From MAILER-DAEMON@netaxs.com Sat Apr 26 19:17:48 1997 Return-Path: <> Received: from deliverance.acsu.buffalo.edu (deliverance.acsu.buffalo.edu [128.205.7.57]) by access.netaxs.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA04535 for ; Sat, 26 Apr 1997 19:17:32 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199704262317.TAA04535@access.netaxs.com> Received: (qmail 29574 invoked from network); 26 Apr 1997 23:17:32 -0000 Received: from listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu (128.205.7.35) by deliverance.acsu.buffalo.edu with SMTP; 26 Apr 1997 23:17:31 -0000 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 19:17:31 -0400 From: "L-Soft list server at University at Buffalo (1.8c)" Subject: File: "GEODESIC LOG9512" To: cjf@NETAXS.COM Status: RO ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 02:23:57 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: "David F. Watkins" Subject: Re: ETHANOL vs Methane In-Reply-To: <199511302233.RAA13674@mailbox.syr.edu> On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, David T. Middleton wrote: > It seems to me that these fuels still contain carbon and hence when burned > will produce CO2, a green house gas. What non carbon options do we have > besides hydrogen and solar? > David T. Middleton > Adjunct Prof Materials and Processes > Syracuse University > None that I can think of. I find it interesting that some of the proposals from the field of nanotechnology would have us using the CO2 in our atmosphere as the raw material for the fabrication of basic building materials. The energy source for this would be solar so the total process would improve the environment. Bucky discussed pollution as a failure to use resources to their fullest. If nanotechnology can be developed, it would seem to be ideally suited for this role. Dave Watkins ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 09:35:45 CST Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Re: new addition to "toy" index In Message Thu, 30 Nov 1995 22:04:23 +0000 (GMT), Kirby Urner writes: >Marcia Blackburn wrote: > >>I've just picked up a wonderful icosahedron toy at the Museum of Modern >>Art in New York. It's called "The Original Skwish Classic" and is >>manufactured by Pappa Gepetto's Toys Victoria Ltd., Box 98, Victoria, >>B.C. V8W 2M4 CANADA. It's made of multicolored wood parts connected with >>black tension cable. Entrancing! >> >>- Marcia Blackburn >> >>oh, it was $16.00. > >Does it have little bells and sliders on the wood parts? >Sounds like the tensegrity my daughter (18 months) likes to play with. >Sold in Portland as a kid's toy. this toy is also sold in Holland at least in Uterecht and it seems to be doing fine becuse a lot of is sold this babies will know tension and little compression. Tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 09:59:43 CST Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Re: ETHANOL vs Methane In Message Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:04:11 -0500, James Fischer writes: >David T. Middleton said: > >>It seems to me that these fuels still contain carbon and hence when burned >>will produce CO2, a green house gas. What non carbon options do we have >>besides hydrogen and solar? > > In order of probability of being a "real solution" in the real world: > > Low-Head Hydropower > Solar (Passive) > Solar (Water or Rock Store) > Solar (Phase-Change Salts) > Solar (Solar Cells) > Wind > Geothermal > Hydrogen > Wave Action > > What smells so bad? Perhaps it is that New World Odor everyone is talking >about > I want to bring Nick Pine into this he told me that solar energy is not economical in these days, i myself red that in order to change a country to solar energy system, meaning the whole infrastucture, you need minmum of 40 years. as far as i know only 1 to 2 % of energy is supplied by wind solar neuclear. Industry uses 30% of total energy in U.S, that will be smiliar to many other countries, 30% in transportation. this is bulky may be some one know better. the energy situation is very sophisticated, here in Holland most of the windows have no drapers, Holland have 5% of world natural gas, and inspite of the much talk about Holland as being green it is really totally irresponsible an nonsense. in U.S 70% of electricity can be saved by year 2000, burucracy is simple automatic minded, are the same, and give the same response. I am beging to believe that if there is major change is going to come from U.S. i think Europe is shuffling 200 years behind, they trive on creating more entropy. i geuss we need another virtual map with all the data so we know or they know what is at hand. Tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:18:19 CST Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: system theory It is time to go to system theory we need some synergy i have few scattred notes with no coherence which might ring a bell. various completely disconnnected but quasi simultanous processes form a stocahatic realm - if they are of the same kind, it is possible to describe them in general form by statistical function example bubbles- traffic -bird singing - " it is frequently possible by harmonic analysis to extract some, or even many regular cyclical curves from a complex one and these components can generally be associated with some regulatory system of causes and retroactions." anyone know what they are talking about Tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:26:16 CST Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: defence and value of the dollar U.S defence budget in 1939 was 1.4 billion dollar 1.4% of GNP this made me think again that can not be since that means 140 billion of GNP. the US went from 140 billion to 4 or 5 trillion in 1985 that is very high rise, if it goes in this level ....... my estimation, with no study at all, that the value of the dollar now is about 10 times less the value in 1900. Tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:34:16 PST Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Joe Moore Subject: Re: Re[2]: maps In-Reply-To: <30NOV95.11569909.0344.MUSIC@MARISTB.MARIST.EDU>; from "Art Scott" at Nov 30, 95 10:42 am Art Scott writes: > Appendix A of my report has a copy of those coordinates. If anyone > wants them, I'll scan them in and send them. > If anyone wants a copy of the whole report, I'll consider scanning > the entire report. Figures will be a problem. I have a WWW page, if > that is feasible. YES. Could you put your entire paper in your web page? What is your web page address? -- JOE S MOORE joemoore@cruzio.com TEL: 408-464-3743 850 PARK AVE, # 3-A FAX: 408-479-0733 CAPITOLA, CA 95010 I hereby declare this post to be in the public domain. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:13:10 PST Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Joe Moore Subject: METHANE Comments: To: synergetics-l@teleport.com In-Reply-To: <199511300616.AA11285@unix.nets.com>; from "chardhawk@nets.com" at Nov 29, 95 11:11 pm chardhawk@nets.com writes: > > Very interesting, Tagdi. Your comprehensive approach to gathering > information is a real contribution to the list. Can anyone shed more light > on this molecular structure of methane? > > Richard Hawkins (chardhawk@nets.com) > Methane: CH4; 4 hydrogen atoms around 1 carbon atom. The hydrogen atoms form a tetrahedron with the carbon atom in the middle. See Linus Pauling's books such as _College Chemistry_, _The Architecture of Molecules_, and _The Nature of the Chemical Bond_. -- JOE S MOORE joemoore@cruzio.com TEL: 408-464-3743 850 PARK AVE, # 3-A FAX: 408-479-0733 CAPITOLA, CA 95010 I hereby declare this post to be in the public domain. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 08:39:57 PST Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Joe Moore Subject: Re: ETHANOL vs Methane In-Reply-To: <199511302233.RAA13674@mailbox.syr.edu>; from "David T. Middleton" at Nov 30, 95 5:34 pm David T. Middleton writes: > > It seems to me that these fuels still contain carbon and hence when burned > will produce CO2, a green house gas. What non carbon options do we have > besides hydrogen and solar? > David T. Middleton > Adjunct Prof Materials and Processes > Syracuse University > WIND. See _Earth, Energy, and Everyone_ by Medard Gabel, pages 118-30. -- JOE S MOORE joemoore@cruzio.com TEL: 408-464-3743 850 PARK AVE, # 3-A FAX: 408-479-0733 CAPITOLA, CA 95010 I hereby declare this post to be in the public domain. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 17:53:42 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: On the Concept of Race (from sci.philosophy.meta) daniel.hoffman@republic.netaxs.com (Daniel Hoffman) wrote: >Dave Hauten (hatunen@netcom.com) makes the claim that races >do not exist. He said: > >D>You are arguing from a flawed assumption: that something definable >as "race" exists. > >"Race" exists precisely because it is definable. While the case >of people of mixed ancestry blurs the boundaries, the distinguishing >features of race are obvious. To deny the obvious is to display >clear evidence of either a hidden agenda or an affliction with a >gratuitous dogma. What are you up to? I would side with those who hold that the concept of 'race' is a crummy one and deserves a phase-out. Not so long ago, people talked about "octamaroon" as in 1/8th black, as if 'blackness' were some genetic trait that could be divided or subdivided, some element in the blood (a carryover from the days when aristocrats claimed they were 'blue bloods' -- and meant it). True enough, people can be pigeon-holed by genetic characteristics into groupings, now identified as 'racial' -- but the groupings of genetic characteristics identified with a race are not intrinsic to any race. Caucasians in Bangladesh have darker skin than many Negroids. Skin color, eye shape etc. are inheritable in a wide mix, many of which are not so common today, but so what? Why should an Amerasian kid be labeled as "mixed race" as if almond eyes and white skin were somehow derivative of the "real bonafide races", as if the genetic groupings we're most familiar with deserve enshrinement in some museum as the ultimate baseline, and the exchange of genetic traits down through the ages should always trace back to a snap-shot of today ("I'm 1/3rd causcasian, 1/4 negroid, 1/4 asian, and the rest miscellaneous" -- what nonsense!). Contemporary anthropology is largely unhappy with the 'race' concept and it is neither radical nor marginal to suggest phasing it out of serious anthropology. The sci.anthropology FAQ asks: Q: How many races of humans are there? A: One. I do indeed hold that a 'racist' is 'someone who believes in races' and say this on my web page: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/terms.html, where my text reads: No Race, No Class Western science originally portraryed race and class as characteristics of a person's blood which, as such, could be subdivided in proportion to a person's ancestry, "blood" being treated as a mathematical quantity, contributed in equal proportions by one's parents. Hence such terms as "octamaroon" (one eighth black). Whereas "class" is no longer regarded as a genetic entity, "race" has remained a popular concept for grouping genetic characteristics, even if the link to blood is no longer made. Like anthropologist Ashley Montague, Fuller felt the concept of "race" had outlived its usefulness, that the cross-breeding of the world's people, especially evident in North America, was exposing the old racial categories as mere snap-shots of genetic traits thrown together by the exigencies of time, but available in any number of permutations from that vast grab bag of traits known as the human gene pool. In the Fuller lexicon, a racist is perhaps most straightfowardly defined as someone who believes in races. Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 22:53:58 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: Kirby on Bosnia (sort of) dave suwala wrote: > > the environment that we all live within spirals down to a low gravy > anyway. I always wonder whether our efforts in space will be > rewarded by a breakout from this injured earth. But I guess that > men will be as damaging to the galaxy and universe as they have been > to Bangladesh, NYC, our fishing grounds, etc. I wonder whether we > will use up all of the convenient chemical fuel before we develop > systems (Biosphere 2, for example) capable of enabling us to survive > in space or on the planets and grab and use more stuff exponentially > and synergetically. > > Where can I find "Grunch of Giants"? Always looking for more > literature on Bucky Fuller. > > Compassionately but stoically, > > Dave.Suwala@Reichhold.com Kid: will we ever go into space Bucky? Bucky: we're already in space, dearie [paraphrase] World Game data indicated, up to at least a few years ago, we had the ingredients for planetary success on a sustainable basis. Probably still do. Bangladesh, where I've lived some (parents more) ain't so bad, environmentally speaking, but could easily be made worse if some of the new megaprojects being eyed by the lenders are put through. Throwing up one's hands and turning towards space is defeatism in my view. This biosphere/spaceship is as good as any within a huge number of light years, most likely. Silly to give up on it. Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 22:55:01 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: On Virtualizing Government: A Design Science Approach pdx4d@teleport.com (Kirby Urner) wrote: > >Distribution: unrestricted > > ON VIRTUALIZING GOVERNMENT: A DESIGN SCIENCE APPROACH > by Kirby Urner > 11-30-95 This essay webified at: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/usaos2.html Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 22:56:15 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: Kirby on Bosnia (sort of) and the Fuller Projection pdx4d@teleport.com (Kirby Urner) wrote: > >Thoughts on Bosnia (only tangentially related actually) > This essay webified at: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/bosnia.html Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 18:17:41 PST Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Joe Moore Subject: BF'S UNIVERSE CONTENTS OF _BUCKMINSTER FULLER'S UNIVERSE_ by Lloyd S. Sieden (1989) FOREWORD by Norman Cousins PREFACE 1. COMPREHENSIVE HERITAGE 2 drawings, 5 pics 2. EXPERIENTIAL EDUCATION 4 drawings 3. LESSONS OF LOVE, WAR, AND TECHNOLOGY 3 pics 4. YEARS OF DETERIORATION 5. EMERGENCE FROM THE ASHES 1 drawing, 2 pics 6. INVENTIONS ABOUND 3 pics 7. VEHICLE OF THE FUTURE 3 drawings, 2 pics 8. A CAR IS BORN 2 pics 9. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS 1 drawing, 6 pics 10. SEARCHING FOR PERSPECTIVE 4 drawings, 1 pic 11. EXPANDING THE VIEW 1 drawing, 4 pics 12. A HOME AT LAST 1 drawing, 6 pics 13. CONSCIOUS THOUGHT 2 drawings, 2 pics 14. STRUCTURES EMERGE 13 pics 15. EXPANDING GLOBALLY 16 pics 16. WORLD-GAME ABUNDANCE 1 drawing, 1 pic 17. LEGACY TO THE FUTURE 7 pics CHRONOLOGY OF THE LIFE OF R.B.FULLER (1895-1983) SOURCE NOTES INDEX -- JOE S MOORE joemoore@cruzio.com TEL: 408-464-3743 850 PARK AVE, # 3-A FAX: 408-479-0733 CAPITOLA, CA 95010 I hereby declare this post to be in the public domain. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 23:12:23 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: Dimension & Volume syncswim@world.std.com (Steven L Combs) wrote: >"Arithmetical three-dimensionality is identified with volumetric space >growth rates; >Arithmetical four-dimensionality is unidentifiable geometrically; " > > Synergetics 240.44 > > Of course Bucky uses the term dimension in many different ways at >different times, but these corollaries apply to the question of defining >objects in space. Early versus Later Definitions of Dimension Let's look at some of Fuller's usage patterns surrounding the word "dimension", quoting from the Synergetics Dictionary: "[Synergetics originates] in the assumption that dimension must be physical. It follows that, inasmuch as physical universe is entirely energetic, all dimension must be energetic. Vectors and tensors constitute all elementary dimension" (April, 1949) 1:498:5 "The word 'space' is conceptually meaningless and dimensions may only be expressed in magnitudes of time, energy, frequency concentrations and angular modulations." (June, 1966) 1:497:8 "Time and heat and longevity and weight are inherent in every dimension. Ergo, time is no more the fourth dimension than it is the first, second, or third dimensions. No time: no dimension." (Dec, 1971) 1:497:4 The above quotes show clearly that Fuller wanted to invest dimensions with physical, energetic content. Back then, dimension without substance was inconceivable in synergetics. Certainly time was not some independent, substanceless dimension, as conventional physics seemed to assert -- rather time was the "only dimension" (spatiotemporal was quasi-synonymous with dimensional).7 But Fuller did not stick to this usage. As time went on, he evolved the notion of abstract vs energetic, such that a "prefrequency" tetrahedron, irrespective of any special case manifestation, had "primitive dimensionality" (2:527.26). Dimension begins at four. Four-dimensionality is primitive and exclusively within the primitive systems' relative topological abundances and relative interangular proportionment. Four-dimensionality is eternal, generalized, sizeless, unfrequenced. (2:1033.611) This idea that "dimension begins at four" perpetuates Fuller's sense that "heighth, width and breadth" only co-occur and have no conceptually independent existence: all "three" dimensions presupposed space, or volume, which is irreducible to component dimensions. To assert the "four dimensionality" of space would appear to suggest a meaning would attach to one, two and three dimensions, but this was not Fuller's intent. Rather he was attempting to seize hold of the tetrahedron as the most primitive container, and use something like the well-entrenched mutually orthogonal Cartesian axes to signify his alternative intuition, that a container has at minimum four facets, and that this fourness somehow deserves primacy in our thinking, over the Cartesian facination with threeness. [From my 8 page paper ON REDEFINING "DIMENSION" IN SYNERGETICS (Aug 30, 1995) available via my web site (see http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ku_gall.html)] > > Bucky did not invent the tetrahedron nor was he the first dome-builder. Nature has been deploying both for billions of years. See my http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/dome.html for more on the Jena dome. >However, his quanta modules are original (to my knowledge) and are >actually the units of volume that Synergetics is built upon. The A, B, >and T quanta are equi-volumed (1/24th unit tetrahedron) assymetrical >tetrahedra. Only the T-mod is any good for dealing with 5-fold symmetric shapes and alone can't do much. David Koski has done a lot to develop a vocabulary of T-mod cousins which, when phi-scaled (resized), combine to build most of the familiar (and unfamiliar) 5-fold symmetric shapes. Fuller also derived an S-module, but didn't live long enough to use it much (or might have let it fall by the wayside -- we'll never know). >But it would have been pointless to answer our questioner >with the response, "The volume of a tetrahedron is 24 quanta modules." >Unless, of course, she had asked for its quanta volume. > Since the quantas combine to fill allspace and can define both cubes >and tetrahedra (as well as the geodesics), these are the volumetric units >we should be using. Well, depends on the application. Sometimes we measure in cups, sometimes gallons. Sometimes A/B quanta, sometimes tetrahedra (sometimes cubes). >Interestingly, the A & B Isomatrix quanta 1/192 unit >tetrahedra are the electron models of the Synergetic Atomic Model and the >E Quanta is the strong force model. > Bucky's habit of considering any thing to be a spherical system with >12 degrees of freedom led him away from cartesian cubism, but we need to >be bi-lingual to avoid being hopelessly self-referential. Nobody says Cartesianism is 'hopelessly self-referential' -- I wonder why synergetics is so hopeless. >Sincerely, >Steven Combs >Syncorswim, Inc. > >p.s. - we never did hear back from that kid, did we? > What kid? -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 18:26:55 PST Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Joe Moore Subject: BUCKY BOOKS I just located a great online bookstore that carries a lot of books about and by Fuller and geodesic domes. See: http://www.Amazon.com/ Search by author, title, and subject such as "buckminster" or "geodesic", etc. They also have audiotapes and videotapes! -- JOE S MOORE joemoore@cruzio.com TEL: 408-464-3743 850 PARK AVE, # 3-A FAX: 408-479-0733 CAPITOLA, CA 95010 I hereby declare this post to be in the public domain. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 12:56:03 CET Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Re: syn-l: METHANE Comments: To: synergetics-l@teleport.com Joy >Methane: CH4; 4 hydrogen atoms around 1 carbon atom. The hydrogen atoms form >a tetrahedron with the carbon atom in the middle. See Linus Pauling's books >such as _College Chemistry_, _The Architecture of Molecules_, and _The Nature >of the Chemical Bond_. Tagdi just a puzzle i thought that a tetraheron would not have an atom in the center. but if you think of an Octet Truss and you connect the center of tetras you get the rombic dodechedron(squashed sphervertaxias), may be they bubble out by leaving the matrex; just imagiation. i am used to tetra as having 4 vertexes and nothing in the middle this is nice even if it's rong conjunctuer becuse it gives a feeling of how energy and matter can start from Octet Truss. with almost no idea of chemistry i think this unifies the Octet Trust and rhombic dodecavertaxia or rather this last emerges out of the Octet Truss(multiplication by division) and the instruction to do so comes through the cosmic rails of the Victor Equilibruim, this could by how soap bubbles ar formed and change into other forms. the vertaxia vocabulary was used in FullerCosmography being in light with truths. God is the sumation of all truth of course we have a sentimental view of god. this realy strange thought but even the genetic code could be formed this way out of the field O.T ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:09:27 CET Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Syn-l: METHANE >>chardhawk@nets.com writes: >>> >>> Very interesting, Tagdi. Your comprehensive approach to gathering >>> information is a real contribution to the list. Can anyone shed more light >>> on this molecular structure of methane? >>> >>> Richard Hawkins (chardhawk@nets.com) > > this is a high complement i do not know if i deserve it. > i like to feel i am contributing just a bit, but thanks anyway. > Tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:22:12 CET Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Re: On the Concept of Race (from sci.philosophy.meta) In the begining of the centuary there were more race classifiers than classification of race, for sure this is the time when Darwin went into currency if you look at picture of NY city these times were quite missirable, i remmber that some artist a photographs showing the other 1/2. i do not think that 50% were OK. the city of NY was full of Horse shit by product of horse transportation somthing to 100 million ton a year. i really think that race has to do with wealth and how hungry you are. the less you have the more heatred or annoyance you have. and you can see that in this suburb of Chicago the cheerleaders as if they want to protect what they have. radio became a house entertenment in 1920s ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 04:27:48 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Nick Pine Organization: Villanova University Subject: Renewable energy sources James Fischer wrote: > In order of probability of being a "real solution" in the real world: > > Low-Head Hydropower > Solar (Passive) > Solar (Water or Rock Store) > Solar (Phase-Change Salts) > Solar (Solar Cells) > Wind > Geothermal > Hydrogen Interesting list. Hydropower is nice, but perhaps unavailable to most people, for various reasons. I know a couple of people who live on a very small creek, but they are not allowed to touch the creek, because of government regulations, altho they would like to use it for irrigation water and power. I like some passive solar heating systems, but completely passive systems that work well seem more expensive to build than systems with low power fans, since they need more materials and labor to make the larger structures required for purely convective airflow. People say "yes, you can do that with a passive system, but adding a small fan doubles the solar collection efficiency." I have a 1982 picture of a solar heated building with a caption "98% solar power, 2% fan power." [1] Why be purists? One challenge is to make this $37K system less expensive to build and operate, using thin polycarbonate vs. fiberglass glazing, a 36 watt fan instead of a 200 watt blower, a box full of water containers, vs. a rock bed, and more anticipatory design science :-) Passive systems can also use water and rock storage, eg Steve Baer's air-loop rock storage systems. Water seems better to me than rocks, because it's less expensive and easier to move around, and it has about three times more heat storage capacity by volume, with a lower thermal resistance. A box full of sealed containers of water can be a third as large as a rock bed, with lower airflow resistance, if air is used to transfer solar heat to the heat store. That means less fan power is needed to make the system work. Putting an air- water heat exchanger inside the heat battery seems like a good way to heat water for showers, etc., since it will work 24 hours a day, and never freeze. I haven't heard of any practical inexpensive phase change systems lately. People used to use Glauber's salts, but after a while, they got stuck and refused to change phase, unless they were somehow stirred up mechanically. Photovoltaics are still uneconomical, unless one lives in the woods, off the grid, and the electric company wants a lot of money for a connection. For the last 20 years, inexpensive PVs have been "just around the corner," because of a wonderful recent technical breakthrough. Hype. I'd list wind sooner than PVs. Small wind-electric generators are catching on. A 500 watt grid-tie inverter will help this along a lot. Solar panels with built-in inverters that plug into wall sockets to lower electric bills should also be coming quite soon. "Geothermal" as ground-source heat pumps seems promising. Tapping hot springs, etc, has serious corrosion problems, from what I hear. "Hydrogen" is unlike the rest of these energy sources. It's more of a way to store and transport energy. In the near term, natural gas is being used more and more for house heating and cooking, and perhaps electricity soon. Nick [1] US DOE Report Solar/2116-82/14, "Solar Energy System Performance Evaluation of Contemporary Systems, Inc., of Walpole, NH" available as order number DE83000068 from NTIS, Springfield, VA 22161. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 07:56:20 -0800 Reply-To: ud501@freenet.victoria.bc.ca Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: "Denis F. Blue" Subject: On Virtualizing Government: A Design Science Approach Kirby Urner : good work on your paper "On Virtualizing Government: A Design Science Approach".(11-30-95) Your proposal for an alternate design philosophy to aid your government in seriously exploiting the advantages of cyberspace has great merit. This proposal describes with clarity the important benefits and feasibility of implementing this Design Science approach. With the greatest respect, your proposal is certainly in keeping with Bucky's exhortation to "Dare to be naive". I'm sure you won't be surprised if you and other like-minded people will have to promote these kinds of options without much support from your government. Don't hold your breath for anyone, particularly the powerful, to take the initiative. The powerful, as Bucky pointed out, basically subscribe to the operating philosophy of "keep the pikers out". As a result, the "pikers", the citizens in a land of plenty, are impoverished artificially. The Virtual Government proposal would help provide access to the power rightfully due your citizens , and would challenge these alleged democrats in government to recycle their rhetoric , or else expose their systematic exclusivity. Good luck with this. -- ### ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:49:32 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: James Fischer Subject: Re: ETHANOL vs Methane Tagdi said: > I want to bring Nick Pine into this he told me that solar > energy is not economical in these days, Well, that seems strange, given that Nick seems to know all the basic math required to make solar-driven systems work. One would hope that he could do some math with dollar signs in front, and figure out how to justify the investment required to implement a design. My model is simple - let's say the house of your dreams would cost $100,000 US. Let's be really depressing, and estimate the cost of the same house, after designing in "energy autonomy", to be $150,000 to $250,000. Now, over your lifetime, will you EVER have to pay a total of $150,000 for energy? No way in hell! Even if your "energy bills" ran $200 per month, you could pay them for 62 years, and be under the extra $150,000. BUT... Most people have a mortgage, and pay interest on their home loan. The way mortgages work, people end up paying them off in either 30 years, or 15 years. Let's be optimistic, and say that you can get a 6% interest rate on the loan (dream on!). 15-yr model 30-yr model Cost of House $100,000 $100,000 Monthly Payment $843.86 $599.56 Number of Months 180 360 Total Payments $151,894.80 $215,841.60 Gee, isn't that nice? It seems that FINANCING the silly roof over your head is not economical. So, if we pay no interest, we can afford the extra cost of investing in stuff that "pays us back" by reducing or eliminating our long-term need to pay bills to the power company, water utility, sewer utility and such. Please recall that such innovations as "public utilities" are strange and new beasties So, how do you do it? In stages of course, since you pay for a much better house, when you pay for it out of your own back pocket as you go. >i myself read that in order to change a country to solar energy system, > meaning the whole infrastucture, you need minmum of 40 years. No one will "change" an entire country, but individuals will change their own houses and lives when they figure out that if one eliminates the concept of earning more money to pay higher bills and more interest, one can be truely free of one's "obligations", and hence, start enjoying "retirement" while they are still young enough to do so. What smells so bad? Perhaps it is the New World Odor everyone talks about. james fischer jfischer@supercollider.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 16:10:01 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Steven L Combs Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Subject: Dimension & Volume What do you mean, what kid? This whole exercise was set off by the homework assignment of a little girl who needed the "volume of a tetrahedron" for her class. It's all well and good to talk about the inherent fourness of the minimum system tetrahedron. But if I'm going to tell you how to position one in space, I'm going to need a 3-D space to put it in. In the Synergetic Atomic Model there are only two elements: Space and Energy. Space is quantized by geodesic forms defined by energy vector stars. Energy is quantized as the square of the sum of the vectors in a given star. We're working with a handicap here: Fuller was self-contradictory in many ways (use of the word dimension, for example). He also identified a variety of geodesics as "quarks" at one time or another. But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. I am being perceived as "hanging on to" non-synergetic concepts while persuing something I call the Synergetic Atomic Model. I am attempting to glean some of the genius from Fuller's amazing life-work while side-stepping the landmines of his eccentricity: inventing words / multiple definitions of terms / self reference / stream of consciousness writing, etc. These are some of the difficulties in reading Fuller that make him largely inaccessible to the casual reader. It takes a nimble mind, a leap of faith, and the ability to hold conflicting ideas together to navigate Bucky's brilliance. Sincerely, Steven Combs Syncorswim, Inc. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 11:40:51 -0800 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: John Futhey Subject: Re: Dimension & Volume Steven L Combs wrote: > > What do you mean, what kid? This whole exercise was set off by the > homework assignment of a little girl who needed the "volume of a tetrahedron" > for her class. > > It's all well and good to talk about the inherent fourness of the > minimum system tetrahedron. But if I'm going to tell you how to position > one in space, I'm going to need a 3-D space to put it in. > In the Synergetic Atomic Model there are only two elements: > Space and Energy. Space is quantized by geodesic forms defined by energy > vector stars. Energy is quantized as the square of the sum of the > vectors in a given star. > > We're working with a handicap here: Fuller was self-contradictory in > many ways (use of the word dimension, for example). He also identified a > variety of geodesics as "quarks" at one time or another. But let's not > throw the baby out with the bathwater. I am being perceived as "hanging > on to" non-synergetic concepts while persuing something I call the > Synergetic Atomic Model. I am attempting to glean some of the genius > from Fuller's amazing life-work while side-stepping the landmines of his > eccentricity: inventing words / multiple definitions of terms / self > reference / stream of consciousness writing, etc. These are some of the > difficulties in reading Fuller that make him largely inaccessible to the > casual reader. It takes a nimble mind, a leap of faith, and the ability > to hold conflicting ideas together to navigate Bucky's brilliance. > Sincerely, > Steven Combs > Syncorswim, Inc. Steve, This is by far the most balanced comment on Mr. Fuller's brilliance and shortcomings that I have read on this group. Some of his devotees have lionized him to a point of religious fervor, and some of his detractors think he was a nut-case. Your comments are much more accurate a thumbnail synopsis of that which was/is Bucky. John Futhey ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 12:36:53 -0800 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Karl Erickson Subject: Re: Dimension & Volume >Steven L Combs wrote: >> It's all well and good to talk about the inherent fourness of the >> minimum system tetrahedron. But if I'm going to tell you how to position >> one in space, I'm going to need a 3-D space to put it in. ... >> I am attempting to glean some of the genius >> from Fuller's amazing life-work while side-stepping the landmines of his >> eccentricity: inventing words / multiple definitions of terms / self >> reference / stream of consciousness writing, etc. fuller, because he was dynamic ('a verb'), was always changing, and thus his work contains some inherent 'contradiction'. fuller himself did not have a complete understanding of synergetics, simply because synergetics is an ongoing process of universe discovery. i have found it most useful to treat anyone's claims of truth as simply claims of the significance of specified contexts. all of fuller's contexts are significant in some sense or other, although they do not all find significance in the same sense - thus the 'contradiction'. certain aspects of synergetics can be used to help see other aspects in a clearer light. one of the most important principles that fuller has clarified for me is the need for *effective demonstration* of a claim - i.e. any context can be *claimed* significant, but an effective demonstration of the context would reveal *just enough* (subjective effectiveness in an individual perspective) significance to justify using it regularly. effective demonstration is nothing more than discovering the usefulness of a word tool or concept. different concepts, however, have different amounts of significance. fuller's emphasis on 4D over 3D is a context that i consider significant primarily to combat some misapprehensions that the cubic framework is somehow a primal essense of universe. unfortunately, this emphasis has bled over into other areas (concepts/contexts are wantonly inclined to overlap one another) where it has less significance, and perhaps even negative significance. this is what steven combs calls 'landmines' above - they aren't *inherent* landmines, of course, but are landmines in the sense that there *is* some negative significance within certain contexts, i.e. when fuller's 4D makes people think that xyz/cartesian/3D is *useless*. i doubt if fuller intended this, but his inclination toward correcting the errors of the past did sometimes lead him toward hyperbole that can interfere with exploration. i think it is important for users of synergetics concepts to continue the *evolution* of synergetics with effective demonstration as an emphasis, which means using synergetics contexts only in ways that are demonstrably significant, but without overfocusing on ways in which these contexts _seem_ to *detract* from the significance of other contexts. 3D is clearly useful, and *can* be considered inherent geometry in this sense: the minimal set of axes of rotation for the tetrahedron are the three edge-to-edge axes. is this not reason enough to completely, effectively demonstrate/justify the usage of 3D? we mustn't feel as though we are 'blaspheming' bucky by using contexts that he has seemed to attack in places - he was simply attacking *particular senses* of these contexts - not the complete, extended, conceptually overlapping totality of any context. *every* context can find significance in *some* sense - we just have to make sure that the significance and the sense are adequate for our individual and collective purposes. -k. erixon - setebos@wolfenet.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 15:46:39 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Frank Davis Subject: Re: On the Concept of Race (from sci.philosophy.meta) In-Reply-To: <30bf40db.129502037@news.teleport.com> from "Kirby Urner" at Dec 1, 95 05:53:42 pm Kirby, what a sad definition of a racist you have. It offends me far more and sseems as likely to be as hateful as a Ku Klux Klans observation. As long as we deny in one form or another what we really see (no matter how poetic, theetie weetie or politically correct the reason) we can not make progress towards getting along. If I try to lie and say that my white Welsh ancestry skin is the same as my Cental African cousins, then all I portray is stupidity, not clor blindness. Do not take this as a flame, just a heartfelt reaction to a philosophy that will not forward relations among people. Celebrate the differences and enjoy them as the very spices of life. 'Nuff said! -- F. Willis Davis UPDATE Magazine!, Editor P.O. Box 17 Mexico, IN 46958 fdavis@holli.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 17:34:10 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: On Virtualizing Government: A Design Science Approach James McCaig wrote: >At 11:22 PM 11/30/95 GMT, you wrote: >>Distribution: unrestricted >> >> ON VIRTUALIZING GOVERNMENT: A DESIGN SCIENCE APPROACH >> by Kirby Urner >> 11-30-95 >> >Dear Kirby, > >Some interesting and well thought out ideas. Fortunately, our government >'crats are hopelessly behind the curve with computers. This is fortuitous >because the capability that you mention would certainly be used to take more >and more freedom from the populace. It may be better to let them tag along, >years behind the third wave, while we reinvent goverment along more human >and service oriented lines. > > >Maharaj James McCaig | Sufi Center of Washington >Brotherhood/Sisterhood Representative | Keepers of Sufi Center Bookstore >United States | http://guess.worldweb.net/sufi > > jmccaig@worldweb.net Not sure why you think implementing web sites according to the design philosophy I spell out would 'take more and more freedom from the populace' -- the design was about doing just the opposite. Is this a thought out reaction, or knee-jerk anti-governmentalism, or both, or neither? As for being hopelessly behind the curve, keep in mind that this internet we're all using is an outgrowth of the DoDs Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). And Dr. Vannevar Bush (NSF) was writing about hypertext when computers were still in their vacuum tube phase. As I mention in my essay, we already have lots of government web sites (capability already in use), but they're not designed to create transparency, for the most part. Kirby Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 17:37:34 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: Re[2]: maps Joe Moore wrote: >Art Scott writes: > >> Appendix A of my report has a copy of those coordinates. If anyone >> wants them, I'll scan them in and send them. >> If anyone wants a copy of the whole report, I'll consider scanning >> the entire report. Figures will be a problem. I have a WWW page, if >> that is feasible. > Another resource is Robert Gray's website. His algorithm for producing the Dymaxion is original, I believe, not a projection of spherical to icosahedral coordinates ala the gnomonic, but something a little different. He provides a C-language algorithm for producing coordinates. He also has an excellent paper on the subject, which I don't think is available via the internet as yet. His web site may be visited via my http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/dymax.html Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 13:27:10 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Marcia Blackburn Organization: Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY Subject: Re: new addition to "toy" index In-Reply-To: <30be29d9.58065829@news.teleport.com> Yes Kirby, it does have bells and sliders on both the wood and elastic parts. I keep mine on my desk to contemplate. - Marcia On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Kirby Urner wrote: > Marcia Blackburn wrote: > > >I've just picked up a wonderful icosahedron toy at the Museum of Modern > >Art in New York. It's called "The Original Skwish Classic" and is > >manufactured by Pappa Gepetto's Toys Victoria Ltd., Box 98, Victoria, > >B.C. V8W 2M4 CANADA. It's made of multicolored wood parts connected with > >black tension cable. Entrancing! > > > >- Marcia Blackburn > > > >oh, it was $16.00. > > Does it have little bells and sliders on the wood parts? > Sounds like the tensegrity my daughter (18 months) likes to play with. > Sold in Portland as a kid's toy. > > Kirby > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU > Email: pdx4d@teleport.com > Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 19:18:25 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: James McCaig Subject: Re: On Virtualizing Government: A Design Science Approach At 05:34 PM 12/2/95 GMT, you wrote: > >Not sure why you think implementing web sites according to the design >philosophy I spell out would 'take more and more freedom from the populace' >-- the design was about doing just the opposite. Is this a thought out >reaction, or knee-jerk anti-governmentalism, or both, or neither? > Dear Kirby, One would hope that all reactions to articulate comments like yours are thought out. Whether they are "well thought out" is completely subjective, but it is thought out with my limited capacity. Yes the ARPANET was conceived as a government tool, but that was some time ago and the goverment, much to its chagrine, has lost control of it. There have been several attempts to take it back, but they have thankfully failed. Recently, in frustration, all funding for the net has been suspended, I heard on PBS. If the 'crats who have steadily attacked the bill of rights (especially the 4th amendment) were to have the computer power you desire, there is little likelihood, IMHO, they would use it as you suggest. That is not to say that your suggestion has no merit, rather that it is my opinion that your idealistic use of the tools wouldn't be implemented. As to "knee-jerk anti governmentalism", I'm not too sure what that means. For my own part, the government as it is conceived in the Constitution and the first ten amendments is fine with me, perhaps one of the best on the planet. The way it is run today, though, leaves me somewhat dismayed. One would hope to be able to voice criticism, so long as it is evenly mildly thought out, of the system that has degenerated (IMHO) sharply since Fuller wrote chapter 3 of CRITICAL PATH. It was this very chapter that set my knees to jerking! For the most part, with certain exceptions that make the rule, what the residents of computer stations in the Federal Government are doing is of little interest to me. Generally they are blowing our cash on make-work and it would be cheaper if they stayed home, with full pay, and played solitaire. As a long time resident of the DC area, it has been my pleasure to know many dedicated and highly motivated government employees. On the other hand, anyone who was raised in this city knows plenty about waste and the hunger for power that is rife in these environs. My suggestion is give them all 286's and let them play. Much cheaper and wiser than meddling in the Balkans with high tech toys. Maharaj James McCaig | Sufi Center of Washington Brotherhood/Sisterhood Representative | Keepers of Sufi Center Bookstore United States | http://guess.worldweb.net/sufi jmccaig@worldweb.net ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 21:47:32 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Kirby on Earth (sort of) dave suwala wrote: >> the environment that we all live within spirals down to a low gravy >> anyway. I always wonder whether our efforts in space will be >> rewarded by a breakout from this injured earth. But I guess that >> men will be as damaging to the galaxy and universe as they have been >> to Bangladesh, NYC, our fishing grounds, etc. I wonder whether we >> will use up all of the convenient chemical fuel before we develop >> systems (Biosphere 2, for example) capable of enabling us to survive >> in space or on the planets and grab and use more stuff exponentially >> and synergetically. and Kirby commented: >World Game data indicated, up to at least a few years ago, we had the >ingredients for planetary success on a sustainable basis. Probably still >do. I can't speak for all, but I myself am very, very, very, very 100% sure that we are nowhere near "the point of no return", at least for the human race. Other species may not fare so well, since many have died out due to the urban sprawl. >Throwing up one's hands and turning towards space is defeatism in my >view. This biosphere/spaceship is as good as any within a huge number of >light years, most likely. Silly to give up on it. More accurate to say that this biosphere is the ONLY one within range of the current crop of space probes. While it is possible to extrapolate the number of planets around a star and their rough distances from the star from some very fancy readings, finding a "habitable" planet is a real long shot, and would require a probe similar to the Voyager. We have yet to send anything to another solar system, and have data come back that tells us anything. I did a poster design for an envronmental group. It showed various planets from our local solar system, including Saturn with it's famous rings, rampant on a pseudo-Milky Way background. The text was simple: "OK, Don't Recycle - We Can Always Move..." As for Dave's hopeful comments on Biosphere II, I can only laugh. Biosphere II was a sham. It was a disgrace, and a fraud. The new management may do some good work, but the "grand scheme" was a joke from the get-go. A triumph of public relations over facts. We are making headway in small matters, to the point where people see that we can reclaim the screw-ups of the last century or so. Now that prices for "post-consumer" aluminum are decent, I defy any of you to find enough empty cans lying about to buy lunch at the cheapest place in your town. In one full day of looking, I saw one or two cans by the side of the road. In the 70s, there were enough around that they were an eyesore. The "Everything Must Go", blowout sale of fossil fuels still goes on. Even the USA power companies no longer think that Fission nuclear plants are a good idea, since the last 3 or 4 have bankrupted the builders. Sustainable approaches DO exist, but they cannot compete well with the current cutthroat pricing and subsidies for dirty fuel sources. What to do? Set an example, and WALK. Ride a bike. Start a compost pile. Plant some veggies and eat them when they grow. For example: The small town I leave near had its annual Christmas parade today. Over 100 floats, old cars, fire engines, horse-drawn wagons, antique tractors and such. A fire alarm was broadcast over the radios of the various emergency vehicles in the parade. 1) The majority of the volunteer fire-fighters were in the parade. So was the majority of the fire-fighting equipment. (Ooops, next year someone will think more clearly, I am sure.) 2) The police halted the parade, and everyone pulled to the sides of the roads to make way for the fire-fighters. (Watch that marching band scramble for cover when being overtaken by 12 Tons of screaming fire truck!) 3) Guess who made it to the house in question first? The firemen on horseback! One group even ejected the non-fire fighting passengers from a restored heavy farm wagon dating back to the 1800s, and gave their horses a good workout. 4) The actual fire trucks came in second! Despite belching desiel fumes, blaring sirens, and shiny chrome, they were beaten by a sustainable, renewable form of transport! The fire? Minor kitchen blaze. No one hurt. Q: "What did you make for dinner tonight, Honey?" A: "Reservations at the Peaks Of Otter Lodge." What smells so bad? Perhaps it is the New World Odor everyone talks about. james fischer jfischer@supercollider.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 21:47:49 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: James Fischer Subject: Re: The (non)Concept of Race - ...OK, time to weigh in on this one... F. Willis Davis commented: >Kirby, what a sad definition of a racist you have. It offends me far more and >seems as likely to be as hateful as a Ku Klux Klans observation. This is not even acceptable debating style. The KKK is alive and well in places like NC/SC, and while laughable, they are a danger to anyone with a stake in law, order, and peace. Invoking their image against Kirby is in very poor taste. Invoking their image against anyone is at least "poor form". >As long as we deny in one form or another what we really see >(no matter how poetic, theetie weetie or politically correct >the reason) we can not make progress towards getting along. Wrong. We CAN deny that the type of pigment in our skin has any impact on any other aspect of a person's being, and pray that "society" will not prove us wrong. I have a very large number of freckles, should I therefore be an associate member of the NAACP? Just a few more freckles in the right places, and I would qualify for a full membership! >If I try to lie and say that my white Welsh ancestry skin is the >same as my Cental African cousins, ...which it IS, except for minor pigmentation variance! If burned in a fire, a black person's skin could be used (in a pinch) to literaly save your rear end!!! Your body would not care a bit. Tissue typing ignores details like black/white. Ditto for organ transplants. 100% of all your replaceable parts are interchangeable with a significant percentage of the members of ANY race you wish to name!!! >then all I portray is stupidity, not color blindness. I think the above line stands on its own merits... >Do not take this as a flame, just a heartfelt reaction to a >philosophy that will not forward relations among people. Kirby's "philosophy" appears to me to be a better shot at making for better relations than your comments. If your comments are "heartfelt", then this is a strange and hitherto unknown use of the term, to which I am not accustomed. >Celebrate the differences and enjoy them as the very spices of life. Celebrate yes, but how can one celebrate when darker skinned people are STILL given a hard time by lighter skinned ones? Ask an American Indian. Ask an Indian Indian. Ask a Black. Ask a Hispanic. Ask them what they have to "celebrate" about their skin tone, given that it brings them grief from whites on a regular basis. >'Nuff said! -- When enough is said, then people will describe my friend Ron as "The tall guy" (he is 6' 4"). They never do. He is "the black guy" (when in fact, he is light brown). They will also call me "The short guy" (I am 5' 8"). They don't. I am, of course, "the white guy" (when in fact, I am DARKER brown than Ron in some spots, and lighter in others...) Christ (who was more likely dark-skinned than white) tried to get people to be nice and get along. He was nailed to a tree for his trouble. How long before we get the message? Go ahead and flame me... my new firewall has yet to be "tested" by anyone who was any good at all. What smells so bad? Perhaps it is the New World Odor everyone talks about. james fischer jfischer@supercollider.