Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick  I am sure you could work something out here Rascal,make it fit so to speak,btw,in the UK
we have an oxo cube for making gravy,though I suppose that's not anywhere near being
"super"!
regards michael. |
________________________________
Mr. Fuller's poiint here seems to be that the popular icon of a 'supercube'is fallacious, regarding illustrations and/or sculptures representing the 4th dimension.
Although a geometric point doesn't exist, its (mathematical) shape is not to be thought of as being square, but, rather, round. As sequential perpendicularities emerge with projections of right angle motions, a sphere, and not a cube, is produced, in a three dimensional construance.
Ripples from a center source of disturbance are round (not square).
A free falling drop of water spontaneously takes on a spheroidal shape.
Soap bubbles, for example, naturally take on a spheroidal shape. The physical dynamics of a soap bubble are extremely complex with regard to surface tensions and other balanced factors of tensor integrity.
Among other conclusions, we may draw from this the fact that the morphological quality of the 4th dimension is applicable to and observed - in situ - in quite any shape at all;
beginning with a microcosmic spheroid.
(All of this seems to be Fuller's way of noting that the dominant paradigm of a 'supercube', is a really square idea, as it is popularized to exhibit the 4th dimension.)
Best regards,
- RP