From <@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU:owner-LISTSERV@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU> Mon Feb 6 14:52:15 1995 Received: from netaxs.com (root@netaxs.com [198.69.186.1]) by access.netaxs.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA24385 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 1995 14:52:15 -0500 Received: from UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu (ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu [128.205.2.1]) by netaxs.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA28518 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 1995 14:52:03 -0500 Message-Id: <199502061952.OAA28518@netaxs.com> Received: from UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU by UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2625; Mon, 06 Feb 95 14:51:42 EST Received: from UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UBVM) by UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9054; Mon, 6 Feb 1995 12:39:32 -0500 Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 12:39:27 -0500 From: "L-Soft list server at UBVM (1.8a)" Subject: File: "GEODESIC LOG9404" To: "Christopher J. Fearnley" Status: RO ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 18:11:30 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: "" Subject: Re: E-MAIL The reason, I suspect, that y'all out there have been feeling a little lonely is because no-one has been submitting messages. 'Geodesic' seems to go through periods of very low then very high activity. I suggest you submit a few postings to get things rolling again. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 19:46:22 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: scimatec5@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU Organization: University of Toledo Subject: Buckyboron anyone? Have any experiments been done trying to make boron into a geodesic from, like the buckyball? I would think there'd be some way, though its properties would be quite different, beyond strength, or course. Steve Mather ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Apr 1994 00:07:57 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Jonathan Betts Organization: Cellular Organization Subject: Archives In article Roy Klassen, Roy_Klassen@MINDLINK.BC.CA writes: > I am also new to Geodesic. I have downloaded some of the archives. >This was helpful. I am interested in some 'cheap and nasty' software to >help design domes. Fancy graphics is not necessary. Archives? What archives? Please tell me where to get archives. -Joe Betts betts@netcom.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Apr 1994 02:59:10 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: scimatec5@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU Organization: University of Toledo Subject: Re: Archives In article , Jonathan Betts writes: > In article Roy Klassen, > Roy_Klassen@MINDLINK.BC.CA writes: >> I am also new to Geodesic. I have downloaded some of the > archives. >>This was helpful. I am interested in some 'cheap and nasty' software to >>help design domes. Fancy graphics is not necessary. > > > Archives? What archives? Please tell me where to get archives. > > -Joe Betts betts@netcom.com You beat me to it. Please post this answer. Steve Mather ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Apr 1994 00:16:11 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Jonathan Betts Organization: Cellular Organization Subject: Polyhedral modeling kits Does anyone know any good sources for polyhedra modeling kits that are either mail order or local to the Bay Area? I have grown inpatient with toothpicks and marshmallows, strings and straws, etc. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Apr 1994 09:26:17 18000 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Reba Henderson Subject: Re: Archives In-Reply-To: <199404030759.AA03570@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu>; from "scimatec5@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU" at Apr 3, 94 2:59 am Geodesic does have archives. Send the following message to listserv@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu (if you're on Internet, otherwise use the shorter Bitnet address): index geodesic That's it. Have fun. Diane Henderson <> ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Apr 1994 00:07:48 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kurt Przybilla <73602.3025@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: 4,000,000,000 billionares introductiont0+ R@7@ 0, j4fg +P<'@` +A*$8y8WDBNMSWD )Dxv)D|R~7 ; _ aaao ==== G QQcx.[ {*;OaComputers do not have to see or feel anything. Computers do not deal in opinion judgements; they simply store, retrieve, and intefrate all the imformation given them. The more relevant the information they are given and the more accurate that information, the better the answers that the computer can give as to the consequences of doing thus and so under a given set of circumstances. Only the computer can cope with the astronomical complexity of integrating the unpredicted potentials of the millions of invisible technology gains in physical capabilities already accomplished. Only world-considerate computer accouting will be able to produce the figures that will persuade all humanity to divert high-science technology from weaponry to livingry. Computer capability will clearly manifest that we indeed now have four billion real-wealth billionaires. - R. Buckminister Fuller, Critical Path,1981 While I was growing up, one of the most exciting events every spring was the day my father would decide to put up the dome. From a pile of red and white pipes, we'd build a beautiful structure which always created the same magical space. I can still recall clearly what it was like to hang upside down inside of that dome. Please, allow me to introduce myself. I'm Kurt. Forgive me if I violate any rules of nettiquette with my introduction. I am new to the net, though I grew up playing chess and Star Trek on the terminal in library at the small community college in northern Minnesota where my father taught. My parnets just gave me a modem for Christmas. I'm still stumbling my way through my reentry to cyberspace. I'm still uncertain about many things and because I accidently deleted the message I got from the listserver after I subscribed, I'm don't know exactly how to post this properly, so if it looks or sounds strange, I'm sorry. I guess I came in during the last period of posting activity. At the time there was an ongoing dialogue about wealth and economic systems. I was surprised not to read any quotations by Bucky himself in used in response to some of the more selfish lines of thought being put forth. Again, since I was new, I don't recall exactly who was saying what. [I still haven't figured out how to quote someone else with a command, but don't particularly like the practise.] I'm not really trying to restart that discussion, because I felt it wasn't that intresting, particularly due to the negative side. Still, I wanted to read what Bucky would say or at least hear a discussion about what he actually did say about wealth and the worlds current economic systems. integrateaccountingparentsdelayed reentry to cyberspace. any quotations by Bucky himself The structure of the current system deliberately}/@&k $ /P*_m7j P+)fH ( f"2` zg@ xg:{ ;DNUt178D 15JN ryabcefg5cghIUpqJijopx{?@c*+FIJ#*a{x{{@ C[\TU & c D E ` a;bccd+,-"#xpppg b]b]X]b] S]NF>F6FF]]1]!@ !@l !@l !@l !@!@!@!@ !@ |` !@ !@ ^ forsakes utility for profit. The incredible wealth technology has created and the ability to rapidly share it and the wealth of information gathered everywhere on the planet and through use of an ever expanding, speed ever-increasing, organic electronic system. Bucky spoke so clearly of this being the tool through which we will be able to achieve the adjustment in our physical environment necessary to enhance the very nature of life on the planet. " Technologically we now have four billion billionaires on board Spaces hip Earth who are entirely unaware of their good fortune. Unbeknownst to them their legacy is being held in probate by general ignorance, fear, selfishness, and a myriad of paralyzing professional, licensing, zoning, building laws and the like, as bureaucratically maintained by the incumbent power structures. Dismaying as all this paralysis may be, it will lead eventually to such crisis that comprehensive dissemination of the foregoing truths ultimately will be accomplished through (1) the world-around-integrated electronic media broadcasting and (2) the computerized switchover from the inherently-inadequate-life support accounting assumption of yesterday to the adequate-for-everyone-and every-thing, time-energy accounting comprehensively employed by the multibillion-galaxied, eternally regenerative Universe itself. An exclusively-to-be-accomplished, world-around-integrated, computer-facilitated, comically compatible accounting switchover will make it popularly comprehensible that we do indeed have four billion billionaires on our planet, thereby publicizing that fact and there be inducing the systematic release of the heritage to all Earthian humans. All this accounting switchover must also be accomplished before 2000 A.D." -Bucky, Critical Path I have come here to meet you and do my part in accomplishing this switchover. I am very pleased to meet all of you. P.S. - By the way, does anyone have any information on BFI ? _@ g_ V' N g h _ ``a ()* _!@!@!@!@!@ !@!@ !@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@a# HHp@ l tXe(|}HH0@|' l tX=`/P PBH -:StyleWriter (JE(5L}eozMl v g h l . 2 G K o v ^ _ ` b c d 2`de F R m n G f g l m u x < = ` '(CFG '^_;DnN U ct 178 15JN ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Apr 1994 12:45:03 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Barbara Sansing Subject: Re: Polyhedral modeling kits There's an advertiser in Dome Magazine re: modeling kits. I don't have mine handy now, anyone else have the name, etc? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Apr 1994 18:14:58 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Barbara Sansing Subject: Problems Would the Manager of this listserv please contact me directly re problems I've been having with sending mail. If I receive no reply, then I will assume that my mail, in fact, does not go to "Geodesic". I will discuss the details with the responder. Thanks. ...Barbara Sansing voice phone: 508-937-5400 ext 220 (You have me e-mail address) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 5 Apr 1994 02:56:08 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Colin Gray Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 Subject: Dome Magaizine (was Re: Polyhedral modeling... In article <9404041645.AA01196@aoi.aoi>, Barbara Sansing wrote: > There's an advertiser in Dome Magazine re: modeling kits. > I don't have mine handy now, anyone else have the name, etc? I've never heard of this magazine. Can someone tell me what it is and who to contact to subscribe? thanks, colin cgray@teleport.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 6 Apr 1994 00:42:02 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: 4D Solutions Have any experiments been done trying to make boron into a geodesic from, like the buckyball? I would think there'd be some way, though its properties would be quite different, beyond strength, or course. Steve Mather At the July 93 BuckyBall Conference in Santa Barbara (H. Kroto hosting), I hung out with a German chemist who was trying to do stuff like this with boron. Or maybe he was trying to insert boron molecules into fullerene cages. Anyway, somewhere, something with boron and buckyballs is a top priority. So we can all sleep easier. -- Kirby Urner GEODESIC reader ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 6 Apr 1994 12:14:11 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Barbara Sansing Subject: Dome Magazine In response to a request for information, following is the info: DOME (ISSN 1041-1607) Published quarterly by: Hoflin Publishing Ltd. 4401 Zephyr Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-3299 Tel. 800-352-5678 Fax 303-422-7000 Build Your Own Geodesic Model: A.G.S. Products 2111 SW 31 Avenue Pembroke Park, FL 33009 $24.95 plus $3.75 shipping ...Barbara Sansing (aka Information Junkie) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 6 Apr 1994 17:17:56 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: scimatec5@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU Organization: University of Toledo Subject: Re: (no subject given) In article <199404060742.AAA06674@igc.apc.org>, 4D Solutions writes: > At the July 93 BuckyBall Conference in Santa Barbara > (H. Kroto hosting), I hung out with a German chemist > who was trying to do stuff like this with boron. Or > maybe he was trying to insert boron molecules into > fullerene cages. Anyway, somewhere, something with > boron and buckyballs is a top priority. So we can all > sleep easier. Whew, I know I will =) steve mather ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 7 Apr 1994 01:28:52 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kurt Przybilla <73602.3025@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: polyhedral model kits model kits000+ R@7@ 0, j4fg +P<'@` +A*$8y8WDBNMSWD )I-)I.._~7:9: ) ; ; ; ; E O O ax ; Y y*9 The best polyhedronal modelling kit I've seen is available from Edmund Scientific. It is called a "Star Structure Construction Set". Although it is a little pricey at $25, the vector joints are the best I've found. They resemble stars with 12 points. The struts are hollow tubes that fit on the stars. Though the book it comes with is a little lame, it explains how to make some of the more basic shapes. The main disadvantage is that the struts are all the same length which makes domes difficult. Edmund Scientific has a wonderful catalog that everyone should should have their own copy of. The number listed in it to request a catalog is (609) 573-6858. To order directly (609) 573-6250. The set is catalog number G52,060. Probably the most widely available kit on the market are made by a company out of Oregon called Ikosa Kits. Though they are inexpensive and come in various sizes, they are really nothing more than shishkab sticks with sections of plastic tubing which you must pierce yourself to make joints. They are available in new age toys stores like Star Magic. g#`]\Z.Z``ffx'%:R5)R$* 9_/f `,( P`*ggu^ '^ _V`3+9&g6X``w`ecg`c_`bNgg ggu9xH_)XP^Rf`A `Au P0Hx1|g`^ |g+J_ }]U-| g`c2x,`g*J_ }:uvYZ:ztnth!