Equalatural pyramids.

[devance]

This just post about the side arms of a equalateral pyrimind.

As on side shortens another increases.

As a physics outlook that could be true.

energy/time/distance

In the center is matter.

E=MC would be a elegant equation for a ratio to describe one arm in relation to another.

But in the social realm where justice/commerce/political forms a blalanced or unblanced triangle.

Is a such a social equation existant.

[planthelper]

are we talking coriolis force here?

i place my pyramid on the equator, but on top of a 8000m mountain, mine will faster get out of shape than yours.

[Legba]

...i place my pyramid on the equator, but on top of a 8000m mountain...

8000m thats over 26 000 feet. where ya gonna put it, everest?? . :D

[Amulte]

This just post about the side arms of a equalateral pyrimind.

As on side shortens another increases.

As a physics outlook that could be true.

energy/time/distance

In the center is matter.

E=MC would be a elegant equation for a ratio to describe one arm in relation to another.

But in the social realm where justice/commerce/political forms a blalanced or unblanced triangle.

Is a such a social equation existant.

its utterly impossible.to the best of my knowledge an qualatural pyramid has the same dergress on every angle. every angle on an equalateral is 60degress, no more no less. if not 60degress then its not and equalateral. if one side were to increase as one decreased the angle would change and it would no longer be equalateral

Energy does not = mass times the square of the speed of light.

you cannot build a flux-capasitor and install it into your delorian.

Edited December 26, 2005 by Amulte

[ballzac]

What the hell are you guys on?

Are we talking about a tetrahedron? If so, then as one edge increases or decreases in length, so must the other five in order for the vertices to remain equidistant. All the other stuff I have no idea what you guys are talking about. Is this some secret code? Because it doesn't sound like physics.

are we talking coriolis force here?

What did that have to do with the coriolis force?

Energy does not = mass times the square of the speed of light.

If we're talking physics and this isn't a metaphor that has gone COMPLETELY over my head, yes it does. It's been proven time and time again that matter is just energy 'frozen' in spacetime. Because the same quantity of matter will always liberate the same quantity of energy when annihilated, E=m. Or, to put it in a less cumbersome way (because an enourmous quantity of energy is liberated from the destruction of a tiny quantity of matter) E=mc^2

But...It sounds like you guys are talking about something completely different. You're posts all seem almost unrelated. So tell me, Is this a secret code or something?

Anyway, to repeat myself in a way, Amulte was essentially right when he said that no edges/sides can be shortened. This is true of the sides of all polygons, and edges of all polyhedrons.

[devance]

I should have said equalateral triangle as the ratio of one arm lenthening while

the one or both of the other shortens is apparent.

Many together would form a Bucky ball. Would be interesting to know the angle as it would be a universal number.

Yeah, matter is the condensed sum of the arms of a equalateral triangle as the total energy/space and time would remain constant but the existential expression of such if manipulated is a matter for physicist not me to comment about.

Bosen condensate, laser light speed slow downs, who knows a good example..

-----------------------------------------------

But for the pyramid type of polyhedron the fourth arm might be consciousness or conscouness might be the condensate while the four surfaces would be interesting and different as each is delineated by only three of the four possible dimensional parameters.

I wonder what sort of 5th D bucky ball that would produce.

The nucleous of a atom flutuates in a remarkable fractal manner.

But consider tetrahedron ratios is way too confusing and unprovable.

----------------------------------------------------------------

I was thinking to much of the masonic emblem on the dollar bill showing a pyramid with Gods eye in the center and considering it might represent a short of social equation. In equal proportion the social equation would produce a stable society while in unequal proportion, a doomed one.

[ballzac]

I should have said equalateral triangle as the ratio of one arm lenthening while

the one or both of the other shortens is apparent.

Many together would form a Bucky ball. Would be interesting to know the angle as it would be a universal number.

Yeah, matter is the condensed sum of the arms of a equalateral triangle as the total energy/space and time would remain constant but the existential expression of such if manipulated is a matter for physicist not me to comment about.

Bosen condensate, laser light speed slow downs, who knows a good example..

-----------------------------------------------

But for the pyramid type of polyhedron the fourth arm might be consciousness or conscouness might be the condensate while the four surfaces would be interesting and different as each is delineated by only three of the four possible dimensional parameters.

I wonder what sort of 5th D bucky ball that would produce.

The nucleous of a atom flutuates in a remarkable fractal manner.

But consider tetrahedron ratios is way too confusing and unprovable.

