Greatest Educational Tool Ever…Q-Tips!


I have stated before on this blog that I am a model builder, first and foremost. Ever since first getting involved with Synergetics in the 70’s I have been looking for the best way to construct models within the format of the Isotropic Vector Matrix, the “shape” of the Universe, the Higgs Field, the Aether. Several years ago I found a Christmas toy that was available at my local Walgreen’s Drug Store called under various brands with varying levels of quality Geo-Mags, or Mag-Stix or the like. It consisted of a construction set like Legos or Tinker Toys. It was a number of steel balls about 1/2″ in diameter and plastic pieces about 1 1/2″ long with a small, flat magnet at each end. 12 sticks fit nicely around one ball. Worked great for Synergetic modelling and I made a few art projects using them until some safety board realized that if your 3 year old ate one of these sticks, and the magnets came out, they could attract with each other from different sections of the intestine and F things up pretty good. So, they were taken off the shelves. I was bummed, what could I use instead? Now keep in mind the costliest of these would cost like $25 for 100 pieces…I typically use 5-10K pieces in a construction. The trouble with the cheaper ones was the lack of consistency in the length of the pieces. Sometimes I got to the end of a piece and just couldn’t get the surfaces flat (I’ll explain that later). Then I saw a video about Frank Chester, who spoke at Rhode Island School of Design, it’s on U-tube. He uses Q-tips and rubber cement. Brilliant! Not sure if it’s his idea but it sure works well. As a matter of fact, I am not exaggerating when I say this may be the greatest educational toy ever.

Dodecahedron and 4-Frequency Tetrahedron


The Q-tips are uniform length, cheap (100 cost $.25 here in Costa Rica)  and available in color. I can get a half liter of silicon liquido for $4 at any libreria. The real beauty ( as if this wasn’t enough) is in the adjustability of the Q-tips. When the cement is slightly dry it tacks nicely making it easy to piece together tetrahedra and assemble and connect them on the fly. I generally work on 15-20 Q-tips at a time and, when I have them partly assembled, can go point-to-point adjusting the position of the end points. At first, I thought this just a convenience in making the models but, something quickly manifested the true purpose of this “toy.” As I assembled the first big piece I could feel the structure tighten up as I added the layers of Q-tips. As a layer would get completed I would go back over the entire layer and tweek each point. Invariably, when I got all the way around., all of the slight deviations could be balanced out, all the faces could be flattened by placing the face on the work table and gently pressing down a multiple points on the piece. Since the glue wasn’t completely dry, and was flexible even then, final adjusting was a breeze.

VE


How is this educational? Well, if Synergetics is the underlying geometry of the Universe, as we are contending, what better way to see how it works than by playing with it? Not only do we get a hands-on experience of the structural integrity that Synergetics offers but, we also get to see the sheer diversity offered by Synergetic Modelling. Numerous principles of physics, chemistry, biology can be modelled this way as can marketing, social interaction, geo-political forces.

I am currently working on several sets of models, for an upcoming seminar I am putting together, as well as a video/book with some suggestions and graphics showing where I have gone with this.


If I had any money I would buy Q-tip stock!


[Full (if crude) Animation]

Advertisements

Pieces of a Dream


I had two, seemingly random thoughts the past few hours. Rather than overanalyze them, as usual, I thought I would post them and see if anyone else gets anything out of them.

1. I was thinking about Phi and the Golden Mean and Synergetics and looking at a tree limb. The cell growth by division must stay balanced between the length of the limb and the diameter. As the tree grows the cells are developing in the diameter of the limb and in the length at the same time. Could it be that the interaction and attraction between these cells, within the synergetic format, generate Phi and the Fibbonacci numbers?

2. I heard today that one language expert hypothesized that music was an accident of evolution that came along with language. I think there is more to it than that. Another neurologist points out that music releases the same bonding enzymes in the brain as an orgasm. He hypothesizes that music evolved as a necessary aggression suppressant in humans, the only mammal on the planet which accommodates more than 18 or so males within the tribe.

How about considering that it is the “tunability” of the synergetic format which allows certain frequencies to resonate harmonically? Everything is vibrating but we may select which frequencies we (consciousness) react to and how we react. It’s right there in the numbers and, it appears to be universal.

A=440 vs A=432 Leads to a Challenge

I have just had a friend recommend an article he read on the significance of Standard Tuning of A being 440 HZ or 432 HZ and the ramifications of this fact. He and I are both musicians but the implication of the article is that this 8 HZ difference represents far more than musical inclinations. From this site you can get to all sorts of discussions and controversies: Rothschild’s, Illuminati, enslavement.

This got me to the field of Cymatics and some spectacular patterns generated by sound vibrations. It also got me to a really interesting conspiracy theory basically claiming that The Pope and Hitler had tried to shift standard tuning from 432 HZ, which, they (the conspirators) claim had always been used for 2000 years because; they had discovered that this shift in frequency was what caused people to be more inclined to fight and disagree, to generate aggression. Kind of like when you are running out of your favorite <fill-in-the-blank> .