@w!@w!@w!@w ^: : ::HHp@ l tXe(|}HH0@|' l tX=`/P PBH -:StyleWriter ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 9 Apr 1994 09:29:22 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Elizabeth Kommit Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Subject: Playing with polyhedra Anyone interested in the geometry mentioned in _Synergetics_ (and has access to a computer running 3D Studio R3) could check out a free program (on the net as HEDRA.ZIP) which purports to create a very wide variety of polyhedral forms. I don't think 3D Studio will let you easily raise the forms to higher frequencies, though. Ben Discoe "I do VR for a living" ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Apr 1994 21:34:05 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Jim Lutz Subject: Re: Buckyboron anyone? In-Reply-To: <940401202256.218082b0@Csa3.LBL.Gov> I don't remember much of my chemistry anymore, but it seems to me you would have better luck with silicon. I think the key factor is the number of other atoms each atom can bond with. Jim Lutz On Fri, 1 Apr 1994 scimatec5@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU wrote: > Have any experiments been done trying to make boron > into a geodesic from, like the buckyball? I would > think there'd be some way, though its properties > would be quite different, beyond strength, or course. > Steve Mather > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 00:46:36 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: Buckyboron anyone? Synergetics: A metaphoric language for communicating experiences using geometric concepts. Thinking is the tuning in/out of systems. Systems are spherical networks of interrelated points of interest. The density of points is a measure of a system's "frequency" -- super high frequency systems approach sphericity. The minimal system with the fewest possible points is a tetrahedron -- four points make a primitive volume with an inside and an outside. The canonical tetrahedron has a volume of one. The tetrahedron may be sliced up into 24 irregular tetrahedra (12 left handed, 12 right handed) called A modules. The octahedron is comprised of 48 A and 48 B modules of equal volume = 4 x the volume of the tetrahedron. A & B modules may be used to assemble the cube (x3 tetravolumes), rhombic dodeca- hedron (x6 tetravolumes), and the Coupler (x1 tetra- volume). The Coupler, with the same volume as the tetrahedron (1), is an irregular octahedron that packs together to fill space without gaps. Radiation is explosive outwardly while Gravitation is an implosive squeezing at 90 degrees to Radiation, i.e. is circumferential. Metaphysically, Gravity networks points of interest into systems of inter- related thoughts while Radiation drains away the sense of our systems and turns them into meaningless noise. Radiation is compression, Gravity is tension. Radiation is Entropy. Gravity is Love. Clearly this is not Physics but a more metaphorical language for communicating experiences using geometric concepts. This is Synergetics. -- Kirby pdx4d@igc.apc.org ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 00:23:26 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Kevin Sahr Organization: Forest Sciences Laboratory Subject: Metaphorical Synergetics (was Re: Buckyboron anyone?) In article <199404110746.AAA22387@igc.apc.org> 4D Solutions writes: >Synergetics: A metaphoric language for communicating >experiences using geometric concepts. > >Thinking is the tuning in/out of systems. Systems are >spherical networks of interrelated points of interest. The >density of points is a measure of a system's "frequency" -- >super high frequency systems approach sphericity. > ...interesting details trimmed... >Clearly >this is not Physics but a more metaphorical language >for communicating experiences using geometric >concepts. This is Synergetics. This sort of explanation is precisely what attracted me to Synergetics in the first place. It seems to have the potential to be used as a mathematical basis for "communicating experiences" or for otherwise describing them in a precise way. Though I agree with this in principle, I've never seen anyone actually use it for this purpose. For instance, can anyone out there right now communicate an experience to me using Synergetics? Even a "toy" example would be useful for discussion, but I'm thinking more along the lines of communicating some unique thought/constellation of thoughts to me; something that could not be well communicated using ordinary english sentences, but which would be unambiguously communicated to me by a set of geometrical relationships that, say, could be stored in a computer. > >-- Kirby > > >pdx4d@igc.apc.org Kevin ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 07:46:31 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Laurence Canter Organization: Canter & Siegel Subject: Green Card Lottery- Final One? Green Card Lottery 1994 May Be The Last One! THE DEADLINE HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED. The Green Card Lottery is a completely legal program giving away a certain annual allotment of Green Cards to persons born in certain countries. The lottery program was scheduled to continue on a permanent basis. However, recently, Senator Alan J Simpson introduced a bill into the U. S. Congress which could end any future lotteries. THE 1994 LOTTERY IS SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE SOON, BUT IT MAY BE THE VERY LAST ONE. PERSONS BORN IN MOST COUNTRIES QUALIFY, MANY FOR FIRST TIME. The only countries NOT qualifying are: Mexico; India; P.R. China; Taiwan, Philippines, North Korea, Canada, United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland), Jamaica, Domican Republic, El Salvador and Vietnam. Lottery registration will take place soon. 55,000 Green Cards will be given to those who register correctly. NO JOB IS REQUIRED. THERE IS A STRICT JUNE DEADLINE. THE TIME TO START IS NOW!! For FREE information via Email, send request to cslaw@indirect.com -- ***************************************************************** Canter & Siegel, Immigration Attorneys 3333 E Camelback Road, Ste 250, Phoenix AZ 85018 USA cslaw@indirect.com telephone (602)661-3911 Fax (602) 451-7617 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 09:11:32 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Chris Fearnley Subject: Re: Metaphorical Synergetics (was Re: Buckyboron anyone?) In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 12 Apr 1994 00:23:26 GMT from On Tue, 12 Apr 1994 00:23:26 GMT Kevin Sahr said: >In article <199404110746.AAA22387@igc.apc.org> 4D Solutions >writes: >>Synergetics: A metaphoric language for communicating >>experiences using geometric concepts. >> >>Thinking is the tuning in/out of systems. Systems are >>spherical networks of interrelated points of interest. The >>density of points is a measure of a system's "frequency" -- >>super high frequency systems approach sphericity. >> >...interesting details trimmed... >>Clearly >>this is not Physics but a more metaphorical language >>for communicating experiences using geometric >>concepts. This is Synergetics. > >This sort of explanation is precisely what attracted me to >Synergetics in the first place. It seems to have the potential to >be used as a mathematical basis for "communicating experiences" or >for otherwise describing them in a precise way. > >Though I agree with this in principle, I've never seen anyone >actually use it for this purpose. For instance, can anyone out >there right now communicate an experience to me using >Synergetics? Even a "toy" example would be useful for discussion, >but I'm thinking more along the lines of communicating some >unique thought/constellation of thoughts to me; something that >could not be well communicated using ordinary english sentences, >but which would be unambiguously communicated to me by a set of >geometrical relationships that, say, could be stored in a computer. > I think these synergetics explanations are not meant to replace ordinary english, but to supplement it. I think when you start (perhaps even at a metaphorical level) to examine the complex of interrelationsships in an "english" story, you find deeper meaning. The synergetics paterns are there but our minds CAN (are capable of) dealing with these synergetics patters at a "unconscious" level. By trying to enumerate the precise geometry, you slow the normal geometric patterning - break the flow of thought. I suggest that by awareness of the inherent synergetic side of thinking, we can (as sort-of a side effect) find new relationships and understand more deeply the (initially obscurred) relationships inherent in your "story". In other words synergetics probably does not supply a (logicians') decision procedure for unfolding a story,but rather a "mystics" science for appreciating relationships which before synergetics would have been left outside of cognition realization. In this synergetics science previously "impossible" ideas can become clear. Now you asked for an example of synergetics' application to understanding stories. Perhaps a new paragraph is in order? Just a random thought. Antivirals may cure AIDS: AZT may be the answer! Well, synergetics suggests that we need to find ALL the relationships involved in our subject of conscern. So we must look at the whole system. We now discover that the human body is chock full of viruses and bacteria. So it becomes clear that just by fighting the viral component of disease, we may be missing some vital components of disease. Perhaps AIDS is not a bad virus, but a "good" virus that through some co-factor some problem develops that is unrelated to the actual viral mechanisms. In sum, by looking at all the factors and keeping a clear sight of inside-outside phenomena, we can begin to appreciate that the AZT craze of recent years, may be too simplistic a view of the situation. So with recent reports suggesting that AZT is mostly ineffective in improving the quality of llife of AIDS patients. In conclusion, because synergetics asks us to consider the WHOLE complex of factors in inside-outside relationships, a disciplined thinker can be more skeptical of false eureka's and more sober when the false theories of yester- day are debunked. English's problem is that it doesn't provide the discipline of thinking that synergetics demands. Hope that helps. >> >>-- Kirby >> >> >>pdx4d@igc.apc.org > >Kevin Chris Fearnley cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 07:16:21 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Anton BAKKER Organization: Schlumberger RPS - France Subject: Re: Polyhedral modeling kits In article <9404041645.AA01196@aoi.aoi>, Barbara Sansing says: > >There's an advertiser in Dome Magazine re: modeling kits. >I don't have mine handy now, anyone else have the name, etc? Test response I seem to have posting problems ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 07:18:51 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Anton BAKKER Organization: Schlumberger RPS - France Subject: Re: Polyhedral modeling kits In article , Jonathan Betts says: > >Does anyone know any good sources for polyhedra modeling kits that are >either mail order or local to the Bay Area? I have grown inpatient with >toothpicks and marshmallows, strings and straws, etc. The Zone-Tool by Biocrystals in Bolder Colorado is a good tool. The large kit cost ~ $600 A contact person is Marc Pellitier. If you contact him tell him that Jane & John Kostick refered the tool to you via me. Marc ows Jane & John $120 (true). It would be nice if he payed them. Have fun with the Zone Tool. Regards, Anton Bakker ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 07:20:57 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Anton BAKKER Organization: Schlumberger RPS - France Subject: Re: Playing with polyhedra In article <2o6l52$9kg@crl.crl.com>, chao@crl.com (Elizabeth Kommit) says: > >Anyone interested in the geometry mentioned in _Synergetics_ (and has >access to a computer running 3D Studio R3) could check out a free program >(on the net as HEDRA.ZIP) which purports to create a very wide variety of Yes very interested, where do I find Headra.zip and how do I get this. (sorry for being new to all this) Regards Anton Bakker ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 11:17:26 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Barbara Sansing Subject: Re: Polyhedral modeling kits This is a test response as requested by Anton Bakker 04/13/94 Note: With every posting I transmit, I receive two error messages that day and one additional error message the following day. However, based upon M. Bakker's message, I am quite sure that my postings do indeed make it to the List. Is this a universal flaw in this particular list? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 09:12:50 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Clif White Subject: Cheap polyhedral mode kit. In-Reply-To: <9404131611.AA24405@bluebird.csrv.uidaho.edu> > > > Try this the next time you have some time, newpaper, a dowel and some > masking tape. > > All that newspaper laying around your house can be made into large > structures that are surprising strong as well. > > Simple roll a sheet of newspaper around a 1/2" dowel secure the end of > the roll with a bit of tape and slip out the dowel and then repeat > procedure to make another strut. > > Using your stock of newly created struts, secure the ends to form joints > using more masking tape. (Don't use a lot of tape at the ends.) Form > triangles and then tetrahedron along with octahedrons and you will begin > to make a large scale octet truss system that will quickly fill up your room. > > You will be amazed at how strong this system is! > > This is a great activity for a bunch of kids. You can make all sorts of > polyhedra quickly and cheaply. A production line of strut makers, and > joiners can really pump out the structures. My kids love this activity. > Enjoy!!!!! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=- == Clifton White - clif@uidaho.edu = === Training Coordinator - + ==== Computer Service - Phone #=> 208-885-6721 = ===== University of Idaho - Fax # => 208-885-7539 = ====== Moscow, Idaho 83844-3155 - = -=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 13:03:50 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Chris Fearnley Subject: Re: Polyhedral modeling kits In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 13 Apr 1994 11:17:26 EDT from On Wed, 13 Apr 1994 11:17:26 EDT Barbara Sansing said: >This is a test response as requested by Anton Bakker 04/13/94 > >Note: With every posting I transmit, I receive two error messages that > day and one additional error message the following day. However, > based upon M. Bakker's message, I am quite sure that my postings > do indeed make it to the List. > > Is this a universal flaw in this particular list? I get similar behavior. I believe it is caused by two (or three) people who subscribed to the list and now their accounts or somesuch are not working properly. I have thought of writing the postmasters of these sites to see how to get this resolved, but I'm not 100% sure what's wrong. The error means that two (or three) subscribers to the list had your mail as distributed by the list bounce. Perhaps the list owner could delete them from the subscribers list. Chris Fearnley cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 19:07:49 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Jonathan Betts Organization: Cellular Organization Subject: Re: Polyhedral modeling kits In article <2og6cr$d3e@snlsu1.london.sinet.slb.com> Anton BAKKER, abakker@sss.montrouge.rps.slb.com writes: >The Zone-Tool by Biocrystals in Bolder Colorado is a good tool. The large kit cost ~ $600 Why so incredibly expensive? What makes it so good? I'm really curious! Joe Betts -- betts@netcom.com -- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 22:36:22 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: William Fickas Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Subject: How to subscribe Can you tell me how to sign up to the geodesic list from a mail server? I'm reading this from USENET, but I have a friend interested in Fuller who has mail only access. Bill Fickas 76270.3222@compuserve.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 14 Apr 1994 00:26:06 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Kevin Sahr Organization: Forest Sciences Laboratory Subject: Re: Metaphorical Synergetics (was Re: Buckyboron anyone?) In article Chris Fearnley writes: >On Tue, 12 Apr 1994 00:23:26 GMT Kevin Sahr said: >>In article <199404110746.AAA22387@igc.apc.org> 4D Solutions >>writes: >>>Synergetics: A metaphoric language for communicating >>>experiences using geometric concepts. >>> >>>Thinking is the tuning in/out of systems. Systems are >>>spherical networks of interrelated points of interest. The >>>density of points is a measure of a system's "frequency" -- >>>super high frequency systems approach sphericity. >>> >>...interesting details trimmed... >>>Clearly >>>this is not Physics but a more metaphorical language >>>for communicating experiences using geometric >>>concepts. This is Synergetics. >> ...my request for actual examples of such uses of Synergetics deleted... >> >I think these synergetics explanations are not meant to replace ordinary >english, but to supplement it. I think when you start (perhaps even at a >metaphorical level) to examine the complex of interrelationsships in an >"english" story, you find deeper meaning. The synergetics paterns are there >but our minds CAN (are capable of) dealing with these synergetics patters at >a "unconscious" level. By trying to enumerate the precise geometry, you slow >the normal geometric patterning - break the flow of thought. I suggest that by >awareness of the inherent synergetic side of thinking, we can (as sort-of a >side effect) find new relationships and understand more deeply the (initially >obscurred) relationships inherent in your "story". In other words synergetics >probably does not supply a (logicians') decision procedure for unfolding a >story,but rather a "mystics" science for appreciating relationships which >before synergetics would have been left outside of cognition realization. >In this synergetics science previously "impossible" ideas can become clear. >Now you asked for an example of synergetics' application to understanding >stories. Perhaps a new paragraph is in order? > ...example application of synergetics principles deleted... > > >Chris Fearnley cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us I agree that synergetics is important in the role you give it in your discussion and example, but I think reading Synergetics makes clear that Fuller was very much interested in "trying to enumerate the precise geometry." Synergetics consists of the types of principles you point out (i.e., look at the whole system, etc.), but it also consists of some very precise geometric statements (ie., the A-module break-down of the tetrahedron mentioned in the original post). So I guess I might re-phrase my original question: can anyone give me an example similiar to Chris' AIDS example but applying, say, anything having to do with A and/or B (or, even T & E Quanta :-)) modules? Or maybe (a little bit less esoteric) the Jitterbug? Kevin ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Apr 1994 09:54:37 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: Metaphorical Synergetics (was Re: Buckyboron anyone?) Is Synergetics actually useful for communicating experience? Fuller's writings suggest how bare bones Synergetics supports fleshier metaphors in Critical Path and Grunch of Giants -- Fuller considered them all one magnum opus, viewed from different angles. The non-simultaneity of only partially over lapping events, some far apart in time and space, makes the tuning in of relations among these events a discipline. Fuller felt he was revealing some of these larger patterns in Critical Path. I find many of his visions tough to swallow, but that's another conversation. Like, where's the evidence for submarine aircraft carriers? Since reading Fuller, I've done mental gymnastics to "feel" myself driving on the surface of a planet, stuck on by gravity, but not oriented in an up/down Universe. Once in New Mexico, a felt I was hanging upside down (my driving was unimpaired). More, though, it's the word building associations, lying in the dark thinking of all the metaphysical communications going around the world (networking, diplomacy, broadcasting, satellites, telephone, exchange programs, advertising) as a circumferential countering of more physical explosions of violence (bomb blasts, big and small, gun fire). Not that some communications, such as inflaming of nationalist, racist sentiments and xeno- phobia, aren't also conducive to violence (wrong picture to think of communication as intrinsically beneficent -- can be entropic in the extreme). -- Kirby pdx4d@igc.apc.org ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Apr 1994 10:02:03 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: Metaphorical Synergetics (was Re: Buckyboron anyone?) As for whether "precise" or "refined" synergetics, using A & B mods etc, is useful for communicating experience... well, to communicate precise geometric models and pictures certainly -- my ability to visual the face centered cubic lattice of crystallography, and to understand the design of geodesic spheres and the dymaxion map certainly owes a lot to synergetics. But I think Kevin's question is more about whether electronics, molecular physics, quantum mechanics or the like may be illuminated by geometric descriptions -- is a kind of "narrative mathematics" possible, in which your read "hard science" information more the way you read english syntax, than reading the usual mathematical symbolry? Fuller makes many attempts to talk about quanta, electron orbitals, energy transfer, stellar mechanics, using his language. I think we know what such narrative, or operational mathematics might look like. The question is whether these models have any experiential validity. Part of the problem, as Fuller saw it, is that geometric modeling of the physical world fell out of favor some decades ago, when the math left experiential visualization in the dust. So getting back to geometric models is tough with or without the help of a geometric narrative-style language. -- Kirby ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Apr 1994 14:27:11 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Chris Fearnley Subject: Re: Metaphorical Synergetics (was Re: Buckyboron anyone?) In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 14 Apr 1994 00:26:06 GMT from On Thu, 14 Apr 1994 00:26:06 GMT Kevin Sahr said: >In article Chris Fearnley > writes: >>On Tue, 12 Apr 1994 00:23:26 GMT Kevin Sahr said: >>>In article <199404110746.AAA22387@igc.apc.org> 4D Solutions > >>>writes: >>>>Synergetics: A metaphoric language for communicating >>>>experiences using geometric concepts. >>>> >>>>Thinking is the tuning in/out of systems. Systems are >>>>spherical networks of interrelated points of interest. The >>>>density of points is a measure of a system's "frequency" -- >>>>super high frequency systems approach sphericity. >>>> >>>...interesting details trimmed... >>>>Clearly >>>>this is not Physics but a more metaphorical language >>>>for communicating experiences using geometric >>>>concepts. This is Synergetics. >>> >...my request for actual examples of such uses of Synergetics deleted... >>> >> My attempt at explaining some of the nature of Synergetics deleted >...example application of synergetics principles deleted... >> >> >>Chris Fearnley cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us > >I agree that synergetics is important in the role you give it in >your discussion and example, but I think reading Synergetics makes clear >that Fuller was very much interested in "trying to enumerate the precise >geometry." Synergetics consists of the types of principles you point out >(i.e., look at the whole system, etc.), but it also consists of some very >precise geometric statements (ie., the A-module break-down of the >tetrahedron mentioned in the original post). So I guess I might re-phrase >my original question: can anyone give me an example similiar to Chris' >AIDS example but applying, say, anything having to do with A and/or B >(or, even T & E Quanta :-)) modules? Or maybe (a little bit less esoteric) >the Jitterbug? Synergetics is subtitled "Explorations in the geometry of thinking" - not explorations in the geometrical shape of an idea, argument, discussion. Fuller's geometry is very dynamical. It shifts even more quckly than science's theories about the origin of life on Earth . So if I understand correctly, you're asking for an example describing how an intertransforming isotropic vector matrix pulsating through it's full periodicities (with A and B models as an integral part of the whole apparatus) can model the evolving process of "casting out irrelevancies" to focus thinking more-and-more on the system in question (the requested example). I think this would be impossible to do in a general fashion. Perhaps one could examine their own thought patterns carefully enough to see which thoughts correspond to which A-Module pulsations, but I think this would be difficult especially given the fact that by examining the process of our thinking we alter it in unpredictable ways. I think Fuller's theories on the dynamics of thinking can only be "proven" with hig-level, fundamental resoning w.r.t. the nature of the geometry itself and its "uncovering" of the mysteries of thinking (the process, the verbs not the nouns). By exploring the fundamental logic of the basis of thinking in Synergetics, I convinced myself that in general Fuller is "right on the money", but I have been unable to apply his work in the static way in which you would like to see it. [See Fuller's essay "Omnidirectional Halo" in _No More Secondhand God_ which is the essay which when "unfolded" turned into _Synergetics.] > >Kevin Chris Fearnley cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us P.S. I could of course answer your question directly by saying that is was a t quanta module that "sprung" the isotropic vector matrix in my mind into replying to your post in the way that I did. :) Unfortunately that glosses over the geometrical complexity of my effort! ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Apr 1994 08:39:54 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Ross Keatinge Organization: Public Access Internet, Auckland New Zealand Subject: Dome houses I posted this about a week ago but the news posting system hasn't been working too well here. I did not get a confirmation back from the list server. Sorry if you are seeing it for a second time. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Since things have been quite quiet here lately I would like to invite people to share their experiences with building and living in dome houses. To build one is a long time dream of mine which I hope to put into reality in the next few years. I and hopefully others would be interested in hearing about: - What prompted you to build or buy a dome - The design and materials used. - Experiences with building codes etc - Problems to avoid - What it is REALLY like living in a dome Regards Ross Keatinge icosa@iconz.co.nz Auckland New Zealand ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Apr 1994 02:49:56 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Kevin Sahr Organization: Forest Sciences Laboratory Subject: Re: Metaphorical Synergetics (was Re: Buckyboron anyone?) In article <199404151702.KAA00532@igc.apc.org> 4D Solutions writes: >As for whether "precise" or "refined" synergetics, using >A & B mods etc, is useful for communicating experience... >well, to communicate precise geometric models and >pictures certainly -- my ability to visual the face >centered cubic lattice of crystallography, and to >understand the design of geodesic spheres and the >dymaxion map certainly owes a lot to synergetics. >But I think Kevin's question is more about whether >electronics, molecular physics, quantum mechanics >or the like may be illuminated by geometric descriptions >-- is a kind of "narrative mathematics" possible, in >which your read "hard science" information more the >way you read english syntax, than reading the usual >mathematical symbolry? Fuller makes many attempts >to talk about quanta, electron orbitals, energy >transfer, stellar mechanics, using his language. >I think we know what such narrative, or operational >mathematics might look like. The question is whether >these models have any experiential validity. Part >of the problem, as Fuller saw it, is that geometric >modeling of the physical world fell out of favor >some decades ago, when the math left experiential >visualization in the dust. So getting back to >geometric models is tough with or without the help >of a geometric narrative-style language. > >-- Kirby Again, I think this kind of thing is important, but "geometric modeling of the physical world" is not what I was getting at - what I'm after is geometric modeling of the _metaphysical_ world, the world of mind. A lot of people are interested in Synergetics as throwing light on things which fall within the realm of the hard sciences (ie., molecular configuration [Buckyballs], civil engineering [octet trusses], etc.), and certainly I think Synergetics will repay any time spent with it by practitioners in those fields. But, to come out of the closet, my own interest is in mathematical models of how we think (and how we might think more effectively!), specifically those models which are computer programmable. I think that Bucky saw Synergetics as very relevant to that type of "science," and I think he would have claimed that that relevance extends even to the more mathematically esoteric elements of his theories. I'm just trying to figure-out what that relevance might be! By the way, I'm not claiming that Bucky himself always saw such a relevance in all of the "generalized principles" he discovered; often I think he was just cataloging such principles in hopes they might be useful to someone in the future. But I _am_ claiming that I think Bucky would have argued that there _must_ be some such relevance for all these principles. And I think it's clear that he saw relevance in areas that I do not yet. Again, to turn to the concrete. I apologize for not having the exact quote in front of me, but Bucky wrote in Synergetics something to the effect that the Jitterbug recapitulates the phenomenology of all experience. In what way is this true? If this is so, then shouldn't it be the case that we could take any experience (including any thought or line of thought) and in some sense map it onto the Jitterbug? Kevin ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Apr 1994 23:23:59 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: leo elliott <76440.1416@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: syner-linguistics Fullerenes, Interesting discussion on the nature of synergetics as science, as linguistics, and how Bucky may have conceieved their pattern-integrity. Interesting enough to make me pull out some ancient transcriptions of a 1976 "Being With Bucky" gathering out in SF... Like Kevin Sahr, I must confess that, as a non-scientific type, the appeal of Synergetics always seemed to come more from the notion, implied or explicit, that all Bucky's perusings and perambulations pertained at least as much to the metaphysical as to the physical, that somehow 'thought' itself was structured in the form of A and B quanta modules, or their equivalents... As a former devotee of _The Urantia Book_ I used to get quite excited about all the triadic expressions of 'universe reality' presented therein, things like "thing/meaning/value" or "fact/idea/relation" or "origin/nature/destiny", an attraction I now view as part of a basic rhetorical appeal that somehow reinforced, in a starry-eyed-seventies way, Fuller's own novel rhetoric. I suppose that if the 'return to modelability' that Bucky spoke of was part of his life enterprise, then perhaps a first step was a 'return to speakability' -- and as any hereon who may have been fortunate enough to hear Bucky live (for me only once) may attest, it was an experience of sitting on the edge of my chair for three hours, straining to keep up with the thinking of a man three times my age, and at the end of which left wondering if perhaps Bucky weren't receiving some kind of alien transmissions through his hearing aids. I still had that feeling when listening to these tapes again, almost twenty years down the road. Is it fair to say that Bucky's written grammar and syntax was at least as complex and intricate as his oral presentation? I know Bucky took a lot of flak from those whose eyes glazed over after the same sentence went longer than two minutes or twenty -or-so lines, but somehow whenever I tried to find any grammatical or syntactical error(s), none showed up, and while I never actually did so, I had the feeling that one could even diagram his sentences. There is a great photograph in E.J. Applewhite's _Cosmic Fishing_ which shows a page of galley proof, supposedly ready to go to press, which Bucky had filled the margins of with corrections and revisions, never being content with saying something, on paper or in person, just the way he had said it even the day before. So in answer to queries for metaphysical specimens of synergetics, I can only think of Fuller's written works, and his oral presentations as such have been preserved in various archives. I also believe Bucky spoke of his 'prayers' being different every day, and how "it also seems illogical to remind God of anything". If any are interested I have a version or two of at least one specimen of the Bucky-version of the Lord's Prayer, which at least on the tape -started out- as an "our father" type soliloquy, but which in typical fashion mutated several paragraphs later into something else. I attach below my own specimen of fullerspeak, written in the best syner-linguistics I could muster. Is it also fair to say that Bucky's speaking and writing styles were as close to identical as any rhetor in the collective recollection? critically pathing, Leo Elliott ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Our tetrahedron who art in geometry hollowed by thy concavity thy convexity come thy system be dome on Urth as it is in Universe. Give us this eternity our daily integrity and fore-give us our dis-integrations as we fore-give those who dis-integrate around us. And lead us only in -- to syntegration and de-livery us from entropic monofocus on material self-interest universe within Universe amen. lhe 13 May 1977 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Apr 1994 21:28:56 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: scimatec5@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU Organization: University of Toledo Subject: Re: Buckyboron anyone? In article , Jim Lutz writes: > I don't remember much of my chemistry anymore, but it seems to me > you would have better luck with silicon. I think the key factor > is the number of other atoms each atom can bond with. Well, I think boron has three, which _could_ work. The carbon of a buckyball shares the electrons amongst three bonding points, like the aromatic hydrocarbons (hence the "ene" on the end.) > On Fri, 1 Apr 1994 scimatec5@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU wrote: > >> Have any experiments been done trying to make boron >> into a geodesic from, like the buckyball? I would >> think there'd be some way, though its properties >> would be quite different, beyond strength, or course. >> Steve Mather >> ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Apr 1994 09:00:42 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Barbara Sansing Subject: Re: Dome houses How about sharing "dreams" of dome houses? I fell in love with the dome from a small model displayed in a builders office in Phoenix, Arizona in 1972. The concept of open space is what appealed to me. As one who tears down the walls in every house I;ve lived in, who continuously remodels space to suit a current and changing lifestyle, the dome is the ultimate in usable space. My design is a one story dome (probably a cluster of three to complete all the necessities) with kitchens, closets and other permanent uses against the circumference. And the space inside would be mine to do with as I wish! I am distraught by domes that are built with inside walls, with bays or extensions built to accomodate traditional windows and doors. A dome should be a dome from rooftop to foundation. My next - and last - house WILL be a dome. I will also be interested in postings regarding building a dome. Thanks, Ross, for starting this exchange. ...Barbara Sansing Amherst, New Hampshire (who learned to spin Merino wool in Sydney, Australia) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Apr 1994 13:23:45 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Anton BAKKER Organization: Schlumberger RPS - France Subject: Re: Polyhedral modeling kits In article , Jonathan Betts says: > >In article <2og6cr$d3e@snlsu1.london.sinet.slb.com> Anton BAKKER, >abakker@sss.montrouge.rps.slb.com writes: >>The Zone-Tool by Biocrystals in Bolder Colorado is a good tool. The >large kit cost ~ $600 > >Why so incredibly expensive? What makes it so good? I'm really curious! > >Joe Betts -- betts@netcom.com -- I think it is a result of being new and trying to get their investment back too quickly. However, I know some people who use it daily and they are quite happy with it. Their is also some nice stuff in Holland that is called Polydron.I will check on where to get this in Holland and let you know! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 21:01:30 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Chris Fearnley Subject: PHILA. Science Kick Conference Final Timetable and Dates This has come to my attention. It should be of interest to many of you, but I know little about the project. Addresses and phone numbers are included for further information. Chris Fearnley fearnlcj@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us SCIENCE KICK SUMMARY: Science Kick is a multi-disciplinary program to explore some of the exciting inter-relationships between the fullerenes, space (both as geometry and outer space), chemistry, R. Buckminster Fuller, and the soccer-ball/world cup connection. There will be an on-going exhibition and a single-day scientific conference including Arthur C. Clarke, Arthur L. Loeb, Richard E. Smalley, and Fred Wudl. The conference is free and open to the public. SCHEDULE: MAY 16 - JUNE 3: Harvard Students' Visual Arts Exhibition Dr. Loeb's students will present an exhibition of their work on 2-D and 3-D science at 3600 Market Street, Philadelphia in the Esther M. Klein Museum. TUESDAY, MAY 24TH 10 a.m. - 3 p.m.: Science Kick Conference 3624 Market Street. 10 a.m. - 11 a.m. "Buckminster Fuller vs. The Irrational" by Dr. A. Loeb, Harvard University 11 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. "Discussing Buckytubes" with Arthur C. Clarke (live from Sri Lanka via satellite) and Richard E. Smalley. They will discuss Buckytubes in the context of Clarke's book _Fountains_of_Paradise_. 12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. Lunch and Reception in Klein Museum. 