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 20:03:26 PST Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Joe Moore Subject: BFVI AT ECOMALL The EcoMall has one of the more recent versions of the Bucky Fuller Virtual Institute with lots of links. See: http://www.ecomall.com/ecomall/activism/bucky2.htm Check it out. -- JOE S MOORE joemoore@cruzio.com TEL: 408-464-3743 850 PARK AVE, # 3-A FAX: 408-479-0733 CAPITOLA, CA 95010 I hereby declare this post to be in the public domain. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 23:26:43 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: James Fischer Subject: Re: ECOMALL? >The EcoMall... >http://www.ecomall.com/ecomall/activism/bucky2.htm >Check it out. Why does this sound kinda like a contradiction in terms - an Eco-Mall? Aren't "malls" one of the things that are mauling the ecology of a number of areas? Perhaps it is just me.... What smells so bad? Perhaps it is the New World Odor everyone talks about. james fischer jfischer@supercollider.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 23:25:04 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Frank Davis Subject: Re: The (non)Concept of Race - In-Reply-To: <199512030251.VAA05591@crucible.inmind.com> from "James Fischer" at Dec 2, 95 09:47:49 pm Who really cares as to whether you have a new firewall, or what is good debating skill. I still find your attitude to be racist and hateful. That is not flaming. -- F. Willis Davis UPDATE Magazine!, Editor P.O. Box 17 Mexico, IN 46958 fdavis@holli.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 23:44:23 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: James Fischer Subject: Re: The (non)Concept of Race - F. Willis Davis retorted: >Who really cares as to whether you have a new firewall, or what is good >debating skill. I still find your attitude to be racist and hateful. That is >not flaming. -- I have never seen a word on this mailing list that is racist or hateful, and I doubt that the general opinion of the group would contradict me. As a matter of fact, the first time I EVER saw anyone call someone anything close to a racist was when you said: "Kirby, what a sad definition of a racist you have. It offends me far more and seems as likely to be as hateful as a Ku Klux Klans observation." Now you seem to have the opinion (above) that my "attitude" is racist (and HATEFUL!), which is pretty much the same thing as the less overt reference directed at Kirby. Pretty presumptious on both counts. Better that this discussion be in via private e-mail, if you must continue it. What smells so bad? Perhaps it is the New World Odor everyone talks about. james fischer jfischer@supercollider.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 02:01:21 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: Dimension & Volume syncswim@world.std.com (Steven L Combs) wrote: > What do you mean, what kid? This whole exercise was set off by the >homework assignment of a little girl who needed the "volume of a tetrahedron" >for her class. Oh... I thought we were trying to help Tagdi teach his class. Pretty enterprising of her to post to GEODESIC. What is her name? > It's all well and good to talk about the inherent fourness of the >minimum system tetrahedron. But if I'm going to tell you how to position >one in space, I'm going to need a 3-D space to put it in. If you mean you'll use xyz coordinates it's up to you whether you call that '3D space'. Fuller didn't. The number of parameters it takes to specify something need not be identified with its 'dimension' as Cantor showed. The concept of dimension preceded the invention of Cartesian coordinates. > In the Synergetic Atomic Model there are only two elements: >Space and Energy. Space is quantized by geodesic forms defined by energy >vector stars. Energy is quantized as the square of the sum of the >vectors in a given star. This is your model I presume. > We're working with a handicap here: Fuller was self-contradictory in >many ways (use of the word dimension, for example). He also identified a >variety of geodesics as "quarks" at one time or another. But let's not >throw the baby out with the bathwater. I am being perceived as "hanging >on to" non-synergetic concepts while persuing something I call the >Synergetic Atomic Model. I am attempting to glean some of the genius >from Fuller's amazing life-work while side-stepping the landmines of his >eccentricity: inventing words / multiple definitions of terms / self >reference / stream of consciousness writing, etc. These are some of the >difficulties in reading Fuller that make him largely inaccessible to the >casual reader. It takes a nimble mind, a leap of faith, and the ability >to hold conflicting ideas together to navigate Bucky's brilliance. I do not wish to interfere with your project. My self-defined role, on the other hand, is to give as much clarity to Fuller's definitions and concepts as I am able. If I am able to attach meaning and consistency beyond where you have decided to draw the line, that's maybe useful to some readers, irrelevant to others. Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 02:57:13 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Steven L Combs Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Subject: Dimension & Volume Kirby's point is well taken. It is his role here to define synergetics within its own context - Bucky as Bucky saw himself. Lest there be confusion, what I refer to as the Synergetic Atomic Model is my own version of applied synergetics, therefore I take liberties in applying synergetics how I see fit. For example, I change Fuller's modification of Einstein's E=mc^2 from Bucky's E=2V^2 into E= (Sum V)^2 . As one reader points out, it is in applying synergetics in useful special case scenarios that we achieve our purpose. Kirby's intellectual integrity in keeping the list grounded in Synergetics (with a capital S) is a useful reminder of our common roots as we explore synergetic applications. I must plead ignorance as to the identity of the original questioner in the matter of the volume of a tetrahedron. I recall that it was the father of a schoolgirl with a homework assignment. But I didn't save his email address. Sincerely, Steven Combs Syncorswim, Inc. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 03:20:30 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Steven L Combs Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Subject: Time At the risk of being branded a complete loon, I would like to explore the subject of time. Fuller took note of something that I don't think I've ever seen discussed anywhere else - Einstein's work as a patent clerk exposing him to many varieties of timepieces and Einstein's subsequent view of time - "I then concluded that a man who had Einstein's kind of philosophy and Einstein's kind of patent-examiner-of-timekeepers experiences would naturally think a great deal about relativity of nonsimultaneously and always differently viewed time experiences." RBF - "Cosmography" page 77 The slant I would like to put on this is that there really is no evidence for the existance of "time". You can't bottle it, as the song says. Measurement of it is relative, imprecise, and based on measurement of other quantities. The simplest way to demonstrate my view is to suggest the thought of time travel. If you were to awake in an unknown time, how would you determine when you were? There is only one way - examine where you are. That is, the nature of the space and energy around you would determine what time you would conclude it was. Sincerely, Steven Combs Syncorswim, Inc. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 15:49:49 CET Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Re: The (non)Concept of Race - In Message Sat, 02 Dec 1995 23:25:04 -0500, Frank Davis writes: >Who really cares as to whether you have a new firewall, or what is good >debating skill. I still find your attitude to be racist and hateful. That is >not flaming. -- > >F. Willis Davis this newsgroup is about how to make the world work, if you like Danish coluor or sweedish budockes is not important to this group. you are free to like what you like. wasting time on somthing messy as the race issue in ordor to justify tasty group feeling is just a way to keep others with your precoupation and what is great about Wales anyway( the feeling of warmth, the friendship, the landscpe ) well to someone else it is just myth that creates make belive feeling. I belive in the indivisual, groups based on scratch my back syndrom. this is not flaming, oh how i like this sentence. they use to sell black for 80 dollars, what do you say to that or you do not have a hearthfelt feeling. i suggest leave this issue alone try to raise the standard of living you might have a better combination. last sentence: we know what racism when we see it. Tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 16:04:25 CET Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Re: Dimension & Volume In Message Sat, 02 Dec 1995 11:40:51 -0800, Steve >> It's all well and good to talk about the inherent fourness of the >> minimum system tetrahedron. But if I'm going to tell you how to position >> one in space, I'm going to need a 3-D space to put it in. are you sure that 3D exist, if you tell a child that diminsion starts wtih 4 direction i think he will grow out with the idea and will find 3D to be strange proposition. many of our ideas in culture go back to two or three thousand years ago, so what seems to be contemprory is really long time ago thing. >> In the Synergetic Atomic Model there are only two elements: >> Space and Energy. Space is quantized by geodesic forms defined by energy >> vector stars. Energy is quantized as the square of the sum of the >> vectors in a given star. >> >> We're working with a handicap here: Fuller was self-contradictory in >> many ways (use of the word dimension, for example). He also identified a >> variety of geodesics as "quarks" at one time or another. But let's not >> throw the baby out with the bathwater. I am being perceived as "hanging >> on to" non-synergetic concepts while persuing something I call the >> Synergetic Atomic Model. I am attempting to glean some of the genius >> from Fuller's amazing life-work while side-stepping the landmines of his >> eccentricity: inventing words / multiple definitions of terms / self >> reference / stream of consciousness writing, etc. These are some of the >> difficulties in reading Fuller that make him largely inaccessible to the >> casual reader. It takes a nimble mind, a leap of faith, and the ability >> to hold conflicting ideas together to navigate Bucky's brilliance. can you explain more since some of us do not know much physics. >Steve, > >This is by far the most balanced comment on Mr. Fuller's brilliance and >shortcomings that I have read on this group. Some of his devotees have >lionized him to a point of religious fervor, and some of his detractors >think he was a nut-case. Your comments are much more accurate a >thumbnail synopsis of that which was/is Bucky. > >John Futhey i think you are bit insulting. are you a devotee or detractors or both. Tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 16:57:56 CET Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Re: Fw: Re: WEALTH AS ENERGY HOW TO BECOM A MILLIONIARE In Message Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:53:24 -0500 (EST), "Robert C. Reining" writes: > Has any one done a economic cost-benefit analysis of this hybrid > diesel electric system? hello Robert any information on engins including diesel will be appriciated. Tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 17:25:11 CET Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Re: Bucky Triangles >>>"Circle" approach, or to continue with his triangular approach. >> >>I have done some preparation before tuning into this echo. As I >>recall the circle approach is considered to construct a spiral. >> >>>Yeah, it'd be cool to link the crab thing to Fuller's concept of >>>'precession'. Nature gets the job done precessionally, often at >>>90 degrees to what humans consciously understand. He felt our >>>being graduated to Class I evolution would be a manifestation of >>>our coming to understand 'the way of the crab' (tao?). >> >>This direction perhaps is along the w axis linked to the 4th dimension. >>And I do think this has to do with the 'chi' of the Tao. I have been >>thinking about chi and synchronicity/synergy. Read a short description >>of topoi which appear to place less emphasis on points which are oldstyle. >>The suggestion is a new view of self-reference not defined by points as >>fixed but occupying a domain-more flexibility to allow forbidden symmetry. >>My cautious opinion, is that Bucky did this with crystals and polymers. >> >>Good Day, >>Stephen > > anyone know how to do more learning with less, and how to creat > low pressure in life situation. >Good week Stephen >Tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 17:26:58 CET Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Ethanol vs methane >Dave >> The discussion of fuels is particularly interesting. Rather >> Malthusian but inevitable. As we proliferate the automobile (the >> world has discovered the wonders of automobility through our >> satellite transmissions of our American lifestyle) the engineers >> will have to begin to use sources of energy as yet untapped. You >> have been discussing fuels based on corn (ethanol) and animal waste >> (methane). >Tagdi > > what is going on with oil companies, any nice information. > > >> How about the more direct utilization of solar power? The amorphous >> silicon solar cell has increased in efficiency so that in a few >> years we may be roofing our houses with them. The energy, currently >> > can you add little more about the improvment of solar cell and > it is future use. