Nad
Since the beginning
Works in Berlin Germany

PORTFOLIO (3)
Discussions (41) Opportunities (0) Events (0) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

radonge


especially for those of you
who are hooked on sudoku and hanjie:

http://www.daytar.de/art/radonge/

DISCUSSION

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: the random


Hi Dirk

yes this is more or less what i meant. However I think its
a big question, what the role of perception or
more important the role of cognition is here in this context.
I feel unable to comment sensefully on this in brief.

or in very short, I really think that this is
nontrivial: how come that we come up with such
concepts like e.g. a CIRCLE? Why do we "find" this
concept at all? Is it about
us in our space-time environment?

I dont know wether it makes sense to discuss this
particular thing on the raw list. its very hard to keep
track of threads and its very time consuming
to sort out comments. one needs some redundancy
for this kind of communication and may be i feel this is not
suited for the subject. at least for me: redundancy
can blur understanding sometimes.

nad

p.s. your definition of a circle supposes that you have
the notion of a distance. You can still define a circle
without having a distance, like in topology.

Dirk Vekemans wrote:

> Certainly, one needs to make the distinction, even in my very private
> mess
> of things, where math is the first order coding process, or better
> still:
> the Code itself, the core of knowledge that, if anything, stands out
> as
> Kant's a priori body of knowledge. For,as you put it, us humans just
> find
> the code, when we think of things like a circle or a line, we indeed
> think
> of things that have been before us and will 'survive us' in eternity.
> In
> fact, let's be clear about it, no irony whatsoever, so there can be no
> misunderstanding later on: we think of them as outside of time,
> circles
> don't change, they're on some divine plane of consistency that for
> some
> reason unintelligable for humans, just is there, waiting for us to
> unravel
> more of its splendour as we make progress, not by invention but by
> discovery.
>
> A static system of truth. Unshakable. The only thing changing about it
> is
> our perception of it, how much we have discovered, how many mistakes
> we
> have made or are making, but those are irrelevant because they don't
> change
> the things themselves.

DISCUSSION

3D display technology


Hi everybody, especially Dirk who was interested
in getting a real 3D image into air.

This technology seems to me at the moment to
be the most promising way to get real 3D
images into air:
http://www.aist.go.jp/aist_e/latest_research/2006/20060210/20060210.html

I got this information first via the blog:
http://www.my-os.net/blog/

nad

DISCUSSION

fractal geometry


something funny for the discussion about randomness:
http://www.physorg.com/news10757.html