2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. "Chemical Modifications of Buckminsterfullerene (C-60)" by Fred Wudl, University of California, Santa Barbara CONFERENCE ORGANIZERS: This project is being organized by the University City Science Center (UCSC), a non-profit corporation established in 1963. UCSC stands at the interface of academia and industry and has extensive networks in both arenas. The mission of the Science Center is to promote the application of scientific and technical knowledge to improve the quality of life and to serve as a science and technology based economic development force. [R. Buckminster Fuller was World Fellow in Residence at UCSC for the last 10 years of his life.] ORGANIZERS ADDRESSES AND PHONE: Please contact UCSC if you plan to attend. They also have suggestions for accommodations. Robert Krutsick University City Science Center 3624 Market Street Philadelphia PA 19104 (215)387-2255 Science Kick 420 S 19th ST, APT 15B Philadelphia PA 19146 (215)546-7948 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 20 Apr 1994 01:16:13 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Kevin Sahr Organization: Forest Sciences Laboratory Subject: Re: syner-linguistics In article <940417032359_76440.1416_HHE37-1@CompuServe.COM> leo elliott <76440.1416@COMPUSERVE.COM> writes: >Fullerenes, > ...interesting discussion trimmed... > >I suppose that if the 'return to modelability' that Bucky spoke of was part >of his life enterprise, then perhaps a first step was a 'return to >speakability' -- and as any hereon who may have been fortunate enough to >hear Bucky live (for me only once) may attest, it was an experience of sitting >on the edge of my chair for three hours, straining to keep up with the thinking >of a man three times my age, and at the end of which left wondering if perhaps >Bucky weren't receiving some kind of alien transmissions through his hearing >aids. I still had that feeling when listening to these tapes again, almost >twenty years down the road. One of the things I'll always regret most is never having met (or at least seen him speak). When I first became interested in his work I didn't wish to bother him; though I've since heard he was quite approachable. My wife's boss worked as his secretary for awhile and I guess that's as close to Bucky as I'll ever get. > ...more interesting discussion trimmed... > >So in answer to queries for metaphysical specimens of synergetics, I can >only think of Fuller's written works, and his oral presentations as such >have been preserved in various archives. These are of course the prime examples. But, as you've pointed out, Synergetics on one's own can be a daunting (though highly rewarding) task. I guess I'll just keep slogging along! > >I also believe Bucky spoke of his 'prayers' being different every day, and >how "it also seems illogical to remind God of anything". If any are >interested I have a version or two of at least one specimen of the >Bucky-version of the Lord's Prayer, which at least on the tape -started out- >as an "our father" type soliloquy, but which in typical fashion mutated >several paragraphs later into something else. Would it be possible to post it? I'd love to see it! > I attach below my own >specimen of fullerspeak, written in the best syner-linguistics I could >muster. Very nice!. > ...prayer trimmed... > Kevin ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 08:53:44 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: "ukcc.uky.edu" Organization: The University of Kentucky Subject: Re: Dome houses In article <2oljsq$acp@status.gen.nz> icosa@iconz.co.nz (Ross Keatinge) writes: > >I and hopefully others would be interested in hearing about: > >- What prompted you to build or buy a dome My wife & I saw the dome built by the husband of one of her coworkers. When the time came for us to build a new house, we agreed on a dome plan. >- The design and materials used. Oregon Dome Inc 45'(3/8 sphere) no riser wall, full walk-out basement Shell components pre-fab 2x4/OSB - 1450 S/F finished (nearly) basement - 1450 S/F main floor: LR, DR, kitchen, pantry, library/guest room, bath - 450 S/F loft: master BR, bath, large walk-in closet >- Experiences with building codes etc The county in which we live (Bourbon) has no permit requirements for on- farm (>10 acre) construction. We were told to "have fun." >- Problems to avoid Except for the roof, I don't think any of the construction problems were peculiar to a dome house. I acted as general contractor, and the local Oregon Dome dealer recommended a fellow who had tried to operate his own dome construction business (marketing failure). He is also a Fuller fan. I paid him for a few hours of consulting, which was money well spent. Because he is still in the construction business, he was able to recommend subs and helped with some of the estimating. I then hired a carpenter who lives nearby & who was able to oversee other subs when I couldn't be there. >- What it is REALLY like living in a dome Comfortable, spacious, energy efficient, light & airy; it's HOME. And my razor blades stay sharper { or was that the pyramid :) }. -jg ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 19:29:46 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: leo elliott <76440.1416@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Bucky's Prayer Per request from Kevin Sahr, the following is a transcription from a 1976 "Being With Bucky", New Dimensions Tapes, side 15 (parsing and punctuation by transcriptionist). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Our God, who art in we even, even we who know most intimately of our own weaknesses, failures, faults, and outright sins our selfishness, fear and cupidity, of our moments of jealousy, rage and hate secret cover-ups, lies and self-deceits God even of we Our God -- our intuitively-apprehended comprehensive-admonisher Omni-experienced is your identity, the everywhere and everywhen evolving omnireality is your presence and as the reality differs _uniquely_ from moment to moment in respect to each individual so do you speak to each in exquisitely relevant, instructive terms regarding that which the individual can most effectively do not in behalf of self but in behalf of all humanity and Thus in support of the intellectual functioning of humans thereby in local universe support of the eternal integrity of omniregenerative universe which is God. As omniexperience, you have given us overwhelming manifest of your complete knowledge your complete comprehension your complete concern your complete wisdom your complete responsibility your complete co-ordination your complete competence to cope with any and all problems and of your utter reliability always so to do Yours, dear God, is all the glory. * * * We oft-times think of ourselves as independent individuals able to get on by ourselves by our own wits forgetting altogether that we did not invent those wits nor the incredibly complex, 99.9% automated biological organisms nor the rest of the universe with which they interfunction, all of which is entirely the prior competent conceptioning only of God. Yes dear God, yours _is_ all the Glory. You are the totally mysterious eternal integrity, both comprehensively and incisively governing the omni-intercomplementation and omni-interaccomodation of all physical and metaphysical experiences of ever and everywhere separately and complexedly intertransforming omni-regenerative universe. You are the synergetic integral of all truths. We have absolute trust and faith in you and we wish of you awe-inspiredly, thankfully, rejoicingly and lovingly -- for it's spontaneously feasable for humans to be wishful of the truth in awe of the truth thankful for the truth to rejoice in the truth and to love the truth and to love all the truths combined for all truths are omni-interaccomodative as are all the only mathematically-statable generalized principles discovered by human minds, experimentally verified by science to be externally governing complex interrelationships of physical universe. * * * Truths and principles never contradict one another. They are all concurrently omni-interaccomodative and all the truths are metaphysical cognitions by humans of special-case realizations of eternally-valid generalized principles. It is only through many repeated experiences and recognitions of the eternal principles their non-contradicting interaccomodations that each individual human progressively and only intuitively discovers the existence of eternal principles and their special-case manifests and the truths of everyday events and all the truths, as our lives discover them, trend to integrate in synergetic perfection beyond the special-case experiencing of inherently terminal ergo inherently limited human conceptioning, comprehension and communication... ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 10:36:21 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Ross Keatinge Organization: Public Access Internet, Auckland New Zealand Subject: Re: Dome houses Barbara Sansing (aoi!barbara@ULOWELL.UML.EDU) wrote: : How about sharing "dreams" of dome houses? My idea is for a 5/8 dome maybe about 12 metres in diameter with living space on ground level and a mezzanine level for bedroom space. Probably the outside covered in wooden shingles. I agree that the less internal divisions the better. Most important would be that at least part of the top pentagon would be transparent. I think it would be awesome to lie in bed and look out at the moon and stars or the rain coming down (or in as Bucky would say). I guess that would mean getting used to waking up with the sun. I don't intend building it close to high rise buildings :-) : (who learned to spin Merino wool in Sydney, Australia) My interest in Domes started in Sydney when I saw some small ones at the Mind Body Spirit Festival in 1991. Regards Ross Keatinge icosa@iconz.co.nz Auckland New Zealand ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 02:12:08 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: Dome houses SOME THOUGHTS ON NATIONS FROM A FULLER FAN Nationalism seems a bankrupt strategy for mapping ethnic/cultural distinctions to geography, which as too few dimensions to accommodate the interweavings of affinity. For all their drawbacks, notice how corporations support the trappings of nationhood, with logos, mottos, CEO-prezes, image/identity stuff, but without blocking off huge areas of the map. Corporate cultures hang together globally with dispersed campus settings wired by commlinks and frequent flyers. In this sense, I think Serbia, Inc. or Israel, Inc. or Palestine, Inc. -- global networks with no huge territorial claims -- would better accommodate the complex topology of "we" groupings. Phasing in Fuller's nationless map doesn't mean declaring that nations don't exist, or waiting for some revolution. We're just de-emphasizing their importance. And I still think USA has a bright future, not so much as a territory as a democratic system for providing goods and services. Governments are systems, inherently global. You can log in to USA OS (USA operating system) from wherever. Much as it is today -- I send email to mom & dad @usaid.gov in Africa. To be a Fullerian, philosophically, is, I believe, to say "enough with the silly nation-state idea already!". That doesn't mean I don't pay taxes, or vote for this or that. But I'm not interested in deciding the boundaries between Israel and Syria or Serbia and Bosnia. That's a jigsaw puzzle that's hopeless to the core. Lets get folks into domes and such, and online. With multimedia and a future to live for, life will again seem too precious to waste in war to defend the future of some obsolete institution called "nation." That was the real purpose of the Spaceship Earth metaphor: not to make earth seem mechanistic (Jeremy Rifkin's criticism) but to make it seem apolitical. -- Kirby ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 15:53:10 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: "Bruce T. Lael" Subject: Dream Domes..... My dome home would also be a 5/8 sphere, about 10-12m diameter. I worked out som e ideas back in Engineering school for a passive/active heating system to work in a dome. Several of the panels would have integrated air-type collectors, which would be ducted internally to the top of the interior. A heat-pipe would circulate hot from the top down into the lower level (or basement) [D [D [D [D [ D [where it would freely circulate upwards. The sperical shape gives a dome exc ellent natural air circulation. The top-most panels would be openable windows. Some water-type collectors could also be integrated into panels for DHW. A wood- stove in the center would heat the dome very well and be very cozy! My other favorite dome design is the full oblate-spheroid that is picturedduring construction in one of the DomeBooks. It looks awesome, and requires a relative ly small foundation for its size. Got to make it somehow, On the dreams you still believe... Bruce Lael New Jersey Institute of Technology Graduate School of Architecture ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 16:04:07 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: "Bruce T. Lael" Subject: Dream Dome, cont'd (Sorry if my last post was garbled at the end) A wood-stove would heat the dome very nicely. Solar panels for DHW could also be integrated into the exterior. My *other* favorite dome design is the full oblate-spheroid picured in DomeBook (2?) It only needs a small foundation for its size and would be great for hilly sites , and besides, it would be an awesome house! Bruce ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 20:50:28 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kurt Przybilla <73602.3025@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: more than a metaphor 900.20 Synergetics 900.21 Synergetics is a book about models: humanly conceptual models; lucidly conceptual models; primitively simple models; rationally inter- transforming models; and the primitively simple numbers uniquely and holistically identifying those models and their intertransformative, generalized and special case, number-value accountings. 900.30 Model vs. Form 900.31 Nodel is generalization; form is special case. 900.32 The brain in its coordination of the sensing of each special case experience apprehends forms. Forms are special case. Models are generali- zations of interrelationships. Models ar inherently systemic. Forms are special case systems. Maind can conceptuallize models. Brains can apprehend forms. 