Looking Inside VS Looking Outside

IVM
This is a preliminary model of what Fuller called the Isotropic Vector Matrix


Now, since we can’t actually see into atoms we must deduce what is going on by shooting greatly accelerated, high energy particles at atoms and other particles and watch as time after time the so-called particle splits into other smaller particles and energy is released. Then, using the basic generalized principles discovered by Newton, we are trying to put together a Grand Unified Theory which will show us how everything works. I’m afraid it’s a bit like trying to learn how to fly by throwing rocks at an airplane. Unfortunately, it requires a bit more vision to try to grasp these concepts by starting at the Macrocosm, the outer limits if you will, rather than focusing on the microcosm. And yet, that’s exactly what we have to do. Of course, any workable model of the Universe ought to work at both ends so let’s see what we can come up with.


A Possible Solution


In 1972, in the 2 volumes of Synergetics, Richard Buckminster Fuller presented us with the system of design and mensuration which Nature, the Universe and everything uses, very consistently and in harmony with all other subsystems. A means to communicate the results of research in one field directly into other seemingly unrelated fields, fields such as acupuncture, spirituality, genetic engineering, music, art. The basic concept is that Fuller’s approach enables us to model many complex events and systems simply, intuitively and without resorting to calculus, integrals or Pi.


So let’s make a few bold points which may appear arguable but, have shown to be true time and again.

 

  • Science has never demonstrated a “particle”. Every “indivisible” particle has been split to give off energy and other smaller “particles.”
  • Science has never demonstrated a flat surface (or plane), a continuous curve, a sphere. These are all metaphysical concepts which exist only in mind, nature doesn’t use them.
  • Nature doesn’t use irrational numbers, doesn’t need them. Anyway how does a soap-bubble know where to round off Pi and what happens to the little bit left over?
  • If the Universe started as a “big bang” and is expanding at an accelerating rate, where is the energy coming from? And where is the center.

 

Synergetics


Since nature doesn’t use squares or cubes, other than as products of triangulation, we are stuck with the following dilemma; when we attempt to model things like areas and curves mathematically we constantly have to triangulate our dimensions through the hypotenuse which is the triangulation necessary for stabilization of the 90° angle. Look around you. Other than in man-made objects, where else does the cube appear? Apples, planets, stars, people, creatures all based on smooth, all rounded, radial shapes. Energy radiates spherically, electrons whiz around nuclei in patterns that are certainly more spherical than they are cubic and in all cases triangulation is required for stability. So, if we stick to this 3 dimensional, 90 degree system everything we find in nature, which we will show uses a 60° 4-dimensional system, must be adjusted using elaborate constants and machinations on all but the most basic calculations of the movement of rocks. Modelability is gone! Stephen Hawking in a Brief History of Time says, “It’s impossible to imagine a 4-dimensional space.” I beg to differ! We exist in a 4-dimensional space, it can be visualized. It is “real” in that it is part of an eternal, timeless integral unity which we as conscious minds divide and sub-divide for an ever more complex layering of detail upon detail, the wellspring of Synergetics doing ever more with less and less. It’s here right before our eyes but you must remove those silly 3D glasses, they’re making you squint.


Now, before we go into a lot more detail regarding the problems and contradictions we would like to resolve, let’s highlight some of the basic tenets of Synergetics and this volume.

 

  • There are no particles, only positions and angles. Science has never demonstrated a particle
  • Nature does not use a 3 dimensional, 900 X,Y,Z coordinate system. It uses a 4 dimensional, 600 coordinate system, based on the closest packing of spheres. A 900 angle is unstable and requires triangulation.
  • Consciousness creates matter
  • The Universe is not expanding, we, as consciousness, are shrinking, exhibiting the concept of multiplication only by division. How else can one explain the fact that the center of the Universe is from wherever it is measured.
  • The principles put forth herewith should apply throughout the known Universe

 


The Universe is holographic and is composed of layer upon layer of “holon”, i.e. a whole, complete in and of itself, which is part of a greater whole and also may comprise lower level holons, much as atoms are parts of molecules which are in turn parts of compounds.

2 thoughts on “Looking Inside VS Looking Outside

  1. To keep the dignity and honor of the words ”squares” and ”cubes” I would like to mention that when we draw a spiral of mutually tangent having r+1 incremental circles we obtain an arc of squared numbers as 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, …..
    Similarly for spheres to be bounded nearness with the parent particle of r1 we could approx. obtain the pythagorians in cubes of numbers.

    1. Let’s start by eliminating the terms “squared” and “cubed” as neither works. Stick to “second powering” and “third powering.” I’m having a bit of trouble seeing “mutually tangent having r+1 incremental circles.” Please elaborate or make an illustration.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *