Volumetric Points
 
Subject: Reply to Do Points Have Area?
Author: Jesse Yoder < jesse@flowresearch.com>
Date: 22 Jan 98 14:08:14 -0500 (EST)
 
Hi Kirby -
 
You said, beginning with a quote about dimensionless points::
 
">points. Mutiplying 0 by infinity still equals 0. As far as I can
see,
>this remains an unresolved problem for Euclid's Axiom One (definition
>of point), and I believe that ascribing area to points is the only
way
>around it.
> 
 
At the risk of being redundant, I'd prefer to ascribe volume to
points,
since your pancake points, if as flat as the ghostly "2D plane" won't 
stack to create volume, any more than ghostly "0D points" you
criticize would make a line. 
 
RESPONSE: Boy, am I glad you said that! I think that volume is a good
way to go, if you are operating in 3-dimensional space. This makes the
Points into small Spheres or Balls. For the most part, I have confined
my discussion to the 2-dimensional plane of circles, rather than the
3-dimensional area that involves volume. I can avoid your issues about
"pancake Points" by ascribing height to planes. But in general, once
we switch to 3 dimensions, points become Spheres and hence have
volume.
 
I'm sorry I can't really follow the rest of your comments relating to
an isotropic matrix or lattice, although it sounds like you are
suggesting some type of link between geometry and physical theory. If
I sometimes don't respond to your comments, it's only because I
haven't mastered the language of your Fullerian geometry.
 
Jesse

http://forum.swarthmore.edu/epigone/geometry-research/khulstaymerm/uzfpsp2ko14l@forum.swarthmore.edu

 

 

1999-2000
Flow Research
27 Water Street
Wakefield, MA 01880

781-224-7550
781-224-7552 (fax)
email: info@flowresearch.com