900.33 Forms have size. Models are sizeless, representing conceptuality independent of size. - Bucky, SYNERGETICS 2 Synergetics is a way of thinking! Bucky went far in describing experience in terms of the experientially derived model, discovering along the way the synergetically surprising benefits to build structures based upon the special case structures designed using the generalized principlas understood using this evermore useful mentality. 200.001 Definition:Synergetics _________________________________________________________________________ 200.01 Synergetics promulgates a system of mensuration employing 60- degree vectorial coordination comprehensive to both physics and chemistry, and to both arithmetic and geometry, in rational whole numbers. 200.02 Synergetics originates in the assumption that dimension must be physical; that conceptuality is metaphysical and independent of size; and that a triangle is a triangle independent of size. 200.03 Since physical Universe is entirely energetic, all dimension must be energetic. Synergetics is energetic geometry since it identifies energy with number. Energetic geometry employs 60-degree coordination because that is nature's way to closest-pack spheres. 200.04 Synergetics provides geometrical conceptuality in respect to energy quanta. In synergetics, the energy as mass is constant, and nonlimit frequency is variable. 200.05 Vectors and tensors constitute all elementary definition. 201.00 Experientially Founded Mathematics 201.01 The mathematics involved in synergetics consists of topology combined with vectorial geometry. Synergetics drives from experien- tially invoked mathematic. Experientally invoked mathematics shows how we may measure and coordinate omnirationally, energetically, arithmet- ically, goemetrically, chemically, volumetrically, crystallographically, vectoriall, topologically, and energy-quantum-wise in terms of the tetrahedron. 201.02 Since the measurement of light's relative swiftness, which is far from instantaneous, the classical concepts of instant Univers and the mathematicians' instant lines have become both inadequate and invalid for inclusion in synergetic. 201.03 Synergetics makes possible rational, whole-number, low-integer quantation of all the important geometries of experience because the tetrahedron, the octahedron, the rhombic dodecahedron, the cube, and the vector equilibrium embrace and comprise all the lattices of all the atoms. -Bucky, Synergetics The isotropic vector matrix provides a bodel for thinking- for thought- a model more flexible than the squarebox-y-z cubist mindframe, a clearly defined mathematical and physical model, an organic matrix based on the closest packing of spheres, bubbles, atoms. A model which attempts to ex- plain everything, much more that any lingually linear metaphor can ever manage. It provides a structure in which to think about any structure or system. Whether you want to discuss why people first built dome shaped huts, why St. Peter's cathedral was the largest space man had domed until Bucky came along, why planets and stars are sphereical, the structure of the atom, the structure of complex carbon molecules scientists worldwide are building, or dome homes we wish to build. I dream of building many. The nicest is portable, made of the highest quality, light weight alloys, easily affordable and assemble almost any- where on the planet by the average human and friends in about a day. It will utilized the best solar technology, all technology comprehensively integrated to improve living. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 18:29:13 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: leo elliott <76440.1416@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: nations, maps, metaphors A few thoughts prompted by Kirby's recent post on nations and nationalism, and Kurt Przybilla's post on synergetics as 'more than a metaphor' -- I suppose the response to each/both is something like, 'despite my affinity for both pov's, just why is it that synergetics, whatever it is, has yet to catch on to the point where it's more fun for people to go out and hack each other to death with machetes and lob mortars in enemy hospitals that to lay back in the dome and log on?' No argument from me that nationalism presents some definitely grunchy, special case, anachronistic modes of ownership, which seems to be the prime directive in these various hideous nationalistic horror theaters (Rwanda, Bosnia, etc.). I might still have some reservations about there being a darker side to corporationalism that would lead me to suspect that, benign as it may sometimes seem, it would hardly make the world apolitical -- maybe affect the political dialog, but I doubt it would erase the greed or fear or whatever it is that lies at the core of the mort-gaging system of accounting which, imo, is squeezing the forward-lookingness out of more and more arenas. [I am still debating whether to view Schindler-style commercialism as a testament that, even in the ultimate debasement of dialog that war represents, that there is at least some common dialect of commerce that will still be spoken (representing, presumably, some still-commonly-agreed-upon standards of value), or whether to view Schindler's efforts as outrageous exploitation.] In any case, as Kurt P's excerpts remind me, I am probably stuck on trying to evaluate forms and missing some larger model in the process... Would that it were as easy as Kirby exhorts: "Lets get folks into domes and such, and online." The fact that this has never been done, and doesn't seem likely of accomplishment in my lifetime, convinces me that the special case forms of land ownership and control are as far away from manifesting any 'synergetically surprising benefits' as the special case forms of land mensuration are from a 60-degree coordinate system. However I must question again, if it is the disposition of physical Universe that we seem to be having difficulties with, just what are we missing, just what is it that has kept this energetic geometry from transforming le monde? This from David Turnbull's _Maps Are Territories_, cited in _The Power of Maps_, (Wood, 1992), pp 40-41: "Aboriginal maps can only be properly read or understood by the initiated, since some of the information they contain is secret. This secrecy concerns the ways in which the map is linked to the whole body of knowledge that constitutes Aboriginal culture. For Aborigines, the acquisition of knowledge is a slow ritualized process of becoming initiated in the power-knowledge network, essentially a process open only to those who have passed through the earlier stages. By contrast, the Western knowledge system has the appearance of being open to all, in that nothing is secret. Hence all the objects on the map are located with respect to an absolute co-ordinate system supposedly outside the limits of our culture." [And this _is_ the type of co-ordinate system that Synergetics proposes, no?] "One could argue that in Western society knowledge gains its power through denying, or rendering transparent, the inherent indexicality of all statements or knowledge claims. In the Western tradition the way to imbue a claim with authority is to attempt to eradicate all signs of its local, contingent, social and individual production. Australian Aborigines on the other hand ensure that their knowledge claims carry authority by so emphasizing their indexicality that only the initiated can go beyond the surface appeaarance of local contingency. "In the light of these considerations we should perhaps recognize that all maps, and indeed all representations, can be related to experience and instead of rating them in terms of accuracy or scientificity we should consider only their 'workability' -- how successful they are in achieving the aims for which they were drawn -- and what is their range of application." So this leads back to Bucky's "experientially founded mathematics"... yet I might submit here that, as the above might indicate, there may be a cultural variant even in mathematics (says he, DUCKING!) Which leads me back to those 'simple' aboriginal counting systems of the type: one,two, three, four, five, many, etc. and to wonder as to their experiential foundation, their local-applicability, and their range of application -- if I were plopped into the Kalihari, I would much prefer to locate a local Bushman with whom I might be able to pantomime my way out, than to locate a Dymaxion map, its range of application notwithstanding. Which leads me to question the hubris inherent in any model "which attempts to explain everything," as aesthetically pleasing and omni-interaccomodative as it may seem, as neat as it may sound, even if it was Bucky's. Later on, Wood cites Katherine Milton noting that "tropical-forest Indians talk incessantly, a characteristic I believe reflects the importance of oral transmission of culture," and notes himself how "Others have made similar observations for groups as far-flung as the Zaire Ituri and the Aboriginals of Australia; and indeed the converse -- the silence demanded in our culture by the private act of reading -- has been increasingly the subject of attention." (p. 44) Perhaps there is a clue here somewhere, about speaking and speakability preceding modeling and modelability? And if we can't get our ideas out in one, two, three, four statements or concepts, (or if we can't put it on the back of a calling card), then maybe we haven't got such a clear idea in the first place? And maybe for all of our intensive model making, we've lost -- somewhere along the way -- the art of conversation? Surely if a picture, a model, an icon, is worth a thousand words, then so must a word, even a "lingually linear metaphor", be worth a thousand pictures? It occurs to me that what we suffer from more, what perpetuates the Bosnias and Rwandas and their local variations, is not so much a structure in which to think, synergetically modeled or not, as much as a conversation to which we feel drawn to contribute. Do we suffer more from a shortage of private acts of reading, or from the failure of the oral transmission of culture? == Leo Elliott Charlottesville, VA 76440.1416@Compuserve.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 00:51:27 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: 4D Solutions Subject: Nationalism Hmmmmm.... Leo brings in some Aboriginal Anthropology. Local vs Global map making. The signature of authority, what is it, per a given culture? Newscasters learned to drop their regional "accents" and imitate a supposedly "region neutral" sound. Broadcasting has done a lot to establish our norms for sure. Getting folks domed and online may seem naively visionary, but we have managed to get a lot of the world's population cubicled and online, at least locally. Toffler's "accelerating acceleration" gives futuristic scenarios (distopian and utopian) a higher probability of coming to fruition in decades rather than centuries. What I'd like to see is "near future" scifi on TV. Star Trek is utopian in many ways, but too remote. We need "nostalgia for the future" again (was strong in the 1920s, formative of Fuller I'd say, and vice versa). Lets envision a TV series set only as far into the future as The Waltons is set in the past -- and make it semi-idyllic. I know Blade Runner and Road Warrior darkness is popular. RoboCop, the Series is closest to Near Future SciFi that I've seen, but it is again fairly dark, an extrapolation of megalopolis aesthetics ala LA (where most TV is made after all). SupraNational Corporatism vs Nationalism: becoming increasingly transparent that the USA is a sponsored, made-for-TV program. Rockwell International machines print the money. As Bucky tells it, the Stars and Stripes is the flag of Admiralty. If our money had little corporate logos on it, that'd be closer to the truth. "USA, brought to you by..." How nations fade from significance is by history exposing their sponsored underpinnings, their basis in legal fiction which is no more than a stale storyboarding language invented for a pre-TV highly literate class. The principles for which some nations stand remain enduringly important. Our sites should be on the principles (democracy, liberty), not necessarily on all the packaging. My TV show would show off prototype dwelling units, even with company logos on 'em. They'd be more than just theater props -- real engineering would go into 'em. Of course the plots would be fictional. The Jetsons was just too unbelievably futuristic (although it did a good job of parodying emergent post-war corporatism -- George Jetson and Spacely Sprockets dynamics -- nowadays Homer Simpson dozes off at the switch). Lets reign in our imaginations just a bit and script/storyboard a series that is tantalizingly close to realizable. Of course Synergetics is a gold mine of visually sophisticated imagery, from IVM graphics to geospheres to tensegrity towers to nationless icosamaps. I'd watch, and I bet Grunch would sponsor it. The key is to cast squares and cubes as anachronistic at least insofar as futuristic computer graphics are concerned. Advertisers who want to connote "tommorow" need to look more towards Tomorrowland, a shrine to corporatism but, with a BuckyBall smack in the center, a supranationalism with lots of potential. -- Kirby ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 12:02:12 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Chris Fearnley Subject: Computer Graphics / Mathematics In Kirby's recent