----------------------------------------------------------------

I was thinking to much of the masonic emblem on the dollar bill showing a pyramid with Gods eye in the center and considering it might represent a short of social equation. In equal proportion the social equation would produce a stable society while in unequal proportion, a doomed one.

This still all sounds like a bunch of unrelated stuff all joined together into sentences. What are you talking about? If any one of the sides of any equilateral polygon/polyhedron shortens, it will no longer be equilateral. A triangle will become scalene or isosceles.

How did buckyballs come into it? As far as I know, the carbon-carbon bonds (i.e. every bond) in a bucky ball, produce pentagonal spaces in the framework not triangular. Would be interesting to know the angle? WHAT angle? The rest I'm not even gonna try to figure out what you're trying to say. Maybe if I was on acid I would think you were saying something that actually makes sense, and I was just not in a state to understand it, but I'm not, and I can recognize gobledygook when I see it.

[Legba]

But in the social realm where justice/commerce/political forms a blalanced or unblanced triangle.

Is a such a social equation existant.

if you look at commerce/economics as the neucleus of an atom, then politics would be the electrons. if you took this element into space and split it, where the fragments end up is where you may find justice.

[ballzac]

okay, okay. I give up.

[devance]

Well in the simplest model a planar sheet of equalateral triangles when put at a angle to one another form a geodesic dome and when completed a ball with a measurable angle. Between the triangles.

Using a 2d form to form a three 3d form.

--------------------------------------------------

I hadn't intented to say that a nonequalateral could do this.

The forms of crystals are a interesting combination of two or more types of

polyhedrons though.

-------------------------------------------------

The changing of arm ratios for a single equalateral triangle is simply a visual device.

For instance if one was a being in outer space the changing the space/time/energy ratio would be the equivalent of changing the sail angle of a sail boat and type of sails.

A purely living way and not a artficial way such as a star drive.

-------------------------

Doing so might not be as detrimental to a living organism as one might think.

A lenthened distance arm is instant matter transmission.

A lenthened energy arm is ultra fast movement.

A lenthened time arm is frozen nonchange.

Of course only calculus deals with such absolutes by subserving the fictional absolute zero/infinity by using infinite increments.

So such absolutes aren't existing.

But ratios do, like black holes.

------------------

I like other peoples take on such stuff and am not a big fan of threads staying the course like a plodding pack animal until exhaustion.

-----------------

I brought it up as I thought the single equalateral triangle is a good simple modeling experiment for a inhanced psychadelic visual state.

------------------

Then I mentioned that maybe a simple rationic social equation might be interesting to speculate on. :saufen2: .

[Amulte]

Well in the simplest model a planar sheet of equalateral triangles when put at a angle to one another form a geodesic dome and when completed a ball with a measurable angle. Between the triangles.

Using a 2d form to form a three 3d form.

so like a polyhedron star of david?

the rest of the post is starting to sound like the probably potential of astro and quantum physics.

And dont worry Ballzac, the..

Energy does not = mass times the square of the speed of light.

you cannot build a flux-capasitor and install it into your delorian.

Was just a reference to the move "Back to the future". the professor uses E=mc2, along with plenty of pyramids, to figure out how to build a flux capacitor for time travel. nothing to worry you head over. only said in as tounge in check as its a half truth and my wild assumptions devance was constructing such a device.

EDIT - Also its not completely proven to be true. on our miniscule size ratio to the universe there is no way it can be a flawless theory. and also tell me how we know the speed of light to be constant. we believe it to be but ive never heard of anything that flawlessly proves this. we make assumptions from what we see on earth but it cannot behave the same accross different mediums or evironments. yes various and countless partical acelloration tests that on most occassions seamingly prove the theory but on earth. and if done in space would obviously be potentially hazzarous and unlikely.

Edited December 29, 2005 by Amulte

[ballzac]

The speed of light is actually known to be faster than it has ever been before! It is far from constant. Much of what you say it true however. We DO only know things from our tiny perspective, and this is far from entirely objective. Laws DO have to be ammended from time to time as new discoveries are made. Einstein's laws themselves prove that Newton's laws do not hold true at extremely high speeds and under the influence of extremely high gravitational forces.

