`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