post he talks about storyboarding the future with graphics &etc. I know there are West Coast people using (Macs I think) to model Synergetics Geometry and what-not using (I think Mathematica). The probablem with macs is portability and as far as I know macs can't easily be attached directly to the internet. So I've been looking for the tools to do a Synergetics computer modelling work and share it with everyone (yes, I am a revolutionary). First, I'd like to know what others are using to do this type of work (rumors would be valuable too). Secondly, I'd like to know what you all think of using X windows and either PHIGS or PEX (or both) to do the modelling. The advantages are that PHGS and PEX are free standards that run under virtually any unix-like system (and unix-like systems have been ported to every architecture: macs, ibmpcs, crays, etc.). Because X, XLIB, PHGS and PEX are C libraries they are easy to build upon. Moreover, cpp (Critical Path Project hopes to be able to get live on the Internet soon. So presumably one would be able to telnet into their system and use whatever models we put there. They are running Unix Ware 1.1 with X. fearnlcj@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 11:02:09 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Jim Lutz Subject: Re: Computer Graphics / Mathematics In-Reply-To: <940426091624.21a19b3e@Csa3.LBL.Gov> A question & a comment here. How do you model geometry in Synergetics mode? Can someone out there explain this mathematically compared to XYZ coordinate system? I guess I'm looking for a Geometry 1A type introduction. As for sharing things on internet, you should check out the World Wide Web. There is a Mac Mosaic web browser from NCSA. Mosaic would work nicely for sharing results and showing models over the net. I don't think it would be a good tool for doing interactive modeling though. jim (jdlutz@lbl.gov) On Tue, 26 Apr 1994, Chris Fearnley wrote: > In Kirby's recent post he talks about storyboarding the future with graphics > &etc. I know there are West Coast people using (Macs I think) to model > Synergetics Geometry and what-not using (I think Mathematica). > > The probablem with macs is portability and as far as I know macs can't easily > be attached directly to the internet. So I've been looking for the tools to d o > a Synergetics computer modelling work and share it with everyone (yes, I am > a revolutionary). First, I'd like to know what others are using to do this > type of work (rumors would be valuable too). Secondly, I'd like to know what > you all think of using X windows and either PHIGS or PEX (or both) to do the > modelling. The advantages are that PHGS and PEX are free standards that run > under virtually any unix-like system (and unix-like systems have been ported > to every architecture: macs, ibmpcs, crays, etc.). Because X, XLIB, PHGS > and PEX are C libraries they are easy to build upon. Moreover, cpp (Critical > Path Project hopes to be able to get live on the Internet soon. So presumably > one would be able to telnet into their system and use whatever models we put > there. They are running Unix Ware 1.1 with X. > > fearnlcj@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu > cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 14:28:45 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Chris Fearnley Subject: Re: Computer Graphics / Mathematics In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 26 Apr 1994 11:02:09 -0700 from On Tue, 26 Apr 1994 11:02:09 -0700 Jim Lutz said: >A question & a comment here. > >How do you model geometry in Synergetics mode? Can someone out there >explain this mathematically compared to XYZ coordinate system? I guess >I'm looking for a Geometry 1A type introduction. To the end user it doesn't matter much whether you use standard XYZ coords to model the dynamic structures of synergetics. But what I would like to do is write functions (say based on PEX, which, BTW, I don't know anything about except that it provides for 3-D graphics under X windows) that would be intuitive to the synergetisist. For example, a function that would model the IVM from several different perspectives depending on the parameters it is given. Another function to draw all the great circles of symmetry for any given shape. Etc., Etc., Synergetics modelling is conceptual (human, even) and does not care about what the shape of the curve (or integral or derivative) that may be envisioned to exist (but really doesn't exist). I mean in synergetics we say take an icosahedron, draw out all the great circles made by spinning the icosa using opposite vertices as the axis, no draw the great circles with the centers of opp. faces as the axis of rotation. Another nice function would say divide the given figure into A and B quanta modules then count how many there are of each type of model. Lay in an IVM centered at this given A module. Pulsate the IVM at such and such a frequency. This is what I have in mind. I'm sure it can be done and in one year I WILL be working on it. Do you want to help? > >As for sharing things on internet, you should check out the World Wide >Web. There is a Mac Mosaic web browser from NCSA. Mosaic would work >nicely for sharing results and showing models over the net. I don't >think it would be a good tool for doing interactive modeling though. > I need to get mosaic - this dmmm VAX is awful :) With mosaic can you demonstrate dynamic models - in color? > jim (jdlutz@lbl.gov) > > >On Tue, 26 Apr 1994, Chris Fearnley wrote: > [My original message deleted] >> >> fearnlcj@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu >> cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us >> Chris [again :) ] ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 16:44:37 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Jim Lutz Subject: Re: Computer Graphics / Mathematics In-Reply-To: <940426115820.21a19b3e@Csa3.LBL.Gov> Chris, Slow down there a bit. I'm still talking beginning synergetic geometry here. On Tue, 26 Apr 1994, Chris Fearnley wrote: > On Tue, 26 Apr 1994 11:02:09 -0700 Jim Lutz said: > >A question & a comment here. > > > >How do you model geometry in Synergetics mode? Can someone out there > >explain this mathematically compared to XYZ coordinate system? I guess > >I'm looking for a Geometry 1A type introduction. > > To the end user it doesn't matter much whether you use standard XYZ coords > to model the dynamic structures of synergetics. But what I would like to do > is write functions (say based on PEX, which, BTW, I don't know anything about > except that it provides for 3-D graphics under X windows) that would be > intuitive to the synergetisist. For example, a function that would model > the IVM from several different perspectives depending on the parameters it ^^^ What's IVM??? > is given. Another function to draw all the great circles of symmetry for any > given shape. Etc., Etc., Synergetics modelling is conceptual (human, even) > and does not care about what the shape of the curve (or integral or derivative ) > that may be envisioned to exist (but really doesn't exist). I mean in > synergetics we say take an icosahedron, draw out all the great circles ^^^^^^^^^^^ This one's a regular 20-sided polyhedron with equilateral triangles for faces. But I had to look it up. > made by spinning the icosa using opposite vertices as the axis, no draw the > great circles with the centers of opp. faces as the axis of rotation. > Another nice function would say divide the given figure into A and B quanta > modules then count how many there are of each type of model. Lay in an A & B quanta modules??? That one's going to need some explaining also. > IVM centered at this given A module. Pulsate the IVM at such and such a > frequency. This is what I have in mind. I'm sure it can be done and in > one year I WILL be working on it. Do you want to help? I don't think I'm the person you want for assistance. I'm still trying to figure out what you're talking about. > > > > >As for sharing things on internet, you should check out the World Wide > >Web. There is a Mac Mosaic web browser from NCSA. Mosaic would work > >nicely for sharing results and showing models over the net. I don't > >think it would be a good tool for doing interactive modeling though. > > > I need to get mosaic - this dmmm VAX is awful :) > With mosaic can you demonstrate dynamic models - in color? If you can put your demos in JPEG or MPEG format video files then people with the right viewers can watch those videos over Internet using Mosaic. jim (jdlutz@lbl.gov) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 22:43:50 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Chris Fearnley Subject: Re: Computer Graphics / Mathematics In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 26 Apr 1994 16:44:37 -0700 from On Tue, 26 Apr 1994 16:44:37 -0700 Jim Lutz said: >Chris, >Slow down there a bit. I'm still talking beginning synergetic geometry >here. > >On Tue, 26 Apr 1994, Chris Fearnley wrote: > >> On Tue, 26 Apr 1994 11:02:09 -0700 Jim Lutz said: >> >A question & a comment here. >> > >> >How do you model geometry in Synergetics mode? Can someone out there >> >explain this mathematically compared to XYZ coordinate system? I guess >> >I'm looking for a Geometry 1A type introduction. >> >> To the end user it doesn't matter much whether you use standard XYZ coords >> to model the dynamic structures of synergetics. But what I would like to do >> is write functions (say based on PEX, which, BTW, I don't know anything about >> except that it provides for 3-D graphics under X windows) that would be >> intuitive to the synergetisist. For example, a function that would model >> the IVM from several different perspectives depending on the parameters it > ^^^ What's IVM??? Isotropic Vector Matrix: Synergetics I: 410.06: " So I then went on to say if all the energy conditions were everywhere the same, then all the vectors would be the same length and all of them would interact at the same angle. I then explored experimentally to discover whether this 'isotropic vector matrix' as so employed in matrix calculus, played with empty sets of symbols on flat sheets of paper, could be realized in actual modeling. ..." He than describes his kindergarten discovery of the octet-truss (octahedrons + tetrahedrons in an all-space filling array). > >> is given. Another function to draw all the great circles of symmetry for any >> given shape. Etc., Etc., Synergetics modelling is conceptual (human, even) >> and does not care about what the shape of the curve (or integral or >derivative >) >> that may be envisioned to exist (but really doesn't exist). I mean in >> synergetics we say take an icosahedron, draw out all the great circles > ^^^^^^^^^^^ This one's a regular 20-sided >polyhedron with equilateral triangles for faces. But I had to look it up. It has 20 triangular faces, 30 edges and 12 point-vertices. By taking opposite faces, edges and vertices in turn you get 10+15+6=31 great circles of the icosa. By volume II of synergetics the t quanta module is introduced but I don't see everything yet either :) > >> made by spinning the icosa using opposite vertices as the axis, no draw the >> great circles with the centers of opp. faces as the axis of rotation. >> Another nice function would say divide the given figure into A and B quanta >> modules then count how many there are of each type of model. Lay in an > >A & B quanta modules??? That one's going to need some explaining also. Take a tetrahedron. Hold the opposite vertices in turn (two pairs). Spin the tetra. Use a "knife" to cut the tetra where the "great circle" from the spinning would cut it. You now have the 24 A quanta modules of the tetra (12 positive, 12 negative in orientation). Take 1/8th of an octahedron (it's simple to see that the only way to do this is to extract the tetrahedron formed by the center of the octa and the three vertices that form one of its faces). Divide this into 6 equal parts (put the octa face on the table and use the edge bisectors). Note the line from the center of the octa to the center-face of the octa in the 1/8th octa. (It will be on the inside of the last division into 6 parts.) Find it's midpoint and slice the 1/48th octas along this midpoint, dividing the original octa into 96 pieces. The piece of the 1/96th octa that is 1/6th of the face of the octa is our old friend the A module. The B module is the other part. They have the same volume though the shapes differ. > >> IVM centered at this given A module. Pulsate the IVM at such and such a >> frequency. This is what I have in mind. I'm sure it can be done and in >> one year I WILL be working on it. Do you want to help? > >I don't think I'm the person you want for assistance. I'm still trying >to figure out what you're talking about. You may be the perfect person. But first you'll have to spend the weekend with Fig. 916.01 of Synergetics and paper and tape and ruler and maybe even a compass - so we can visualize together. Before I started modelling synergetics I couldn't understand hide-nor-hair of it. Get Synergetics and read chapter 8, sec 410, and sec 920 (in that order) Then we can really talk. This stuff is very easy once you get some experience with visualizing it. NB. It took me weeks of tentatively looking at synergetics before I took the plunge and built the models, then it took weeks for me to really get a grasp of it. Have patience, you too can learn this simple mathematics :) NBB I'm an amateur - some people really understand synergetics! > >> >> > >> >As for sharing things on internet, you should check out the World Wide >> >Web. There is a Mac Mosaic web browser from NCSA. Mosaic would work >> >nicely for sharing