A lot of these sites basically took some very interesting and verifiable facts and combined them in some interesting ways to then generate some pretty fantastic conclusions supposedly based on these facts. Then I realized this is really what happens with every conspiracy theory. Start with an idea, preferably outrageous, and take a few facts, kludge them together and BINGO “Theory Proved.”

Now, fact checking is a bitch; someone makes a statement, maybe they reference it, maybe they don’t. Do you believe them? Here’s what I usually do. The first statement I don’t already know something about, I look up (in what I believe are reliable sources) to get some background. Then I continue with the article. If the conspirator makes a statement and I can confirm it easily I continue. After a number of these fact checks prove verifiable I can ease off and continue the article leaving out the fact checking. However, if I am going to put that article up or quote it, I really should check all of the significant statements. As Arthur C. Clark said, “If you allow me to pick and choose which facts I can use, I can prove anything.”

Unfortunately, when I applied this standard reference practice most of the conspiracy stuff just went away. The first 5 facts I looked into were just plain false. Why weren’t the great cathedral  organs tuned to 432? Why were the tuning forks of Haydn (415) and Bach (422) NOT tuned to 432? Why wouldn’t the ear cochlea adjust, over growth, to adapt to its environment? Why wouldn’t any orchestra use the tuning to lure customers back to their superior feeling music? Why aren’t we all crazy? Well, let’s hold on that one, the jury’s still out. More significantly, where is the hard evidence? Give me something. Take 2 rooms full of 6 yr olds and expose one to a 440 tone and the other to a 432? Try it for a while then switch tones. This ain’t rocket science but I think it falls squarely in the scientific method. Expose someone to 432 HZ while doing an MRI and then to 440 HZ. We can see all sorts of things. Where’s the evidence? 

It’s a pain in the ass but, ya gotta do it. “But what does this have to do with Synergetics?”, you might ask? Just this:

I contend Synergetics gives us a way to simplify the entire fact checking process by not having to keep proving the same shit over and over again, which is exactly what we are doing. Take some facts, put them together based on preconceived notions and jump to a totally irrelevant conclusion. It may be hardwired in, which is why I try to stick to a pretty strict interpretation of the Scientific Method.

Here’s how it works:

I want to take this entire idea that there is a true significance to the difference between 440 HZ and 432 HZ and see if we can’t make sense of it. But, rather than start with the conclusion ( the Pope and the Hitler had discovered something about that frequency ) and seeking facts to support what this discovery must be, let’s see if we can’t come up with a much simpler and clearer explanation for facts we are being shown. I suspect this may take a while but, I think, if we can make it work, it will be self confirming. Furthermore, we hope to demonstrate that these same facts may be recombined to explain any number of phenomena. Sacred Geometry, Holistic Medicine, Psychology, Market fluctuations, Chemistry, Physics, Languages are the ones I have looked at so far and all seem to work nicely within the network provided us by Synergetics. Not giving us predictions, but allowing us to understand what variables are truly important to the area we are exploring and giving more reliable predictability, while allowing for true freedom. In addition, it gives us several additional variables we didn’t even know we had!

The real beauty is that it is a very small set of facts. We shall refer to these as “generalized principles”, which must work everywhere and everywhen to be even considered facts and, once gotten, become the basis of any other area of the Universe we would like to explore. This is how a hologram works, this is how we apply the concept of holons and it all works together.

Sorry, no pictures yet but I am working on the models.

Stay tuned! I want to examine the work of Nassim Haramein and Frank Chester at the Rhode Island School of Design, both of whom have some very good ideas but abuse the application of their “so-called” discoveries.

Half-spin

Now this entire idea of half-spins gave me some trouble in my first forays into visualizing sub-atomic particles. What does a half spin look like?

Turns out you can do some nice approximations of the concept using our 60 degree Synergetic System. The image above has been left unlabeled because we haven’t really gotten that far yet, but let’s notice the similarities between the UUD UDD configuration of the Standard Model with the legs of the half tetrahedron which Fuller relates to the action-reaction-resultant which occurs in any particle interaction. We know that these and all other particles obey the generalized principles of Newton’s Law’s and we can see the vectors indicated by the red and blue lines as vectors and we can also see that when they combine in a certain way they can form a tetrahedron. The minimum system in Universe. the minimum division between inside and outside. Could it make a nice model for an atom (hydrogen) which is the most plentiful, smallest, and most easily combining element in Universe? It ‘s found everywhere. With me, so far?

 So, we can see some similarities but we aren’t ready to start equating symbols to particles without seeing how this geometric twist works helping us visualize just what is going on.
Let’s see if we can make any further connections.

Infinity

I would like to state that, at this point, I don’t believe in the concept of “infinity”. The idea that anything goes on forever; time or direction wise doesn’t compute with me. That should make it obvious that I don’t believe that the Universe is infinite. I think most modern physicists ascribe to this view also. Unless, of course, one wants to equate “infinite” with “God” and basically other incomprehensible concepts.

Our very definitions of point, line, area, volume, as examples of 0, 1, 2 and 3 dimensional concepts, just don’t exist, even conceptually. Can you perceive of a one sided plane surface? We throw in the idea of infinity as an axiom to be taken as stated, much as the idea of 3 dimensions is taken as axiomatic rather than as the misconstrued standard that it has proven to be. None of these things works consistently, or conceptually.

