it.We create a wave pattern. Yes?

So now stop moving your arm hand. So we still see our arm, yet there is no apparrent wave in front of us is there?

So where did the wave go, or did it ever exist at all? Yes, it it exists as Meta-space pattern of mind/intellect/concept, not the occupied space particles of arm and hand, that we still see out in front of us. Understand this distinction?


#22
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
To further theory it is essential that all is considered and nothing is dismissed.

As it is, you are as theoretical as me and any other theorist.

And CAFKOE was just another theoretical acronym, representing the Complete And Final Knowledge Of Everything relative to material development.

Which is a simple string of words and quite easy to understand; basically meaning exactly what it says.

Now it has to be said that Ebuc-speak is quite symbolic and unique and not so easy to understand, but I do try.


Topic's author
#23
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
To further theory it is essential that all is considered and nothing is dismissed.
Huh? What theory. You lack clarity in most things you state Zed.  Mind games to avoid truth as presented to you

As it is, you are as theoretical as me and any other theorist.
I am ebuc not a theory. More mind games on your part to save face and avoid truths presented to you. Distraction from truth.

And CAFKOE was just another theoretical acronym, representing the Complete And Final Knowledge Of Everything relative to material development.
Well thanks for some clarity four five posts later

Which is a simple string of words and quite easy to understand; basically meaning exactly what it says.
Yeah except you never stated the words in last four or more posts. It is like playing find the shell under of one your cups of  mystery mind game.

It is a lot of guessing came with you. GUTOE has been around for some 30, 40 50 years or more ergo ergo very commonly well known and I spelled out words early on.

Now it has to be said that Ebuc-speak is quite symbolic and unique and not so easy to understand, but I do try.
This sounds like some kind of gaelic Zed-speak, that once again, has not one shred of content that explain what it is in relation too. Show some respect of the other person Zed, and post a reference quote.  You seem to be lacking in intellect and effort { lazy } with your replies

TIme is the only dimension....Bucky Fuller....all occupied space is...' moderatiion/modification of angle and frequency '....B Fuller

#24
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Theory is theory.....So any theory.


I am ebuc not a theory.....Word games.

CAFKOE.....Fully explained in post#17.


GUTOE.... Yep,  GUTOE is a another simple acronym and means exactly what it says.

A collective theory of theories, that falls short of CAFKOE

The clue is in the word theory. GUTOE

As it is, both GUTOE and CAFKOE are just inert statements that do not attempt to explain anything.


So you theorise, and you present your thoughts regularly on DebateArt. 

And there is no escaping from the fact that a great deal of what you present is symbolism coupled with you own unique narratives.

Honesty is not disrespect.


And who else on DebateArt, genuinely makes the effort to communicate with you.

Respect is a two way thing.
Topic's author
#25
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Theory is theory.....So any theory.

Yes and no one is suggesting otherwise. Is this in reference to some specific point, comment by etc?

CAFKOE.....Fully explained in post#17.

Ahh, I see now, I missed it in captials. My bad. Sorry, thanks for clarifcation my friend from Britain. My 23andme ancestry located my ancestrys from some part of London. My dads side.

GUTOE.... Yep,  GUTOE is a another simple acronym and means exactly what it says.

Yeah, as I stated, well known { common } yours is not so I only saw the the bold acronym and it through me off.

A collective theory of theories, that falls short of CAFKOE. The clue is in the word theory. GUTOE. As it is, both GUTOE and CAFKOE are just inert statements that do not attempt to explain anything.
Advances are being made and Ive posted them in other threads in last 6 months Susskind and Google quantume computer of quantum entanglement.

So you theorise, and you present your thoughts regularly on DebateArt.
Theories that stem from facts that I also post regularly ex you mention matter and Ive clarified correctly several times that you do not include bosonic forces in your references. You lack the knowledge base and much further from a Complete Knowlege Base, than I am.

Ex .."time is the only dimension" vai Bucky Fuller is good, as far as our pyhsical reality is concerned ergo observed { quantised } time, that associated with the sine-wave patterning resultant inside the tube ---i.e. volmetric body of the tube---  of quantum space-time tori and associated with triangular { structural } numbers.

None have ever offered any shred of evidence that would invalidate the logical common sense critical thinking to arrive at my quantum space-time conclusion regarding tori. No it is not the whole story in those regards, but that part regarding tori is.

Gravity { outer surface set of nodal events }  and Dark Energy { inner surface set of nodal events } are occurr in time, at ultra-micro scales of existent, ergo, beyond/Meta our ability to quantise them so beyond/Meta our physical reality of observed time.

Think of hyper-space or sub-space via the words ultra-micro.  It is that simple
 
And there is no escaping from the fact that a great deal of what you present is symbolism coupled with you own unique narratives.
Show me any 2ndary symbolism Ive used that Ive not gone into detail with clarifying explanation in all of my threads? Please.

A red stop light is a symbolism to STOP.. Green light is symbolism for GO. Humans use 2ndary symbolisms all over the place. So whats your point. A symbolism shortens a paragraph { or less } of words of explanation.

Honesty is not disrespect.
Huh? Wtf Zed?  This is out of left field with no reference to why your making this comment. No quote by me no reference no clarification etc.
When you have something that adds too, or invalidates any of my cosmic concepts please share. You will not, just as others have not, and many have learned to save face/ego, by not even attempting to so.

Far easier to mock and through snide remarks than put out sincere effort of comprehensive consideration

And who else on DebateArt, genuinely makes the effort to communicate with you.
Rarely any and that does not change the facts I present nor the logical, common sense critical thinking set of sequences that lead to my final conclusions, that, I have added to and evolved over the last 30 years.

Respect is a two way thing.
Ive never suggested otherwise. If I have please share my comments that would suggest such. I think part of respect is quoting others comments, when I'm addressing those comments. Much hokey pokey guess work as to what the fuck the other person is going about, without having any specific references.

Again you nor anyone else has added too, or invalidated any of my cosmic concepts, scenarios etc.  And instead of kudos, most all I ever get is jackass remarks.

They lack the knowledge base, or they have more knowledge base ergo the become snob cause I say something not in their knowledge base of science.

At lot of science is incomplete.  My ideas attempt to complete some of missing cosmic parts.

Again, time is only dimension via Fuller is really about the existence of occupied space ergo, his next line..in synergetics time is frequency. A sine-wave is a frequency of events ex EMRadiation, electron etc all have asssociated sine-wave patterning.

..all that exists is moderation/modulation of angle and frequency...Bucky Fuller.   Occupied space has shape, defined by angle and frequency.

The macro-infinite, and truly non-occupied space beyond/Meta the dynamic, occupied space Universe, is shaped by the border wwere the two meet. Understand?





Topic's author
#26
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
Hey Zed, you may take more of liken to Arthur Youngs cosmic  stuff than mine.  His approach and mine shared some similar beginnings i.e. he began with the counting number 1 and I began with the non-counting number 0.  This led me to on a differrent variation of what he fell off into.

He was more into astrology { hokey pokey }, whereas Bucky Fuller and myself more into numbers and goemetry, tho all three of have cross-over aspects.

Arthur was the inventor of the Bell Helicopter https://arthuryoung.com/books/the-reflexive-universe/

His early book is geometry of meaning here https://arthuryoung.com/books/the-geometry-of-meaning/
#27
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
OK.

I will take a look at Artur young when I get a moment.
#28
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@zedvictor4
You ain't no Bucky thats for sure. 
#29
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
No.

But I've got balls.
#30
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@zedvictor4
I can't think of a reply to that Zed. 
I do however want to say ,  Ergo .