Shape of Space vs Form vs Pattern of Space

Author: ebuc ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 5
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,059
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    Is a seemingly straight line a shape of Space? ________ Apparrently not according the article below.

    ..."The basic difference, though, between “shape” and “form” is that “form” is in 3D while “shape” is plain 2D."...

    So this this pattern{?} as follows  \/  i,e. a single angle defined by two lines, also is not a shape of Space, because it does not define an area?

    Is \/ truly even a pattern of Space?  Maybe a pattern requires requires a repetition  of angle ergo /\/ is two angles defined by three lines, however, the angles are in opposite directions.  Can this truly be called a pattern of Space?

    Ok so here  two angles in same direction, and a third angle in other direction  /\/\.  Is that closer to being a labeled as a true pattern of Space?

    /\/\/ and with this pattern of Space we have angular pattern of Space symmetry because, we have two angles in same direction and two angles in same direction that opposite direction, however, they are not diametrically 180 degree opposites, or at least their not diagonal opposites as associated with a diagonal between two points or nodes as follows  <>  , well actually to do this means we have to use four points/nodes and 2D area shape of Space.

    However, in so doing we skip over the less complex, triangle that goes back to a previous semi-2D shape of Space /\/\ wherein we have three angles but require 4 lines to do so.  So, Mother Nature does what with shapes of Space?

    /\  or Y both have three angles and only use three lines to define a shape of Space, however, one encloses as a finite 2D area, and the other does not.

    Finally we get to the birds-eye-view of a 3D { volumetric } tetrahedron \Y/ which is combination of the previous two, altho, if anyone  of the four vertexes of the tet is moved to the its diametrically opposing triangle opening, we have a 2D subdivided triangular area and now we have 9 inside angles,

    three on inside circumference, and three around central vertex.  Yes, in all of the above I'm excluding consideration of exterior angles.

    Have arrived at a conclusion as to what is the shapes of Space?  Yes and no, because of course there are many more we have not included.  Does and infinite amount exist? Yes conceptual infinity exists.  In actuallity a finite number can only exists with a finite occupied Space Universe, with a finite period of Metaphysical-1 time.

  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 2,223
    3
    6
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @ebuc
    While a theoretical line would not be a shape because it is assumed to have no thickness, an actual line has to have thickness in order to exist. This is because an actual line would have to be made up of particles, and particles have thickness. Consequently, actual lines do have defined areas and are shapes.

    One objection to this could be that the line might be made of energy rather than matter. At first, this appears to circumvent the need to have particles and creates a theoretical line with no thickness. However, this objection cannot stand because of the particle-wave duality of matter and energy. At its most basic form, even energy consists of particles. Therefore, the original argument stands. An actual line is a shape.

    Of course, my argument falls like a house of cards because your post implicitly assumes a theoretical line. This makes it obvious that my argument is merely nitpicking. That being said, theoretical lines exist only in theory and not in reality. Thus, while my argument is a clear example of nitpicking, it nevertheless makes a valid point.
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,059
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    --> @SirAnonymous
    Understanding 4 axi of tetrahedron -- four points and four openings---  intimately involve the four, 2D, hexagonal, equaltorial great planar bisections of the cubo-octahedron { Vector Equlibrium/VE } and this graphic LINK is a good as any to explain that 60 degree nature of intimacy.


    So we have a tetrahedron with its four 2D triangular openings coming to zero volume, ---without eliminating the conceptual size of the the 2D triangles--- and we see a cubo-octahedron is created, along with external 12 smaller triangles ---of a  seperate consideration from the VE.

    Four axi = 6 hexagonal bisections sharing a common zero volume tetrahedron and 12 external triangle of a shared 60 degree involvment.  Does this of zero volume tetrahedron shape transformation have some cosmic association to occupied Space Universe, or its parts?

    As a black hole evaporates EMRadiation is emitted ergo what goes in must come out, in one way or another.

    There is much more to this story and how all that exists may be encoded on the event horizon surface of some if not all black hole phenomena.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 12
    Forum posts: 2,351
    3
    2
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @SirAnonymous
    Energy is something.....2D is nothing.

    And ebuccube may or may not be either a genius or a joker.....You decide.
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,059
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    --> @zedvictor4
    The devil 666 is in the details.

    Pi^4 - 31 { XYZ } = 66.4  so 2 tenths short of 66.6, however,
    Pi^4 - 30.8 = 66.60, i.e. if 31 is a full  XYZ deck, then some one     is not playing with a full deck.

    Pi^3 { XYZ } = 31.00
     
    So we can expand Space by powering it....?

    Or is powering really just multiplication-by-division LINK  expansion of occupied Space?

    Or perhaps the macro-infinite non-occupied Space, outside of finite, occupied Space Universe, is pulling part on all of the occupied Space Universe?

    And the expansion is accelerating, because, ?????..a Dark Energy....??? or a rotating axis-of-spin Universe, ?????........

    See what this article says;

    ...."The geometrical pattern exhibited by the distribution of the spiral galaxies is clear, but can only be observed when analysing a very large number of astronomical objects,” Shamir added.

    .....The patterns span over more than 4 billion light-years, but the asymmetry in that range is not uniform. The asymmetry gets higher when the galaxies are more distant from Earth, which shows that the early Universe was more consistent and less chaotic than the current Universe.

    ......Whats more, the patterns do not just show that the Universe is not symmetric, but also that the asymmetry changes in different parts of the Universe, and the differences exhibit a unique pattern of multi-poles.
    "If the Universe has an axis, it is not a simple single axis like a merry-go-round," Shamir said. "It is a complex alignment of multiple axes that also have a certain drift.".........
    ~~\~~~~~/~~~~~~\~~~~~~/~~~~~\~~~~~~~~~/~~~~~~~~\~~~~~~~/~~~~~~~\~~~~~~~~~/~~~~~~~~\~~~~~~~

    And they all { axi } spin faster and faster....for what reason?   Why are they working harder i.e operating at higher frequencies?  If energy is equal to  mass, then perhaps the buzz-spin at higher frequencies is to increase their mass, so as gravity will eventually pull them all back together again and keep Univere from becoming dissapated outward as nothing  ----well at least very long wave single photon---.

    Sort of like all the kings horses and all the kings men, putting Humpty-Dumpty    Universe back together again.