On the other hand, relativity is a theory that came from the mind of a genius, and since then, has been proven to be correct under every circumstance that we can test. And yes, they have been tested in space. The sun itself gives off the amount of radiation that Einstien's equations predict for the mass it loses. Time dilation has been proven to be accurately predicted by these theories too. In the future, there maybe new laws discovered that make Einstein's laws slightly incorrect under special circumstances (in fact, quantum theory could be said to do just that. But that is a whole other textbook), just as his laws altered the implications of Newton's, but you must remember, that the laws devised by Newton centuries ago and these laws alone, are used today to land craft on other planets, something that could not be tested in Newton's day. So just as newton's laws are aplicable for the motion of object on earth and at low speeds (when talking about low speeds in this context, we can mean hundreds of times the speed of sound) in space, Einstein's will always be applicable for making nuclear reactions anywhere in the known universe (this is how all the light of the stars in the night sky is created), for strong gravitational fields, and for high speed travel. That is, speeds approaching that of light.

The warping of spacetime and subsequent dilation of time caused by the rotation of a large mass (in this case the earth) has only been possible in the past couple of years because of advances in the accuracy of atomic clocks. However, a couple of years ago when this was tested, Einstien's predictions of almost a century ago proved to be true. The light from stars that are hundreds of lightyears away are redshifted to exactly (by the most accurate human measurements possible) the degree that these equations predict. I think you underestimate the universality mathematics and the predictive power of the works of the physics geniuses, and there are many more of those than just Einstein and Newton.

-Zac

[Amulte]

I think you underestimate the universality mathematics and the predictive power of the works of the physics geniuses, and there are many more of those than just Einstein and Newton.

-Zac

No no no, i just dont overestimate humans. but enough hijacking for now

EDIT - the speed of light is faster than ever before? that indicates it has progressivly gotten faster, so the constant 'c' is always increasing.

Edited December 30, 2005 by Amulte

[Qhorakuna tantani]

meh.

'c' is thought to be constant, but it's weird how c is different when light travels through different mediums, isn't it. Does that mean that if one somehow were to live inside a giant glass block, their time be slightly dilated?

also tell me how we know the speed of light to be constant. we believe it to be but ive never heard of anything that flawlessly proves this. we make assumptions from what we see on earth but it cannot behave the same accross different mediums or evironments.

The reason the speed of light is thought to be constant for each individual medium is because all electromagnetic radiation is made of two seperate elements, the magnetic and the electric waves, as you probably know. And as each wave moves through space it generates the other in a self perpetuating manner. It was predicted that the speed of light is constant becuase for this relationship to exist without loss of energy, the EM radiation must be travelling as a universal speed for each individual medium. Although this is still an assumption i guess.

And the reason the speed of light is thought to be the 'ultimate speed', and the reason that no object will ever travel AT or above the speed of light (theoretically) is becuase as an object comes closer to the speed of light its mass increases and if it were to travel at the speed of light, it would have an infinite mass which would destroy the entire universe.

Very sorry for adding to the hijacking there... am I supposed to be as confused as I am reading the upper parts of this thread

[ballzac]

Light travels through ANY medium at the speed of light. In a transparent medium (glass, water, air, etc.), the photons are absorbed by the atoms of the substance, and re-emitted, then absorbed by the next atoms and so on and so forth. The light appears to travel slower, but it is not the same photons that emerge at the other end. The photons travel between the atoms at the same rate no matter what the substance.

Electomagnetic waves are called this because there is a relationship between said waves and electricy and magnetism. The actual waves are made up of photons (thought of as little packets of waves, although the reality appears to be that they exist in a superposition of the two states of wave form and particle form. i.e. If you measure it in one way they appear to be particles, and in another they appear to be waves. If modern quantum mechanics is correct, they are simultaneously both.)

When we measure the velocity of light coming from the sun, we find that it reaches us at 299 792 458 m / s. The strange thing is that if we were to travel at half this speed (or infact any speed) towards the sun, the light would still reach us at 299 792 458 m / s. Where does the extra energy go? It becomes blueshift. Instead of the velocity of light increasing as we travel towards the souce, it simply increases in frequency. If we were to travel at high velocity towards a red source of light, it would appear blue. At high enough velocity, the harmless blue light would become gamma rays that would kill us. Similary, receding from a light source causes redshift, the opposite of blueshift.

You're comment about the mass increasing as an object approaches the speed of light is correct, although it wouldn't destroy the universe, it just CAN'T happen. It doesn't matter how powerful your engines are, you can never push something that is of infinite mass. In fact, it would require infinite power to push it to the point where the mass is infinite. This is why you can get closer and closer to the speed of light, and keep accelerating, without ever reaching it.

