Acme
-
Posts
2399 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Acme
-
-
The above picture !
I undertook in a lesson in Woodland landscapes produced in pastels TODAY 2pm to 4 pm . 2nd April 2014
I asked the art teacher if I could do it with a
----" known, ----known- unknowns,-- ----unknown- unknowns - --- THEME.
I explained it was a Rumsfeld theme to do with the science forum. ...
Mike
With all due respect, Rumsfeld is a jackass and what you are quoting from him is pure unadulterated jackassery. Please rethink taking your cues from a war monger.
To quote M Escher
I often wondered at my own mania of making periodic drawings. Once I asked a friend of mine, a psychologist, about the reason for my being so fascinated by them, but his answer: that I must be driven by a primitive prototypical instinct, does not explain anything. What can the reason be for my being alone in this field? Why does none of my fellow artists seem to be as fascinated as I am by these interesting shapes? Yet there rules are purely objective ones, which every artist could apply in his own personal way!
Note : both artist and purely objective rules are mentioned.
So was Escher artist or scientist or a mixture of both or neither?
I vote definitely an admixture.
0 -
Platonic shapes existing in a special realm ?
Mike
Correct culture, but wrong character. Pre-Platonic, but no doubt a special realm.
In M De Sautoys book he tells of finding the full set embodied in the tiling in the Alhambra.
A good thousand years before Escher - though that is not to detract from Escher's achievements.
And, by the way, I gave my answer to your earlier question.
I'll look into it. From a library of hundreds of volumes I'm now down to a score of books due to a house fire a couple decades ago. Consequently I can't precisely check my anecdotal assertion but I believe my source was this book on Escher. >> M.C. Escher: Visions of Symmetry by Doris Schattschneider
http://www.amazon.com/M-C-Escher-Visions-Symmetry-Edition/dp/0810943085
Doris Schattschneider's classic M. C. Escher: Visions of Symmetry (1990) is the most penetrating study of Escher's work in existence, and the one most admired by mathematicians and scientists. It deals with one powerful obsession that preoccupied Escher: what he called "the regular division of the plane," the puzzle-like interlocking of birds, fish, lizards, and other natural forms in continuous patterns. Schattschneider asks, "How did he do it?" She answers the question by meticulously analyzing Escher's notebooks, and the New Scientist described the result as "a collection of detective stories whose plots are brilliantly organized patterns."
Like the first edition of the book, this new volume includes many of Escher's masterworks, as well as hundreds of lesser-known examples of his work. It also features an illustrated epilogue by the author that reveals new information about Escher's inspiration and shows how his ideas of symmetry have influenced mathematicians, computer scientists, and contemporary artists. Visions of Symmetry is a trip into the mind of a creator who continues to captivate the world.
If not that book specifically then one of several similar works listed here. >> http://www.mcescher.com/about/books-on-escher/
Edit: Read up a bit on M De Sautoy and I misunderstood in that I thought he wrote a thousand years before Escher. Now corrected I can only say Escher studied Islamic art as well and while it may be true all the symmetries were extant, as I understand it Escher was the first to rigorously characterize them. Six of one and half a dozen of another I suppose.
My pardon Studiot, but what question did you answer again? Sorry if I missed something. D'oh!
Parting on an Escheresque note, here's a tiling I did under that inspirational chord.
0 -
I want to look at some sheep not maths !
image.jpgWell I must say your pictures give me a comfortable feeling ! Complete neat satisfyingly symmetrical at least side to side .
Mike
I know matrices ?
Not matrices. As I early hinted, their progenitor predates algebra, even though algebra later had its way with them.
Sleep away. On a side note, did you know that M.C. Escher categorized all the possible planar symmetries before any mathematician? Nighty night.
0 -
I need a clue , that is note so oblique as your previous clues. . .?
Like . Is it animal, vegetable or mineral ?
Mike
It -well they- is/are math. Now while they're still technically 'just' art until I say what math, how do you like looking at them? What feelings, if any, do they evoke in you? Comfort? Fear? Rage? Happiness? Tell me...
0 -
This is the same as the previous but one ,one , is it not ?
Mike
No; not the same. I have put up 3 different images. They share a common ancestry, but otherwise are as different as one sibling from another.
G'donya mate! How else would we ascertain the scientific character of art if we couldn't look at it?
0 -
Great examples all. Well, we'll have to excuse Mike for according Dumsfeld with goodness, but Mike's a Brit after all.
Another of my art pieces rooted in science then? Don't mind if I do.
0 -
It doesn't seem to be a very good test. Do all the pails weigh the same, and also what is the weight of the various pails when empty? Also how can 5 be evenly divided by 2?
Yes; all pails weigh the same. In effect the weight of the pails is not germane to the solution, whether they are full or empty. Substitute 5 rocks if you like. As to 'how can 5 be evenly divided by 2?' question, there are no fractions to figure out in the problem. [still, 5 does divide evenly by 2. 5/2=2.5]
0 -
I was reminded of picks theorem.
Google is very artsy about this
An excellent pick. Not the right pick, but good nonetheless.
Notice that on my drawings the vertices do not all fall on an equidistant grid. Hint: My submitted art IS what it describes.So, I have been assiduously researching my submissions for support when they are outed and Swan challenges them, and I ran across something only tangentially related but interesting to our topic here at large. Here we goes then:
Applications of Mathematics in Models, Artificial Neural Networks and Arts
2010, pp 601-610
From Art to Mathematics in the Paintings of Theo van Doesburg
Paola Vighi,
Igino Aschieri
source: >> http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-90-481-8581-8_27Abstract
The aim of this chapter is to show how present, use or find some mathematical concepts, starting from an artistic production. In particular, we chose Arithmetic Composition I (1930), painted from Theo van Doesburg: we propose to read it with mathematical eyes. In our path we touch the concepts of ratio, geometrical progression, gnomon, perimeter and area, symmetry and so on. We wish that our suggestion can promote the need and the opportunity of mathematical instruments for investigating more in depth, in any context.
What a happy band of ARTY people !
Jolly well said. Thanks for provoking our caranniums.
you caught my stone too.
sorry, crosspost
Roger. Coming back at ya.
And this, our life, exempt from public haunt, finds tongues in trees, books in the running brooks, sermons in stones, and good in everything. ~ William Shakespeare
0 -
That's an interesting question because either will produce a wavelength and a bit.Is the correct way to measure wavelength crest-to-crest, or trough-to-trough?
This is a bit like asking how many decades are there in 0 - 10.
I really only posted this to show that I am not picking on swans.
No worries. You found my question interesting and that's good enough for me. While I have you on the line, can you identify the scientific principle illustrated by my artsy drawings? (Not to pick on you or anything. )Is it the grid structure of the Macator projection , used to make a world globe able to be represented on a flat sheet. or the equivalent for the starry Sky ?
Mike
No Sir; not map projections. It wouldn't be a stretch to call them mappings however. Mmmm...reminds me of a book I read some years ago called Mapping the Next Millineum...hold on...accessing... yes; here it is.
1997 by Stephen Hall >> http://www.amazon.com/Mapping-Next-Millennium-Stephen-Hall/dp/0517178575
A visually stunning and conceptually explosive report from the frontiers of mapmaking. Ranging from the mapping of the ocean floor to the scanning of remote galaxies, from portraits of subatomic collisions to an unprecedented view of the mathematical constant "pi, " this work makes the theoretical compellingly concrete, even as it reminds us that the world is far more vast than we ever dreamed. Photographs throughout.
Must have leaked into my psyche.
0 -
Ideally, no. Ultimately everyone has to agree on an answer. If I drop a stone off of a cliff, our answers need to be the same, and not be open to someone's interpretation. Nature only gives one answer, so only one answer can be right.So science has no subjectivity whatsoever? If that is true, why do not all scientists agree on what some same set/piece of evidence 'means'? Moreover, do you really mean to suggest that science does not connect with individuals differently?
snip...
Not necessarily is there just one answer. (What was the question? ) Anyway, suppose our stone off the cliff lands in a pond and as the ripples ensue we decide to measure the wavelength at some set distance from the locus. Is the correct way to measure wavelength crest-to-crest, or trough-to-trough? Further let's suppose I prefer troughs and you crests. So what is Nature's answer/solution in the context of our disagreement and how does Nature inform us of that [one] solution?
Asking if people connect with science differently is an example of the issue I pointed out in my last post. You're addressing a different question than I am. Of course people connect differently. Some aspects of biology makes me squeamish, but that has absolutely no bearing on whether it's correct.
Whether what is correct? I certainly don't expect you to chose some examples contrary to your position, but I do expect detail enough in them so I can contend.
Speaking of examples, expectations, and contending; have you left off trying to understand my scientific images? I mean I guess if it's just too hard to think about what with all my hints, then it's easy tounderstand why you're not trying, but in all fairness I played with your thrown stones.
0 -
there is no doubt that science must be pure.
...
Well, it may strive to be pure but it is in reality purish. I agree it is powerful, but it's not all-powerful in-and-of itself nor immune to subjectivity.
0 -
nothing explains the human condition better than art.
that is because art is an expression in and of itself.
pun intended.
Well, you didn't invoke science so no soup for you.
Do you have a peer-reviewed study to support your assertion that 'nothing explains the human condition better than art'?Mind you I am only arguing that art may 'be' science and not that it always 'is' science. For example I do not accept that Mike's paintings in the OP are science, but certainly they are art. Any example put forward must be judged on its own merits and not by some broad-brush stroke of generalization.
0 -
Anyway, I am well convinced that nothing we post is going to sway Swan. His mind is made up and that's that. No shafts off my plumage.
I will be swayed by evidence, but thus far the examples are not addressing my objections. Everybody seems to be arguing a different point, i.e. that science can't be beautiful or must be lacking in aesthetics. Or maybe I've defined art in a certain way, different than everyone what makes something count as art? As I said above, I think art has a subjective component which means it connects with individuals in different ways. Which is incompatible with science. Art is also about the expression of the artist, and science doesn't allow individual expression like that.