What we have, at the base line are, location, direction (angle) and vector (the length and direction from one point to another). With these basic, quite intuitive, concepts, we can express the complexities of our Universe in ways unprecedented with our 3 dimensional “Standard Model”.

Nucleus of Standard Model



These are the symbols used by western science to show the nucleus of an atom with its constituent parts.

Below we have a rough sketch of the ideas Fuller has for the visualization of the components of the nucleus. See any similarities? The numbers 3, 4, 12, 24, 48 and 64 show up regularly in both systems.

Notice that the Standard Model uses the term spin with the Fermions all exhibiting increments of “half spins”. In the next post I hope to show some models which should spread some light on exactly what a “half-spin” is.

First There’s Nothing, Then There Is.

Fuller starts us out at a place that nicely coincides with the numbers given us by modern physics.

In high school math you may or may not recall the parts about actions and reactions, Newton’s laws, that stuff. The billiard balls and angles. Well, basically we still use these same laws, and, not a whole hell of alot more. We shoot things at things for US$50 Billion and see how they react. Makes sense in a basically 2 dimensional universe. We can even make it work more or less in a 3 dimensional Universe but let’s have a look at this, shall we?

The billiard balls we are examinimg are moving about in what appear to be indeterminate patterns. For arguments sake, and a coherent starting place, we’ll call this “space”; Aether, vacuum space, Zero Point Energy, Higgs field, whatever. Seems to be where all the energy is, no matter how you cut it. It’s everywhere and it’s just energy events. Now, let’s take, for a moment, the work of the Russian scientists  referenced in David Wilcock’s work which we will use presently to nicely model the toroidal (doughnut shapes) used in Kozyrev’s and, later, Nassim Haramein’s presentations.

Fuller uses the term “energy event” and combines these as action-reaction-resultant. Remember, there aren’t 2 balls on a flat plane but millions all going in different directions. Now, let’s throw in the unprovable, but highly plausible, hypothesis that somehow, consciousness (human or otherwise) can cause these energy events as a disturbance in the counter-rotating layers of this aether. We can even use this model to exhibit where angular momentum (another physics sticking point) may come from.

 
To summarize, let’s see if we can map these up/down spins of modern physics with the 4 dimensional advantages of Synergetics. Shown here on the right as some of Fuller’s original sketches.

I’m open to suggestions.

I can now also see how the Up and Down characteristics of physics can relate to the radiant and gravitational aspects of Synergetics giving us the “tunable/untunable” in the form of visible and invisible, perhaps?

Einstein, Relativity and Quantum Mechanics

Perhaps the key breakdown of modern physics has occurred around the apparent irreconcilability of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity with quantum mechanics. They just don’t seem to fit. This dichotomy coincides with the loss of modelability in physics, somewhere around the mid 1950’s.

It occurred to me, as I was getting into the work of Ken Wilber, that in one of his works; Sex, Ecology and Everything he states that one of the inherent occurrences in psychology was that as different aspects of a wide range of research were uncovered, each was seen as a standalone conclusion. Freud saw everything in terms of sex and ego and id and this was thought to be the driving force behind virtually everything, Followed by Jung, B.F. Skinner, et al. all looking at pieces which turn out to be parts of a much greater holon. It was only as the “big picture” was pieced together that the obvious synergy, inherent in this aspect of evolution, became “obvious”.

We are doing the same thing in physics. Relativity and Quantum mechanics are both contained within the greater whole of Synergetics yet we are looking at each as a separate part. Mapping the sub-atomic particles is a logical first step.

Standard Model

 The Challenge which faces us at this juncture is whether we can map the “particles” of the Standard Model of physics (chart on the right), to the geometry of Synergetics which gives us a more intuitive vision of our Universe. I, for one, have a stretch to envision a “strange” force.

I am currently reviewing the various shapes in Synergetics with the apparent particles discovered by physics and looking at and for patterns most of which can be seen at the top of the home page. I hope to put up another chart shortly, if I can find some obvious connections to get the process going. Keep in mind none of these are conclusions, just an alternative way of looking at a Universe that appears to be, at times, largely incomprehensible.

I would invite anyone to contribute any suggestions. This is all new for me and I am hoping that others in diverse fields; science, spiritualism, psychology, who see connections (in positive ways please) let me know by commenting.

Direction of Entropy

Since there is general agreement (scientists, spiritualists, new agers) that time is an illusion, created by the mind, to enable us to comprehend what, by most all accounts, takes place in an instant, we won’t get into the myriad variations here, but start thinking about it.

Though time is an illusion, it still appears very real to us within this physical existence we have chosen. We have entropy as radiation defining time but where does the syntropy come from? Yeah, you know, the thing making the stuff that is breaking down. Does time go backward when we are creating things?

Or could we be dark matter? Consciousness gathering the elemental particles disbursed by entropy and re-knitting them in endless variations?

Considering how physics has buggered with the numbers and re-worked the equations, we should be able to do the same. Only let’s try to be a bit more consistent, shall we?