There are other ways of looking at this too. If a craft were traveling close to the speed of light, their time would be dilated. Supposing we could see what was happening on board. The people would be moving slowly from our perspective, but from their perspective it would be normal. Similarly, when they fire their engines again to accelerate, it seems to them to accelerate them as efficiently as it always has, but to us, it would fire a lot slower because of the dilation of time. The faster they go, the more this effect increases. Because the speed of light would theoretically be the point where time stops altogether, it is impossible to ever reach it. When they are traveling at 99% the speed of light, time will be slowed down to a point where it might take a million of OUR years to reach 99.5%, and a million and a bit more to reach 99.75% and a couple of million more to reach 99.9%. You get my drift. This craft can get closer, but it will never actually get to 100% of the speed of light.

Anyway, I wouldn't feel to bad about hijacking, I think this thread has become a lot more interesting since it started making sense

-Zac

[Qhorakuna tantani]

LOLz.

Stupid me... of course @ c between glass molecules. I'm familiar with blue and red shifts, proof of our expanding universe. Also the particle/wave nature of photons. Am I correct in saying though, that EM radiation is a magnetic field oscillating in one plane, and an electric field oscillating in another? And that the EM wave can exist through each mag or electric field in the EM wave regenerating the other? The reason light travels at the speed it does is because that ultimate speed is need so that neither fieldin the EM wave looses energy. There is total conversion.

I did mean to meantion that to push an object with infinite mass, infinite force would be needed.

I found this out just recently but did you know that GPS satellite clocks actually run faster than earth time due to relativity, not slower? I think that most people would think they run slower but they run faster because the satellites are so far out of the earths gravitational field. They run 7,200 ns/day slow because of their speed but 45,900 ns/day fast becuase of the gravity.

[ballzac]

LOLz.

Stupid me... of course @ c between glass molecules. I'm familiar with blue and red shifts, proof of our expanding universe. Also the particle/wave nature of photons. Am I correct in saying though, that EM radiation is a magnetic field oscillating in one plane, and an electric field oscillating in another? And that the EM wave can exist through each mag or electric field in the EM wave regenerating the other? The reason light travels at the speed it does is because that ultimate speed is need so that neither fieldin the EM wave looses energy. There is total conversion.

I did mean to meantion that to push an object with infinite mass, infinite force would be needed.

I found this out just recently but did you know that GPS satellite clocks actually run faster than earth time due to relativity, not slower? I think that most people would think they run slower but they run faster because the satellites are so far out of the earths gravitational field. They run 7,200 ns/day slow because of their speed but 45,900 ns/day fast becuase of the gravity.

Absolutely right about the satelites (general relativity has been a lot easier to study in a practical sense than special relativity because of this difference). The other thing I'm not sure of. It rings a bell, but I think there's something a little wrong with what you're saying about it relating to the speed of light. I'm not saying you're wrong, just saying I'm not sure. I'm gonna do a bit of research and get back about this one.

[ballzac]

I can find a lot of information about electromagnetic waves being compose of electric and magnetic waves perpendicular to each other, but I can't find anything about how this relates to c. There is obviously SOME relationship, whether it is as you said or not. If you can find anything supporting or contradicting your statement, please post it. In the meantime, I'm gonna keep looking, because I'd be very interested to learn about this. Cheers.

-Zac

[devance]

Absolutely right about the satelites (general relativity has been a lot easier to study in a practical sense than special relativity because of this difference). The other thing I'm not sure of. It rings a bell, but I think there's something a little wrong with what you're saying about it relating to the speed of light. I'm not saying you're wrong, just saying I'm not sure. I'm gonna do a bit of research and get back about this one.

---------------------------------------------

Heres a article that is related to multidimensional ratios. About a theoritical Hyperspace star drive.

.

Has all the things Hollywood movies says earmarks increadable discoverys, such as a 1950's horribly disfigured german scientist from a lab explosion, hidden secretive research complete with mathematics, and mysterious somewhat provable claims.

Truth is stranger than fiction so who knows.

------------------------------------

http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/mg18925331.200

"In Heim's six-dimensional world, the forces of gravity and electromagnetism are coupled together. Even in our familiar four-dimensional world, we can see a link between the two forces through the behaviour of fundamental particles such as the electron. An electron has both mass and charge. When an electron falls under the pull of gravity its moving electric charge creates a magnetic field. And if you use an electromagnetic field to accelerate an electron you move the gravitational field associated with its mass. But in the four dimensions we know, you cannot change the strength of gravity simply by cranking up the electromagnetic field.

In Heim's view of space and time, this limitation disappears. He claimed it is possible to convert electromagnetic energy into gravitational and back again, and speculated that a rotating magnetic field could reduce the influence of gravity on a spacecraft enough for it to take off."

[Gunter]

This is an odd topic, what is the point of it?

[ballzac]

Don't ask ME. I have no idea.