results and showing models over the net. I don't >> >think it would be a good tool for doing interactive modeling though. >> > >> I need to get mosaic - this dmmm VAX is awful :) >> With mosaic can you demonstrate dynamic models - in color? >If you can put your demos in JPEG or MPEG format video files then >people with the right viewers can watch those videos over Internet >using Mosaic. That's exxciting! > > jim (jdlutz@lbl.gov) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 00:51:39 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: 4D Solutions Subject: Synergetics Models I've seen some interesting Synergetics on the Mac: Yasushi Kajikawa did a new module system for assembling icosahedra and other shapes in that 5-fold symmetric family -- 5-fold stuff is IN these days. He used HyperCard with XMD calls to MacroMind Director I think it was -- the individual movie frames were developed in Mathematica. Lots of polyhedra exploding into parts -- looked like car repair manuals for abstract geometric shapes. Music too. The text was all in Japanese. Robert Orenstein tried to get an English edition together -- he also get a jitterbug transformation to run entirely from within Mathematica. Looked cool! I think all the visual scenarios Chris describes (shapes exploding into modules, reassembling), non-Cartesian latticeworks etc. could be artistically rendered on a number of platforms, or even freehanded in some cases ala Childrens Television Workshop. A lot of what we're looking at is Sesame Street simple: just sounds/looks difficult in text because of the Greek polysyllablic phonetics we have to work with. A and B mods on TV (or Kijikawa or Koski mods for that matter) are no mystery once conveyed in their native element. What'd be nice to have is a large inventory of artfully produced synergetics clips *in the public domain* which personal workspace enthusiasts (e.g. me) could inload, edit/recombine, and outload to the network. Over time, we'd build up quite a library. In the short term, I don't think Internet is the place to communicate these high bandwidth scenarios so much as a place to verbally fantasize them or give info about how to get them through other channels (e.g. the mail). Most realisitically, I think a CD ROM of Synergetics Clip Art, stills, short animations, pictures of artifacts, inventions, Bucky's prose and poetry, who's who contact lists etc would be the ideal evolutionary tool to galvanize the incipient Design Scientists among us to get to work. As the dial-up and downloading of visual video clips becomes more available, then we can move our collection to a more public archives. Again, I think these metaphysical assets should be public domain (even though the CD ROMs themselves will cost) to encourage users to incorporate them freely into works of their own, and to upload these for downloading by others in turn, and so on. That'll be the metaphysical/fantasy part: out in the real world, we'll be sharing our storyboards with TV producers to get Hollywood-style storyboards enacted big time, on a bigger scale. Any mass infusion of domed domiciles would be televised for sure. Best to work with the entertainment industry from the inside out, rather than expecting Design Science to take off on the side some place, and have TV news people come running to "the scene." No. The Design Science revolution will start right in the studio, when the map behind Dan Rather's head stops looking so stupidly distorted. -- Kirby Now I get to see this text download 2 or 3 times as "returned undeliverable" because GEODESIC is running on autopilot. Sigh. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 16:39:42 -0700 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: "Niles D. Ritter" Organization: Jet Propulsion Labs Subject: Re: Computer Graphics / Mathematics In article , Chris Fearnley wrote: > In Kirby's recent post he talks about storyboarding the future with graphics > &etc. I know there are West Coast people using (Macs I think) to model > Synergetics Geometry and what-not using (I think Mathematica). > >The problem with macs is portability and as far as I know macs can't easily >be attached directly to the internet. Another victim of proselytizing by anti-mac zealots no doubt :-) I do about 90% of my internet communication on my Mac. It's got a standard Ethernet board built-in, I'm running MacTCP, can post e-mail, run X-window clients, use Gopher for archive searches, NCSA Telnet for logins, NCSA Mosaic for all the fun World-Wide Web stuff, have a finger daemon running in the background, and usually have my mac running a WWW server (URL: http://mtritter.jpl.nasa.gov/). Plus, I just posted this article using NewsWatcher. There are some IRC clients for the Mac as well, some of which allow collaborative graphics among multiple users (HomerPaint is one of them), but I don't do much with IRC, so I can't help out too much there. Mathematica supports a lot of networking features as well, I understand. After hacking around on Un*x machines and PC boxes, I don't see why anyone uses anything but Macs (if only Mac OS had full memory protection and pre-emptive process scheduling...) -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ T H E C A U S E | M ^------------> A | Niles D. Ritter, Mathematician A | | N | Jet Propulsion Labs I <------------v D | ndr@tazboy.jpl.nasa.gov T C E F F E E H T | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 18:11:53 -0400 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: delirium@IME.USP.BR Subject: WWW It will be great when we create a Fuller's database in the World Wide Web ! People who has access to Mosaic, Cello or other WWW browsers can try the following URL: http://cs1.sfc.keio.ac.jp/~t93827ya/index.html I found some geodesic-fuller information and gif there! But a much bigger work need to be done. Let's think in some ideas... Rodrigo Siqueira e-mail: delirium@ime.usp.br (http://piaget.futuro.usp.br/rod/rodhomepage.html) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 23:07:23 -0400 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: "" Subject: Re: Computer Graphics / Mathematics This is an interesting idea; I thought I'd submit the remark that, from the number of 3D CAD packages I've explored (some in depth, some only briefly), none appear to be very useful when attempting to model triangulated polyhedrals. I think the general problem is language - a form language to be exact. The geometric vocabulary of PC based 3D CAD systems is stilted, lacking in some very basic nouns/objects (forms) and verbs (manipulative operations). I suppose what I'm trying to say is that the problem you are discussing may have a solution to be found in the solution to a more general case problem: modelling and manipulating geometric forms (not just IVM's/geodesics). If I had the time to do it (read: 'I wish'), my ideal for such a modelling tool would implement the "form language" developed by Robert Williams in his 1979 book _The Geometrical Foundation of Natural Structure: A Source Book of Design_ (Dover Press). ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 23:52:45 EDT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Chris Fearnley Subject: Re: Computer Graphics / Mathematics In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 29 Apr 1994 23:07:23 -0400 from On Fri, 29 Apr 1994 23:07:23 -0400 said: >This is an interesting idea; I thought I'd submit the remark that, from the >number of 3D CAD packages I've explored (some in depth, some only briefly), >none appear to be very useful when attempting to model triangulated >polyhedrals. Agreed - the tools we need are not yet available. I have begun learning C and my goal is to get skilled in the next year or so to begin a project to fill this gap. I should be EASY to model synergetics. > >I think the general problem is language - a form language to be exact. The >geometric vocabulary of PC based 3D CAD systems is stilted, lacking in >some very basic nouns/objects (forms) and verbs (manipulative operations). >I suppose what I'm trying to say is that the problem you are discussing may >have a solution to be found in the solution to a more general case >problem: modelling and manipulating geometric forms (not just >IVM's/geodesics). > >If I had the time to do it (read: 'I wish'), my ideal for such a modelling >tool would implement the "form language" developed by Robert >Williams in his 1979 book _The Geometrical Foundation of Natural Structure: >A Source Book of Design_ (Dover Press). This is interesting - I must read that book in its entirety! But a form language is the KEY. Without it you just doing XYZ coords (i.e., CAD). Perhaps we should discuss the form language - so when you and I () are ready to begin implementing it, we have a really good design for a form language. BTW, I incorrectly implied that Macs are not so network-friendly. This is clearly misleading. I know that Macs CAN do anything. My only problem with them is there is no MacOS for UNIX or DOS. But there is X Windows and PEX (3D Graphics for X) for Macs, DOS, UNIX, Crays, PCs, etc. So I think (unless someone informs me otherwise) that my graphics work should be in X Windows using the PEX support. Besides, I'm a revolutionary and I want this type of work to be available to even the poorest people. Since X and PEX are A) industry standards (ISO, even) and B) are freely redistributable it seems even more likely that X/PEX is the way to go. [But I would like to hear from anyone who knows otherwise, PLEASE.] Chris Fearnley fearnlcj@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu cfearnl@pacs.pha.pa.us ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Apr 1994 14:03:31 -0400 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: "" Subject: Re: Computer Graphics / Mathematics >>The problem with macs is portability and as far as I know macs can't easily >>be attached directly to the internet. > >Another victim of proselytizing by anti-mac zealots no doubt :-) Nah, just a li'l ignorance ;-} ;-} ;-} >... >After hacking around on Un*x machines and PC boxes, I don't see why >anyone uses anything but Macs (if only Mac OS had full memory >protection and pre-emptive process scheduling...) Another victim of proselytizing by anti-Un*x and PX box zealots no doubt. The pervasiveness of Un*x and PC boxes may be a side effect of the fact that they are more powerful in the ways that really matter. 8-) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Apr 1994 21:28:45 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU From: Craig Anderson Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc. Subject: Re: Computer Graphics / Mathematics I am interested in an internet community to pursue this kind of modeling. My first goal is to get Mosaic access to the WWW. I've scrounged a 386 PC and plan to load Linux on it. Secondly, I would like to discover an interactive computer system for geodesic modeling and explorations. I expect this to be an ongoing project. There are 3 different host OS's that interest me. a) NeXTStep Display PostScript and Interactive Renderman make this my favorite, BUT I can't afford it. b) Linux This I can get my hands on. Internet software, X, and lot's of other software. c) Hurd Not usable yet. Let's keep this thread going and see what develops. Craig Anderson craig@c4.com 303.989.0308 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Apr 1994 18:54:58 -0400 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: "" Subject: Re: Computer Graphics / Mathematics Chris writes: >This is interesting - I must read that book in its entirety! I find it reads best as a reference - a kind of lexicon for form manipulation. Williams also includes a number of references to Fuller's works, and credits him in part as a source of inspiration early on. >But a form language is the KEY. >Perhaps we should discuss the form language... Ok, I'm quoting from the book, as a teaser: "Polygons and polyhedra can be generated or have identity changes through ten principal methods: 1. Vertex Motion 2. Fold 3. Reciprocation 4. Truncation 5. Rotation-Truncation 6. Augmentation-Deletion 7. Fistulation 8. Distortion 9. Dissection 10. Symmetry Integration" >I know that Macs CAN do anything. >...[but]...there is no MacOS for UNIX or DOS. >...available to even the poorest people. Correction: there is no MacOS for Intel architecture machines. But unless you go with plain vanilla DOS or a free Unix clone (BSD or Linux), the costs will be prohibitive for many. >Besides, I'm a revolutionary We all knew this, Chris ;-) >and I want this type of work to be available to even the poorest people. I assume that something like a copyleft would be in order then. >...it seems even more likely that X/PEX is the way to go. Considering the large picture, it may be a tad more expensive in terms of cash, time, or effort required to obtain and use an X based program, but this certainly doesn't eliminate the fact that X is almost everywhere. Think of it this way: many PC users run DOS/MS-Windows; most don't have the capability/knowledge to run X-Window (sic). Some MS-Windows development environments are relatively cheap, are widely available, and there are a number of 3rd party 3-D libraries available. And with Apple moving to the Power-PC platform, both MS-Windows and Mac affectionados would be able to run the software. I know that sounds like a plug... it isn't. Personally, I'd prefer an X-Window (sic) solution myself, and I know of a nice free and stable POSIX compatible OS which runs X and SysV/386 Intel ABI software, too: Linux (read "this is a plug"; I'm going to install it soon an a spare 386 box). But I don't know where the PEX libraries are obtained. Mitch C. Amiano amiano@delphi.com