Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.math > #413331 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-05-18 08:58 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-05-18 16:25 +0000 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.math
5#3-8 unification of straightline geometry with curved-chain geometry// Teaching True Mathematics Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-18 08:58 -0700
Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunks the lifelong Math test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-18 16:25 +0000
| From | Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 08:58 -0700 |
| Subject | 5#3-8 unification of straightline geometry with curved-chain geometry// Teaching True Mathematics |
| Message-ID | <aa1fd314-9c31-4bc6-816e-c3d26b01c590@googlegroups.com> |
Alright, in the below I am getting closer and closer to a unification, not only of conics with regular polyhedra but with all straightline figures versus curved-straightline chained figures. And what seems to be the unifying force involved is the act of Cutting or Sectioning. I am baffled as to why a cut is unifying in nature-- or is it that the cut is Projective Geometry. Newsgroups: sci.math Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: These ideas belong in my other quest to unify Conic sections with Regular Polyhedra Re: Experimenting with ellipse & oval tubes Teaching True Mathematics From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com> Injection-Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:06:30 +0000 These ideas belong in my other quest to unify Conic sections with Regular Polyhedra Re: Experimenting with ellipse & oval tubes Teaching True Mathematics Now these ideas expressed below are part of my quest to unify the Conic Sections with the Regular Polyhedra, but in a funny manner, I need to extend the Conic Sections to include Cylinder sections. I already added the square pyramid to the Regular Polyhedra, so the extension is not too out of place. On Thursday, May 17, 2018 at 1:10:17 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > On Thursday, May 17, 2018 at 12:53:12 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > Alright, some really good progress on this front. > > > > On Wednesday, May 16, 2018 at 1:05:46 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > > On Wednesday, May 16, 2018 at 3:47:03 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > > > Ellipse tube sections seem to generate more ellipses > > > > > > > > Oval tube sections have the potential of generating all three possibilities— oval, circle, ellipse > > > > > > > > Sort of reminds me — square is a rectangle is a parallelogram > > > > > > > > > > Now one can type in ellipse tube into google search and easily get pictures, but the trouble with Old Math, is the ignorant bards could never separate out-- oval is not a ellipse, could never refine that Oval has just one axis of symmetry. Through the centuries and milleniums of math history, everyone was brain-dead over the topic of oval versus ellipse. As if the muses came to earth and placed a huge shroud of fog into the minds of all those that ever came upon the topic of oval and ellipse, and made them nattering nutter dumb on the topic. > > > > > > So if you type in oval tube, you only get ellipse tubes. A ellipse tube has two axes of symmetry. A oval tube has just one axis of symmetry. > > > > > > Now, I have the conjecture that sectioning or cutting these three types of tubes yields these three different results. > > > > > > > > > type of tube possible results from cuttings > > > > > > cone tube circle, oval > > > > > > cylinder tube circle, ellipse > > > > > > ellipse tube ellipses only ?? > > > > > > oval tube oval, ellipse, circle ?? > > > Trouble here is that for 3,000 years now, mathematics was under a delusion spell, a total mind blackout that ellipse is never a conic but rather-- the oval is. And being under that mind-black-out, no-one could even see that there were other geometry figures to examine and research. > > > Now I placed a question mark over the ones I am not sure of. So let that be a conjecture, that only the oval tube can afford the possible creation of all three figures, and the ellipse tube can only afford more ellipses. > > > > > > Now to help me unravel this mystery, I am trying to construct a dual similar geometry of straightline figures only such as square, rectangle , parallelogram with their 3D counterparts. Mind you, I am only doing this to gain insight into the above. > > > > > > type of tube possible results from cuttings > > > > > > cube square, rectangle > > > > > > rectangular solid tube rectangles only > > > Here I needed a pointed head figure like the cone is pointed head versus the cylinder. > > > > Here is much ambiguity for the above is only for a rectangle solid in which