I came across
American Dreamer by Scott Eastham as if in a dream, as here was a new book about Bucky yet I thought I'd seen them all. What parallel reality was this? That was some months ago, and by the time TrimTab Book Club was ready to read it, I had lost my copy.
That was my excuse for taking a break from the meetups every other week.
More specifically, I've been feeling called to tie off loose ends that only I can tie off, such as around Quadrays as I've implemented them, in Python, and so forth. I should prioritize projects on which my presence could be critical.
Besides, Trim Tabbers have privileged access to digitized versions of syllabus assets.
What book will we read next? I tossed
The House of Tomorrow onto the queue, but not necessarily for any time soon. More likely, we'll tackle
Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth next, which surprises me, only because I'd assumed this group had already taken that up, as
one of the core classics.
After that, I sense a lot of interest in CJ's book,
newly available. His practical guide to comprehensivist studies is based on his own experience of being a trim tab in this respect, i.e. steering a course that would optimize whatever free energy (Subgenius: slack) was available.
Energy is a function of frequency, when it comes to light, we should remember. Super high frequency lasers are the "new thing" a lot of photonics experts are taking a look at (although not directly -- laser light tends to be hazardous to one's eyeballs).
We talked about the eclipse quite a bit, even watching Nathan's 7 minute home video of the experience.
Me in chat, interacting with my peers:
Book called Polyhedra by Cromwell documents how the concept of polyhedron has become more ephemeral over time moving from “solid” to more like “wireframe”. Synergetics is certainly consistent with this trend, but then there’s the Zeitgeist as a whole, of which it’s reflective.
“Tetrahedron” is a long-winded word for “thing”. Turns out the etymology of “thing” is a “meeting” (in Finland?). “A thing is a meeting of things”.
Important to remember that XYZ in physics has no gravitational or electromagnetic presence. It’s ghostly, there for reference, not to participate in the chemistry. We have to allow Bucky’s concepts the same pre frequency freedoms i.e. it’s not like all of a sudden we have to imagine literal metals just because the IVM is under discussion instead of XYZ. That’d be double standards, a fallacy.
Equal and opposite is an ideal in physics. “Ideal” usually means “never happens, really”. Perfect circle. What’s so perfect about what never exists, right?
Fuller’s thought experiment: look around and decide if every feature you see is: a face (F) a corner (V) or an edge (E). Can’t these interconvert? Can’t we see a corner as a whole ball, with many faces? Of course, we do this all the time. V + F = E + 2. Etc.