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 17:40:36 CET Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Re: The (non)Concept of Race - The city of Tokyo considering seriously building island cities, they have planned to build an island airport. the models they have for city island is structuraly is not stable. tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 09:03:01 -0500 Reply-To: Traderjc Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Traderjc Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Subject: Publisher of Dome Books 1&2 and Geodesic Math The following books recommended in this group sound interesting to some applications I am developing but I cannot find the publisher contact info: Dome Book 1 Dome Book 2 Geodesic Math They are not in my Books in Print reference by title. Can someone please e-mail or post the publisher contact information? Will be much appreciated. Jim Campbell ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 07:37:35 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Nick Pine Organization: Villanova University Subject: Solar economics James Fischer wrote: > Tagdi said: >> I want to bring Nick Pine into this. He told me that solar >> energy is not economical these days, > Well, that seems strange, given that Nick seems to know > all the basic math required to make solar-driven systems work. He thinks he does :-) He finds it easy math, compared to geodesic geometry. Mostly just arithmetic, with an occasional push on the e-to-the-x button of his calculator... Would that more geodesic geometers discover this easy math. He'd be happy to help, in exchange for some geodesic math tutoring... > One would hope that he could do some math with dollar signs in front, He does that a lot. Lately he is impressed by labor rates for house builders, who seem to charge almost as much as lawyers these days. I guess we need more tooling and prefabrication, if not do-it-your-selfery. > and figure out how to justify the investment required to implement a design. I'm not sure what that means, exactly. _I_ think some solar heating investments are quite well justified, and my house is already mostly solar heated, but where are the rest of the people who want to build things? That's another step. As I already said, one way to make solar heating economics look nicer is to combine it with something else, eg walls. In _How Buildings Learn_, Stewart Brand says: The 80-story Amoco building (1974) in Chicago was originally faced with 1 1/4-inch-thick panels of prime Carrara marble, which soon dished and distorted because it was cut too thin. Replacing the 43,000 panels with 2-inch thick granite is taking three years and $80 million. I suppose photovoltaic walls are cheaper than marble facades: Article: 43011 of sci.energy From: nick@vu-vlsi.ee.vill.edu (Nick Pine) Subject: AC PV panels Date: 3 Dec 1995 06:22:24 -0500 Organization: Villanova University Tom Gray wrote: >Nick Pine writes: >>Solar panels with built-in inverters that plug into wall sockets >>to lower electric bills should be coming quite soon. MrSolar@netins.net (Charlie Collins) kindly forwarded the following from http://www.ultranet.com/~sda, paraphrased below with a few comments... Solar Design Associates is now developing an AC solar module with Solarex, owned by Amoco. The AC module is a DC module with a small integrated inverter. Solarex calls the product "PowerWall." The first modules are designed for curtain walls, the shear wall systems used on modern office buildings. These modules replace the glass or other sheet material used in curtain walls, eg in framing manufactured by Kawneer of Norcross, Georgia. A residential roof product is also in the works. PowerWall modules are available in AC and DC models, in sizes up to 53" X 87", [32 ft^2--why not 4' x 8'?] with outputs up to 250 watts. An ideal solar system should harvest both heat and electricity from the same aperture [although PV power falls off as temperature rises...] Virtually every building has thermal as well as electrical energy needs, and roof area is limited... In 1979, SDA developed a combined, flat-plate, PV/thermal collector. The device worked well. Unfortunately, no company was willing to produce it. Now they are revisiting this device... [I wonder if it still has a thermal output?] In 1980, existing PV modules (~ 4 ft^2) were not large enough to integrate well with building systems. Too many connections were needed to make a significant electrical output. SDA presented the case to all major PV makers for building a large-area module of 25 to 30 square feet, which could be integrated into a building skin to form the structure and weathering surface. Every manufacturer thought they were crazy - except one. SDA began working with Mobil to develop a 24 ft^2, glass-superstrate PV module which could be sold with or without a frame. Now the rest of the industry is following suit. Custom module manufacturers in Europe now offer PV modules of 3 square meters and larger, designing them to architect's specifications for direct building integration. DC outputs of PV arrays impose serious limits on the electrical use. Most electrical loads require AC power, and 30-40% of the cost of a PV system has been used in the transition from the DC PV module to the load. Such systems were complex and required special DC-rated components not readily available. The obvious answer was to create an AC PV module. SDA is now doing that now. --- > My model is simple - let's say the house of your dreams would cost > $100,000 US. OK... > Let's be really depressing, and estimate the cost of the same house, > after designing in "energy autonomy", to be $150,000 to $250,000. Houses need siding and roofs, right? Suppose we use thin polycarbonate plastic in place of siding and roof, with an airspace underneath, to collect some sun. No sheathing, no tarpaper, no shingles. Less labor, since these plastic sheets come in very large pieces and rolls... So to my mind, a solar heated house can be LESS expensive to construct than a conventional house. I wouldn't make the roof out of PV panels, yet... But let's say you did, and it cost another $50-150K... > Now, over your lifetime, will you EVER have to pay a total of $150,000 > for energy? No way in hell! Even if your "energy bills" ran $200 per > month, you could pay them for 62 years, and be under the extra $150,000. Yes, although that is future money, and some economists argue that energy costs rise faster than inflation. > BUT... Yes? > Most people have a mortgage, and pay interest on their home loan. > The way mortgages work, people end up paying them off in either > 30 years, or 15 years. Let's be optimistic, and say that you can > get a 6% interest rate on the loan... > > 15-yr model 30-yr model > > Cost of House $100,000 $100,000 > Monthly Payment $843.86 $599.56 > Number of Months 180 360 > Total Payments $151,894.80 $215,841.60 > > Gee, isn't that nice? It seems that FINANCING the silly > roof over your head is not economical. In what sense, exactly? It seems to me that deciding to buy a house is different from deciding to invest in a stock or put money in a savings account. People live in houses. It's hard to live in a bank account, no matter how much interest the bank pays. Mortgage "payback" is not the same as investment "payback." When I talk about solar economics, I'm thinking that most people are making decisions about where to invest money, or whether to borrow money to do something that has a monetary return. I suppose that most people would rather put money in a bank, rather than buy a solar system, if the bank deposit pays equally well, and has a lower risk and takes less time to manage. > So, if we pay no interest... I'm not quite following you here. I thought you were talking about 6%. If you put up the cash out of your pocket up front (is that what you are talking about?), you forgo the opportunity of putting it in the bank and earning some interest. > we can afford the extra cost of investing in stuff that "pays us back" > by reducing or eliminating our long-term need to pay bills to the power > company, water utility, sewer utility and such. My original point with Tagdi was that if a "solar heater" allows you to avoid paying the oil dealer for 1 gallon of oil per square foot of "heater" per year, about 60 cents, where I live, the "solar heater" has to be very inexpensive to build, OR it has to serve more than one purpose, to make this kind of narrow economic sense to the owner. Nick ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 21:30:36 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: Dimension & Volume >> We're working with a handicap here: Fuller was self-contradictory in >> many ways (use of the word dimension, for example). He also identified a >> variety of geodesics as "quarks" at one time or another. But let's not >> throw the baby out with the bathwater. I am being perceived as "hanging >> on to" non-synergetic concepts while persuing something I call the >> Synergetic Atomic Model. I am attempting to glean some of the genius >> from Fuller's amazing life-work while side-stepping the landmines of his >> eccentricity: inventing words / multiple definitions of terms / self >> reference / stream of consciousness writing, etc... >> >> Sincerely, >> Steven Combs >> Syncorswim, Inc. > >Steve, > >This is by far the most balanced comment on Mr. Fuller's brilliance and >shortcomings that I have read on this group. Some of his devotees have >lionized him to a point of religious fervor, and some of his detractors >think he was a nut-case. Your comments are much more accurate a >thumbnail synopsis of that which was/is Bucky. > >John Futhey A few points: On the consistency issue: as evidenced by my earlier post giving multiple uses of the word 'dimension' over time, Fuller did not always use the word in the same way. We can take this as contradictory, or evolutionary. Note I was mostly quoting from the Synergetics Dictionary, not Synergetics itself. The latter Fuller held off on publishing until he was in his 70s and these contradictions are less evident in the 'final' work, though inconsistencies remain. The subtitle is, after all, "explorations in the geometry of thinking" -- exploration implies lots of tentative forays into what appears tantalizingly relevant, without ever getting to see a final map of the terrain. Keep in mind also that the word 'dimension' has multiple, inconsistent usages quite outside of Fuller's writings (something I take up in my paper, cited above, further quoted below). It is one of those troublesome terms that has had a way of overloading. Towards the end of Synergetics, Fuller himself indicates he has doubts about its lasting relevance. We might someday find ourselves dispensing with the term 'dimension' in Synergetics almost completely. Fuller himself talked about how a process of refining one's definitions over time can be one of settling into patterns which change less frequently as their internal inconsistencies are worked out and the generalized principles worked in -- but all recordings of insight are subject to decay over time. What I find especially interesting in Synergetics is that Fuller set for himself the task of crafting a language which speaks geometry directly to its users in a narrative style, as opposed to using the symbolic notations more commonly identified as "mathematics", and which do not have a prose syntax. He was attempting to inspire visualization and comprehension directly, not through the mediation of computer algorithms or computation. This is, I think, I leading barrier to peoples' appreciation for his work: no one, to my knowledge, has tried so hard to create a precise, yet metaphoric, humanities-style language, yet so invested in stark mathematical/geometric concepts. So it doesn't fit the pigeon-hole of math/science, nor a subject in the humanities; Fuller tried to bridge the two through invention in language, a narrative style of 'operational mathematics' which is at once about the physical and metaphysical dimensions of experience. The result is outside any existing academic department, and therefore not a part of the curriculum in any of them. Synergetics is too 'mushy' for the math-heads, too 'cold and austere' for the humanities crowd. Quoting from my paper on Dimension again: [Synergetics as Language Some might assert that a language which permits