Form is Binding Space
Form is Binding Space
All movement in time is dependent upon a form which exists above time. For example a car driving in a circle requires the circle, as the summation of the car's movements within a given time zone, to literally glue the car's movements together. Form is space which binds reality.
Form is the glue of being derived from point space, all phenomenon are the expansion and contraction of a point with the point representing the height of pure form in one respect, pure formlessness in another. The point is the underlying median which holds reality together.
Form is the glue of being derived from point space, all phenomenon are the expansion and contraction of a point with the point representing the height of pure form in one respect, pure formlessness in another. The point is the underlying median which holds reality together.
-
- Posts: 384
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:59 pm
Re: Form is Binding Space
It seems bizarre to put so much emphasis on a point. Human beings, spots of jelly, and leaves bunched at edges of oak branches, to name several things, don't naturally make one think of points. It seems like an artificial demand on us, to reduce to a make believe point.The point is the underlying median which holds reality together.
Re: Form is Binding Space
The reduction of any shape results in angles and curves whose apex results in a single point.TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Thu Mar 05, 2020 3:14 amIt seems bizarre to put so much emphasis on a point. Human beings, spots of jelly, and leaves bunched at edges of oak branches, to name several things, don't naturally make one think of points. It seems like an artificial demand on us, to reduce to a make believe point.The point is the underlying median which holds reality together.
-
- Posts: 384
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:59 pm
Re: Form is Binding Space
I don't see how that justifies the obsession with the subject matter of the so-called points.The reduction of any shape results in angles and curves whose apex results in a single point.
Re: Form is Binding Space
Because analysis, no matter how deep, results in the same phenomena.TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 8:35 pmI don't see how that justifies the obsession with the subject matter of the so-called points.The reduction of any shape results in angles and curves whose apex results in a single point.
All physical objects can be reduced to point particles forming shapes.
All abstractions can be reduced to intrinsically empty points of view, as assumptions, which are taken strictly "as is" with no thought behind them.
The empty formless nature of the point is both empirical and abstract.
Re: Form is Binding Space
Everything is in constant motion and that includes space, time , matter, and energy. I don't think anything is static to even measure a fixed point.
Wouldn't fractals be the best method of simulating reality?
Don't patterns govern how the universe works?
Gravity creates order.
If our existence was static then we would have solid frames of reference. But we live in a world where spacetime is an emergent property. Accretion makes matter and form.
Wouldn't fractals be the best method of simulating reality?
Don't patterns govern how the universe works?
Gravity creates order.
If our existence was static then we would have solid frames of reference. But we live in a world where spacetime is an emergent property. Accretion makes matter and form.
Re: Form is Binding Space
osgart wrote: ↑Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:05 am Everything is in constant motion and that includes space, time , matter, and energy. I don't think anything is static to even measure a fixed point.
Wouldn't fractals be the best method of simulating reality?
Yes, but a series of fractals still converges and diverges from a point. All objects at a distance are reduced to a point, all objects up close as composed of point particles are composed of points.
All phenomena are derived from converging and diverging points.
Don't patterns govern how the universe works?
Gravity creates order.
If our existence was static then we would have solid frames of reference. But we live in a world where spacetime is an emergent property. Accretion makes matter and form.
-
- Posts: 4369
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Form is Binding Space
corsets are better
-Imp
-Imp
-
- Posts: 384
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:59 pm
Re: Form is Binding Space
Why is a point "formless" and "empty?" It seems as much something as anything else to me.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:53 amBecause analysis, no matter how deep, results in the same phenomena.TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 8:35 pmI don't see how that justifies the obsession with the subject matter of the so-called points.The reduction of any shape results in angles and curves whose apex results in a single point.
All physical objects can be reduced to point particles forming shapes.
All abstractions can be reduced to intrinsically empty points of view, as assumptions, which are taken strictly "as is" with no thought behind them.
The empty formless nature of the point is both empirical and abstract.