all three parameters x,y,z are different, but we know a rectangle solid like 3 by 2 by 2 can yield a square. > > > > So this needs tinkering > > > > > > > > > > > parallelogram tube parallelograms only ?? > > > > > > parallelepiped tube parallelograms only ?? > > > Again, here I needed a pointed head figure and the square pyramid is just the thing. > > > Seems to me there should be some 3D figure when cut, yields all three -- square, rectangle, parallelogram > > > But maybe that is impossible and thus the oval tube cut is not yielding circle, ellipse, oval > > > > > > > > > > Alright, what I need is something with a "pointed head" like a cone to a cylinder. And for straightline only figures. And that is a square pyramid > > > > type of tube possible results from cuttings > > > > cube square, rectangle > > > > square pyramid square, trapezoid, triangle > > > > triangle solid triangles only?? > > Alright, I have a tetrahedron dice sitting in front of me, and can visualize its cuts. I do see a trapezoid emerging as one of possible cuts. Not sure of one of those cuts could ever be a rectangle, I doubt it, but working things out in the head only is often erroneous. Need to actually make hands on cuts of a tetrahedron to see if a rectangle or square can emerge. > Please do not hold me to this, but I believe I can get a square and a rectangle out of a tetrahedron cut. > > > > > trapezoid solid trapezoids only?? > > > > There, that's better. > > I think the trapezoid solid sections would be like the Oval Tube sections in that they -- both of them can give rise to all the other figures of that category class. AP
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 16:25 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunks the lifelong Math test |
| Message-ID | <pdmuqn$ncl$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #413331 |
Village Idiot Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails: >Michael Moroney Anal ButtfuckManure stalker for 26 years Thank you for requesting another Babble-o-meter Calculation! (still a work in progress) ☑ Archie reposts the same old, same old, yet again... ☐ ...and again and again... ☐ ...and again and again... ☐ ...posted enough times to be classified as spam... ☑ ...Post has no new content, in fact... ☐ ...Archie's spam complains about other spammers or babblers... ☑ ...Purpose of post is to remain #1 Front Page Hog... ☐ .....meanwhile, Archie complains of some other "Front Page Hog"... ☑ ...Post contains The Truth because Archie said it is true... ☐ ...Post posted in the wrong topic... ☐ .....and to the wrong newsgroup... ☑ ...One word: Logorrhea... ☐ ...Author awards self Nobel Prize/claims he should be so awarded... ☐ .....Author rejects self-awarded Nobel, real awardees don't deserve it... ☐ ...Author "sour grapes" Nobel or other science/math prize... ☑ ...Post has science or math 100% made up from whole cloth... ☑ ...Post's science/math based on earlier whole cloth science/math... ☑ .....which was based on even earlier whole cloth science/math... ☑ .....which was, oh never mind... ☐ ...Phrases such as "Old Science" (actual science) and "New Science (babbling of author)... ☑ ...Another word: Graphomania... ☑ ...Author thinks a bad dream is an excellent basis for physics... ☑ ...Archie doesn't understand Usenet, not even after 26+ years... ☑ ...Archie asks Google Groups to do something they can't do... ☑ ...Archie even thinks Google runs Usenet... ☑ .....even though Archie used Usenet even before there even was a Google... ☑ ...Archie won't engage in discussion in a discussion group... ☑ ...Writes "Keep out of my threads!"... ☐ ...Archie demands professors resign for not teaching his broken math... ☐ ...Author thinks cutting up magazines disproves actual math proofs... ☐ ...Archie outwitted by someone too stoopid to come out of the rain AGAIN... ☑ ...and Archie can't get over the shame of messing up percentages... ☑ ....he even still thinks 8.88 is "exactly" 9... ☐ ....and he thinks 16.81 is "spot on" 17... ☐ ...Archie is envious that I weighed the electron and he didn't... ☐ ...Post includes the dumb ascii art cat/owl thing... ☐ ...Post contains ascii art of Archie's butthole... ☐ ...and Archie doesn't realize ascii art is so 1980s... ☐ ...Archie tries to involve totally uninvolved people... ☐ .....with a subject about flunking a nonexistent test no one ever took... ☐ .....but has no clue they will never see his post... ☐ .....and has no clue they probably don't know what Usenet is... ☐ .....he expects them to have power/authority they simply don't... ☐ ...Post includes a stalker list of physics and/or math professors... ☑ ...Too stoopid to realize attack posts just produce more posts like this... ☑ ...Google Groups poster. 'Nuf said. Archie's Babbling Nonsense score: 21 plutoniums!
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | sci.math
csiph-web