perpetual redefinition of its key terms is thereby precluded from attaining a high degree of precision, at least with regard to matters scientific. In the western experience, the rationalist rebellion against the tyranny of theology has left a rift between symbolic notations, the province of rationalists, and the more narratively-based stream of consciousness, the province of storytellers, wherein science and mathematics may be diluted for popular consumption, but not securely based or instantiated. Synergetics reawakens old suspicions among rationalists because it proposes to anchor itself in this broader ocean of discourse, rather than in some symbolic notation. Consequently, to the conventional mathematician, synergetics may appear downright unhygenic -- why should pristine geometric ideas be encumbered with so much verbiage? A liberal arts student, on the other hand, may feel put off by all the geometry -- where is the humanity in this language, so stark, cold and austere? In short, readers on either side of the rift feel uncomfortable with synergetics, which suggests that Fuller may indeed have created something of a bridge between C.P. Snow's two cultures. But the fact of the matter is that even rationalist notations are not immune from the kinds of revaluation effects which characterize the rest of language. Even a casual examination of the historical record shows that supposedly rigorous definitions of key concepts in mathematics are subject to review and modification -- which brings us to the mathematical concept of "dimension" in the 1920s.] I realize that to some ears the above may sound like the justifications of an unredeemed apologist who thinks Fuller could make no errors. In actual fact, there is much in Synergetics I do not understand and have no ability to make sense of. But I do think more of a case can be made for his approach, style and language than Steve's comments indicate. I also think that Steve's view is closer to the 'mainstream' (as much as *any* thinking about Bucky's writings can be called 'mainstream') than is mine, and that 'hard core synergetics' will likely remain a marginal subject of study for the vast majority who already have strong math/science backgrounds. Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 21:56:33 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: On Virtualizing Government: A Design Science Approach James McCaig wrote: >Dear Kirby, > >One would hope that all reactions to articulate comments like yours are >thought out. Whether they are "well thought out" is completely subjective, >but it is thought out with my limited capacity. > I understand you better now. You weren't criticizing the proposed design so much as doubting that the USA government, as presently instantiated, has the means or integrity to implement these designs. Yes, that seems well thought out to me. Personally, I'm not into blaming politicians as much as is common practice though (I've lived in DC too BTW). The political class is a scapegoat class in some degree. They're expected to promise this and that, get into office, fall back into 'real world' patterns, get blamed, and the public gets cynical. All such a predictable cycle. My view is that politics is too ill-informed and too much a money-game to ever dig us out of the hole we're in. Why should we expect high caliber design science to flow easily from highly trained *lawyers* of all people. On the other hand, we have this huge network of academic institutions playing gatekeeper to all kinds of important jobs, at the same time playing 'innocent bystander' to the scapegoats, sniping at legislators without questioning whether the curriculum itself should be more the focus of our design science approach towards providing sustainable high living standards for all humans and fellow travelers aboard Spaceship Earth. The metaphor I propose is to take 'learning a living' seriously: we're all students for life. The City is then a Campus -- the whole city, not just the formally identified 'campus' part (if the city even has a campus). I look out across the cities of Calcutta and Cairo and think "global university -- all those impoverished students!" I think of the global food distribution system and think "Food Services." How well are we serving our global university students? Are we giving them access to work-study opportunities and access to inventory assets via exponentially expanding distance-education circuits? No? Well, don't blame the politicians -- they are products of the global university, but not its designers, victims of overspecialization, not its architects. It's the curriculum which teaches students to invest their hopes in the scapegoat politicians and tells them they live in a democracy because they have the right to vote now and then, or throw money at this or that cause. But instead, the curriculum could be telling students of goverment about the opportunity to virtualize governmental offices in cyberspace, giving the public quick access to world game data via the many viewscopes which government, by design, is supposed to have at its fingertips, and could share with serious students everywhere. If government is, in reality, technologically impoverished, incompetent, a liability, maybe we should look back at its sponsors, the Grunch of Giants, and ask why? And maybe we should look at our academic curricula for the programming bugs, rather than in the broken-down political system. Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 22:01:33 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: BFVI AT ECOMALL Joe Moore wrote: >The EcoMall has one of the more recent versions of the Bucky Fuller Virtual >Institute with lots of links. See: > >http://www.ecomall.com/ecomall/activism/bucky2.htm > >Check it out. > Does this mean http://metro.turnpike.net/G/GoatBoy/bfvi.html is not being kept as current? Keeping multiple versions of essentially the same page floating around, some more up-to-date than others, is confusing to would-be linkers. Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 23:14:20 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Solar economics >> Gee, isn't that nice? It seems that FINANCING the silly >> roof over your head is not economical. > >In what sense, exactly? It seems to me that deciding to buy a house is >different from deciding to invest in a stock or put money in a savings >account. Since you can do either, one MUST compare one against the other. >People live in houses. It's hard to live in a bank account, True, but I can rent a house, and avoid having to invest money in a house, thus freeing my capital for (more) investment. If my investments do well, then my money is "better" invested than it would be if invested in a house since: A) Many investments are more liquid than a house, which can be much harder to sell than, say, a pile of Canadian Hydro Bonds (even prior to maturity). B) The money will support me in my "old age". C) Existing construction is nearly 100% dependent upon a constant stream of both resources and cash, thus making the investment in the house only the first outlay I must make. D) The illusion of houses "gaining" value is nothing but inflation. Since all houses require upkeep, in constant dollars, one looses money on a normal 20th century house. >no matter how much interest the bank pays. Mortgage "payback" is not >the same as investment "payback." A mortgage does not "pay back" anyone except the lender! Mortgages are counter-prouductive to the entire concept of building a self-sufficient house, since the mortgage itself forces the owner of the house to keep working in the 9-to-5, no-way-out, no-way-to-win "game" of a day job! Why bother to buy/build a house that feeds you, keeps you warm and dry, and has no major long-term costs, if you are stuck working yourself to death to PAY for the darn thing for the best years of your life? I lived in a nearly empty shell for 2 months, just to make sure that I could "live with" the tape marks on the floor indicating interior walls. As it turned out, some of the interior walls that seemed like a great idea in a CAD system and in a carboard model were LOUSY ideas in my "dry run". The walls never got built. I saved money, trouble, and time. Why did I live in an empty shell? I was out of cash!!! The 2 months were needed to save up money to finish off the interior!!! >When I talk about solar economics, I'm thinking that most people are making >decisions about where to invest money, or whether to borrow money to do >something that has a monetary return. We should invest in items that "pay back" through reducing or eliminating long-term expenses. But borrowing money to do this simply makes "alternative" technologies that much more difficult to afford. Expecting the investment to pay back in a cash income is impossible for most, and a non-goal. Most folks will never save up enough to go out and build/buy a house in cold blood with cold hard cash. Therefore, while Bucky wanted to make a house a mass-produced consumer product, I submit that we must return to the traditional way of housing - building the things with our own two hands, or at least with our PRESENT resources, and the help of a few skilled pros. This means that we must spend and build in "phases". The whole idea of mortgaging one's future is a recent one, and I feel a bad one. If I get a mortgage, I am under pressure to keep earning money for a long period of time. Better to save money, quit your job, build a house that is sustainable, and then become a "semi-retired" person by choice! >I suppose that most people would rather put money in a bank, rather >than buy a solar system, if the bank deposit pays equally well, and >has a lower risk and takes less time to manage. Fools. Can they spell "Savings and Loan defaults"? With the "spread" between savings account interest rates and consumer loan rates at an all-time high, we should all be "going long" in things that are sure to increase in price, like canned goods! I suggest an extreme long view, and propose that our kids and grandkids will take the "profits" of our efforts and "investments". Once they mature to the point where owning the latest and greatest stereo system seems pointless, the facilities we build now will still be there, ready to allow them to live free, tend the gardens, and have minimal "obligations". Consider it your legacy, and build accordingly. >> So, if we pay no interest... >I'm not quite following you here. I thought you were talking about 6%. If you >put up the cash out of your pocket up front (is that what you are talking >about?), you forgo the opportunity of putting it in the bank and earning some >interest. You put the cash in out of your pocket IN SMALL AMOUNTS. You build in phases. You gotta eat peanut butter and live like a college student for a few years, but it is worth it. Anyone can save more money than a bank will loan them! The alternative is that the money gets spent on things that do not matter as much as an early retirement!! My little trick is to make a "more expensive" house less expensive by paying for only the tangible land and house itself. The guy who does the LEAST is the guy who takes small green pieces of paper from others, and "lends" them to you. Why does he make more than the guy who digs the foundation? Cut him out of the deal!!! >> we can afford the extra cost of investing in stuff that "pays us back" >> by reducing or eliminating our long-term need to pay bills to the power >> company, water utility, sewer utility and such. >My original point with Tagdi was that if a "solar heater" allows you to avoid >paying the oil dealer for 1 gallon of oil per square foot of "heater" per year, >about 60 cents, where I live, the "solar heater" has to be very inexpensive to >build, OR it has to serve more than one purpose, to make this kind of narrow >economic sense to the owner. I knew it had to be a very qualified case. But your model above is a worst-case example. I think we can do better. If one takes a more agressive approach, one can implement the semi-passive solar (or micro-hydro, or whatever) and thereby avoid buying an oil burner at all. The trick here is that the avoided cost of fuel is not the only factor. One can also avoid buying the oil burner, fixing the oil burner, and financing the darn thing! Is the life-cycle cost small hydro plant more than the life-cycle cost of a mortgated oil furnace, fueled by oil at God knows what per gallon? Dunno. Don't care! I do not have oil, and I do have water! Yes, this IS a very "facist" approach. If I lived further north than I do, I would be branded a fool. I can burn some wood a few days a year if I must, and be happy that I can be home to tend the woodstove and chop wood! Trees will grow forever on my woodlot. Oil? Not on my land! Once the house is built, if nothing comes in on trucks, and nothing goes out on trucks, then you have both lowered your short-term costs, and built something that has lasting value. I hope that your structure will last for at least 200 years, and that means that "oil" is an item that must be designed out! Bucky lived in the days of promises of power "too cheap to meter". "Ready Killowatt" (a cartoon character created by the electric utilities) reined supreme. When was the last time anyone heard the phrase "Total Electric Living"? They were SERIOUS!!! "Ready Killowatt" is dead! Power will never be "Too Cheap To Meter", and "Total Electric Living" means death when power gets scarce or too expensive. Design for the requirements. They are getting harsher all the time. What smells so bad? Perhaps it is the New World Odor everyone talks about. james fischer jfischer@supercollider.