Re: Form is Binding Space
Take a single point, without a backdrop, and the point is a boundless field.TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 12:53 amWhy is a point "formless" and "empty?" It seems as much something as anything else to me.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:53 amBecause analysis, no matter how deep, results in the same phenomena.TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 8:35 pm
I don't see how that justifies the obsession with the subject matter of the so-called points.
All physical objects can be reduced to point particles forming shapes.
All abstractions can be reduced to intrinsically empty points of view, as assumptions, which are taken strictly "as is" with no thought behind them.
The empty formless nature of the point is both empirical and abstract.
-
- Posts: 384
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:59 pm
Re: Form is Binding Space
OK. What follows from that? The form of the boundless and utterly vague.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 12:59 amTake a single point, without a backdrop, and the point is a boundless field.TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 12:53 amWhy is a point "formless" and "empty?" It seems as much something as anything else to me.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:53 am
Because analysis, no matter how deep, results in the same phenomena.
All physical objects can be reduced to point particles forming shapes.
All abstractions can be reduced to intrinsically empty points of view, as assumptions, which are taken strictly "as is" with no thought behind them.
The empty formless nature of the point is both empirical and abstract.
You know, usually people think of points as having no dimension. As in Euclid and the old Pythagoreans.
Re: Form is Binding Space
A boundless field has no dimension.TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:03 amOK. What follows from that? The form of the boundless and utterly vague.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 12:59 amTake a single point, without a backdrop, and the point is a boundless field.TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 12:53 am
Why is a point "formless" and "empty?" It seems as much something as anything else to me.
You know, usually people think of points as having no dimension. As in Euclid and the old Pythagoreans.
Take a single point.
Against a backdrop of another color it exists as a single dot.
Take the backdrop away and you have a boundless field.
Both are without dimension,
It is the division of a point into another point, through the line, in which form begins.
-
- Posts: 384
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:59 pm
Re: Form is Binding Space
I would say, thought that way, the point would have an exact dimension. That of one point.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:05 amA boundless field has no dimension.TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:03 amOK. What follows from that? The form of the boundless and utterly vague.
You know, usually people think of points as having no dimension. As in Euclid and the old Pythagoreans.
Take a single point.
Against a backdrop of another color it exists as a single dot.
Take the backdrop away and you have a boundless field.
Both are without dimension,
It is the division of a point into another point, through the line, in which form begins.
That's not, however, the usual manner of thinking of points in the tradition so far as I understand it. They are thought as belonging only to the mind and having no dimension. The line is the connection of two points and has one dimension as in the book of L F Richardson on the beauty of one-dimensional fractals.
Re: Form is Binding Space
TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:09 amI would say, thought that way, the point would have an exact dimension. That of one point.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:05 amA boundless field has no dimension.TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:03 am
OK. What follows from that? The form of the boundless and utterly vague.
You know, usually people think of points as having no dimension. As in Euclid and the old Pythagoreans.
Take a single point.
Against a backdrop of another color it exists as a single dot.
Take the backdrop away and you have a boundless field.
Both are without dimension,
It is the division of a point into another point, through the line, in which form begins.
Then a theoretical one dimensional point exists.
A single point is formless.
That's not, however, the usual manner of thinking of points in the tradition so far as I understand it. They are thought as belonging only to the mind and having no dimension.
A point is spatial, space is beyond a priori and a posteriori
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=28184
The line is the connection of two points and has one dimension as in the book of L F Richardson on the beauty of one-dimensional fractals.
-
- Posts: 384
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:59 pm
Re: Form is Binding Space
No. That would be a point existing for the eyes. And not one dimensional. But one point thick, and one point long. And, I suppose, one point tall as well, possibly.Then a theoretical one dimensional point exists.
A point with no dimension is intelligible somehow, but can't exist for the eyes or touch.
If formless means without dimension, that could only be true in the mind for an intelligible notion which, however, is not genuinely imaginable.A single point is formless.
That's to posit a space beyond the senses. Or, that space includes something only for our intelligence. This may be true, but it still excludes points from the region of the eyes alone.A point is spatial, space is beyond a priori and a posteriori