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 04:53:11 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Chip Winborne Organization: Sedona Internet Services, Inc. Subject: To: modelbuilders This afternoon I build a one-thoousand-strut spaceframe: Cheap. Buy a few boxes of cheap cotton swabs. (Q-Tips are too fluffy, and the cheap swabs often have plastic struts). 2-3 bucks for 500. Purchase a can of WELDWOOD contact cement (VENT your workspace!) Get a masons's level, or something of similar shape. Dip 10-or-so swabs, each end, in the cement. Let the stuff dry 'til not tacky. Assemble. Rapidly, if you wish. The mason's level provides a right-sized drying rack. Don't worry about not being able to get the sticks apart. The glue soaks into the swab, and the adhesion is, pleasantly, not great until pressure is applied. The bond is great, and the combination of the cotton fibers and the rubbery cement makes for a nice flexible bond, while retaining adhesion. Works for me! (Warning - STICK WITH ONE BRAND OF SWAB! 1/16th inch size differnces accumulate!) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 02:50:41 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Christopher Belcher Subject: Re: Dimension & Volume OK, let me dive in... though science has never been my best subject. Steve wrote: > > It's all well and good to talk about the inherent fourness of the >minimum system tetrahedron. But if I'm going to tell you how to position >one in space, I'm going to need a 3-D space to put it in. Actually, no, I don't think so. I saw a Hollywood movie where this kid was sending out a pirate radio broadcast, and the Feds were able to find him through a process of "triangulation", where three trucks drove around pointing their antenas towards the source of the signal and the intersection of the three "transmission vectors" if you will, gave them the location. Of course this worked because they could assume that the transmission was originating on the surface of the Earth and not from some alienated adolescent extra-terrestial in his anti-gravity ship (or from dwarves deep in their mines, evidence of the inside-outing of tetrahedral events...). But if you were to put the example in space, away from a planetary surface, wouldn't you need to have a fourth antena to get a fix? If we assume the source of the transmission to be the "event" in Synergetics terms, and a tetrahedron is a minimum systemic event, then this example shows I think pretty clearly that we need to place that tetrahedron in a four-dimensional space. If one wants to place that location into a cartesian coordinate system, say based upon longitude and latitude, then yes, we have to translate it into 3D coordinates. I'd be interested to know how GPS and other satellite navigation tools deal with this. Does this make sense or am I missing something here? Chris ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 07:24:52 GMT Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: Kirby Urner Organization: 4D Solutions Subject: Re: The (non)Concept of Race - Frank Davis wrote: >Who really cares as to whether you have a new firewall, or what is good >debating skill. I still find your attitude to be racist and hateful. That is >not flaming. -- > >F. Willis Davis >UPDATE Magazine!, Editor >P.O. Box 17 >Mexico, IN 46958 >fdavis@holli.com I agree, that may not be flaming. But it's confusing. Whom are you addressing I wonder? I think must be a cross-posting of some kind. I see no record of anyone mentioning a new firewall here in bit.listserv.geodesic (also an email list). Ain't internet fun? Kirby -------------------------------------------------------- Kirby Urner "All realities are virtual" -- KU Email: pdx4d@teleport.com Web: http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 15:32:13 CET Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: tagdi@RUULCH.LET.RUU.NL Subject: Re: The (non)Concept of Race - In Message Mon, 04 Dec 1995 07:24:52 +0000 (GMT), Kirby Urner writes: >Frank Davis wrote: > >>Who really cares as to whether you have a new firewall, or what is good >>debating skill. I still find your attitude to be racist and hateful. That is >>not flaming. -- >> >>F. Willis Davis >>UPDATE Magazine!, Editor >>P.O. Box 17 >>Mexico, IN 46958 >>fdavis@holli.com > > >I agree, that may not be flaming. But it's confusing. >Whom are you addressing I wonder? > >I think must be a cross-posting of some kind. I see no >record of anyone mentioning a new firewall here in >bit.listserv.geodesic (also an email list). > >Ain't internet fun? > >Kirby i think you missed James reply to Davis. It will be intresting to have an image of the pattren of use in the intrnet, becuse i think some people just hop from one newsgroup to another, i have doen it few times. the internet have strong effect on the user,it stimulates reactions. i think some just send one or two email and forget about it, which means it is not an issue they are really interested in. Tagdi ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 10:32:43 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Dimension & Volume (Steve/Kirby) Steven Coombs said: >>> I am attempting to glean some of the genius from Fuller's amazing >>> life-work while side-stepping the landmines of his eccentricity: >>> inventing words / multiple definitions of terms / self reference / >>> stream of consciousness writing, etc... Are these "noise" components of the received signal deliberate? If so, we don't understand something. Are they errors? If so, then Bucky was too busy trying to get his message out to try to work from a prepared speech or set of notes, and one must simply admit the minor errors, and admire the man's willingness to speak without a script, and answer questions by shooting "from the hip". On a regular basis, I am forced to read some computer source code that I wrote long ago. Even though I am rather good about writing comments and notes in my code, I have occasional problems understanding just WHAT I was doing, and what the code does. Hence, the catch-all phrase "It seemed like a good idea at the time, I'm sure." This software was NOT changed behind my back, since it is kept under revision control. If I can't even comprehend myself, how can I expect folks like Bucky to do better at leaving little notes for the rest of us? Both "Synergetics" and some software can be described by the same statement: It was hard to do, and it is hard to understand. If either was easy, it would have been done before. Perhaps the problem is the limits of English as a language. Most technical specialties develop their own dialects over time, but for some reason, I can use the term "CD", which means any of the following very different things: - A shiny round disc that holds data for the computer. - A shiny round disc that holds music for the stereo. - A form of investment (Certificate of Deposit). ...in common use, plus the following specialized uses: - A "capactive discharge" unit used in electronics. - A line connecting points "C" and "D". ...and no one says that I have made an error by using a term with multiple definitions. Must we hold Bucky to a higher standard than ourselves? Meanwhile, Kirby commented: >Fuller himself talked about how a process of refining one's definitions >over time can be one of settling into patterns which change less frequently >as their internal inconsistencies are worked out and the generalized >principles worked in -- but all recordings of insight are subject to decay >over time. While this is "unfair" if there is not new information that is the basis for the redefinition, this is not such a pain. For example, everyone knows what a "window" is, right? My concept of a window has changed over the years to the point where I have no "windows" that "open". Ventilation, light, and view are very different animals. When I need ventilation, I design in something that you can't see through. When I need sunlight, I design in something that may not offer a "view" (such as the glass block stuff). When I want a view, I use normal glass or some fancy plastic, but it rarely opens, rarely has moving parts, and does not offer ventilation. Why? Because some brain-damaged fool came up with the "double-hung window", which is one of the most expensive counter-productive items I can think of! (Don't even get me started on the concept of a "door"!!) When the "Complete Hypertext Bucky" is released (I would expect it to consist of several Gigabytes minimum, perhaps a Terrabyte), the reader will be able to "drill down" from one use of a term to other uses of the same term in the same context, and check the date of each speech or writing. This would allow us to see the slow growth of Bucky's concepts over time, and better see how Bucky was redirected by events and meetings with others. I go through the same process in the design of anything more complex than a toaster. As one moves through the "design spiral" (oops, I just made up a term!), the various factors force one to throw out or reconsider factors that were "decided" in prior revisions of the design. Since the process (to me) "feels" like a spiral, one DOES go around in circles, but the process takes one up (or down) towards a final "solution". Is the design of ANYTHING ever "done"? Of course not. Just look at hammers. Every trade has its own specialized hammer, different from all others. New ones are invented every year. I am "done" a design when I decide to stop, but the work as a whole remains "undone" in the eyes of others, who try to improve upon what I did. >Synergetics is too 'mushy' for the math-heads, too 'cold and austere' for >the humanities crowd. Then who were the folks who crowded Bucky's lectures and speeches? I was not aware that Bucky had a narrow "market segment". >Some might assert that a language which permits perpetual redefinition of its >key terms is thereby precluded from attaining a high degree of precision, at >least with regard to matters scientific. This "redefinition" stuff is not unique to Bucky! A guy from the 4th Century named Chaung Tzu said: "Conditions are not invariable, terms are not final. Thus the wise man looks into space, and does not regard the small as too little, nor the great as too much; for he knows that there is no limit to dimension." The fat lady has not yet sung on any of these issues. Anyone expecting neat and tidy facts, clearly defined terms, or 100% consistency has a surprise in store. How big is the universe? The number changes every year. How much mass is in the universe? Ditto. What can be said about most dead scientists? That they were wrong. What can we say about the universe itself? That we are wrong, too. We live an ever-unfolding story that should be named "Paradigms Lost". What smells so bad? Perhaps it is the New World Odor everyone talks about. james fischer jfischer@supercollider.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 10:32:47 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: James Fischer Subject: Re: GPS Vectors Chris said: >If one wants to place that location into a cartesian coordinate system, say >based upon longitude and latitude, then yes, we have to translate it into >3D coordinates. I'd be interested to know how GPS and other satellite >navigation tools deal with this. GPS units communicate with more then one bird to give you a reading. Some of the GPS units want to "talk" with 4 or 5 birds before making up their minds, which can be a real pain when one is down in a gully or canyon! Most GPS units give you your elevation, as well as Lat. and Long. This seems to indicate that the bird knows how far it is from sea level (the orbital distance), and the vectors are true 3D vectors, rather than simpler "triangulation". You are on the surface of a rough sphere, and the time lags between synchonized pulses from multiple birds are compared to determine the distance to each bird that can be "seen" from your location. The birds spin at the same rate as the earth, so they "know" where they are. Your movement is relative to the "stationary" brids, who spend their days hanging over the same spot. I would expect that "seeing" 2 or 3 birds at the same time would be enough to get your location within the 8 to 9 meter accuracy that GPS gives you. I would rather have a system that tells me WHY I am here, and reminds me if I have been here before. But GPS helps me with Zen concepts, because no matter where you go, there you are. The US-Sprint phone company wants me to "Be Here Now", so I guess I'll stay for a while. What smells so bad? Perhaps it is the New World Odor everyone talks about. james fischer jfischer@supercollider.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 10:59:33 -0500 Reply-To: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works Sender: List for the discussion of Buckminster Fuller's works From: James Fischer Subject: Re: The (non)Concept of Newsgroups/Mailing Lists Kriby said: >>I think must be a cross-posting of some kind.... >>bit.listserv.geodesic (also an email list). Tadgi replied: > i think you missed James reply to Davis. > It will be intresting to have an im