So science has no subjectivity whatsoever? If that is true, why do not all scientists agree on what some same set/piece of evidence 'means'? Moreover, do you really mean to suggest that science does not connect with individuals differently?
This calls to mind the difference between learning science vs learning about science that happens with pop-sci works. Can art be used to convey scientific concepts? Sure. But it's lacking in real content, just like a pop-sci article or an analogy.
My image is full of content. In fact as I implied, it was the principle way to represent the content for at least 1000 years. So that was really another hint and I'll put up another specific example of the general class of content.
I still don't think you will ultimately be swayed, but perhaps others will.
Are fractals pretty? Sure. Can an artist express one if s/he doesn't feel like making it self-similar at all scales? No.
I don't think that makes any points for either side of the argument. Context is everything and putting things in a context that separates art from science does nothing to discount where the two do/may join.
So, another example from my catalogue.
0 -
What would you say is the validity of statistics?
Also, if you're going to support your argument with definitions please don't, as I think you must ask yourself why you have so much confidence in the definitions in the 1st place
I believe the uncertainty just encourages people to not search for the *real* relationship or variables / constants, and it also encourages pointless studies that emphasizes on correlation when the true relationship (if existent at all) is *not* proven.
This also goes for probability, however, I heard that probability is quite applicable in quantum physics.
If you don't like statistics, then don't use them. Likewise if you don't like conventions, ignore them. In any case, nothing you present here is going to change/stop the teaching and use of statistics and that's a *real* relationship you can test.
0 -
ACMESWANSONT ASKED:-
What scientific concept is it [Acme's drawing] meant to portray?
The magnetic field lines at the entrance to a worm hole ? Somehow quantised ?
Do I get a prize ?
Not magnetic field lines, but you get a prize anyway. Just pay $83 US dollars shipping and handling & the prize will be on its way to you.
I'm going to leave what my drawing is as a mystery a bit longer, but here's another clue. Hint: It is a special case of a general class. If it's not clear by my earlier hints, it's a mathematical principle. I dearly hope we aren't going to go off-topic here and argue that math is not science as that is an equine of a different hue.
Anyway, I am well convinced that nothing we post is going to sway Swan. His mind is made up and that's that. No shafts off my plumage.
Back on magnetic lines though, as it brought to mind Hofstadter's butterfly. Just recently confirmed by observation, it flutters between art and science with abandon.
source: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstadter_butterfly
In physics, Hofstadter's butterfly is a mathematical object describing the theorised behaviour of electrons in a magnetic field. It was discovered by Douglas Hofstadter in 1976, who later abandoned physics research and became notable as a computer scientist and author. It takes its name from its visual resemblance to a butterfly. It is a fractal structure and as such it shows self-similarity, meaning that small fragments of the structure contain a (distorted) copy of the entire structure. It is one of the rare fractal structures discovered in physics, along with KAM tori.
To test whether Hofstadter's butterfly describes real electron behaviour requires accurate measurements. Such were not possible when he wrote his paper. However, more recent experimental research has confirmed the characteristic butterfly shape.
0 -
Holy bat ship!! Well, that may be premature as I haven't watched the thing yet but I needed to post to lock myself in for followage. Accessing....
0 -
Finely, where have you been?
OK, that's to vague, why mostly green and black eyes. Why not red or? How does this stay rather uniform over thousands of episodes. And if tied to those ancient mythical reptilian humanoids, what dove the continuity through the ages.In a word, myths. Medusa, snake in Eden, St. George and his dragon, yada yada yada you pick the tail. Erhm...tale.
Told & retold for millennia and no sign of it stopping. In my End is my Beginning. See Ouroboros. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros1 -
Hey, I'm setting out a pretty low bar to clear here. All I have to find is a reasonable physical instigator to a fairly rare but rather specific hallucination phenomena.
With all of the similarity between these accounts it is essential to find a physiologic mechanism to counter the rather dubious claims of so many alien "nationalities" needed to be accounted for, not only in the numbers of alien encounters, but also the variation in their physical appearance. A true mechanism for these no doubt hallucinations would diminish the credibility many people give to these incidences.
Agreed.
You low-barring me again?
I think we can as easily limbo under social conditioning and its mechanism(s) to arrive at similarities in descriptions of aliens/apparitions. Once the first snake was out of the bag, every cigar was a snake. 0 -
[Acme]Doesn't that mean it has failed in communicating?
Scientifically speaking, only for you and only for now. Artistically speaking, you tell me.
I ask rhetorically, "how long did it take to translate written Mayan?" Was written Mayan any less artistic or any less a communication before modern folk deciphered it? [Note that my drawing is not Mayan.]
Another hint: Knowing something of their work, I expect the following gentlemen would have successfully received my scientific communication: Fermat, Mersenne, Lagrange, Gauss, or Cauchy. Alas we fo shizzle can't know their artistic impression of it on account of them still being dead and all.
So. Mike? Et al? Care to take a shot at the science of my image? The art? Come on; humor an old man.
0 -
[Acme]What scientific concept is it [the art] meant to portray?
Well, I won't tell you.
Not right away at any rate. I'll give a hint while we all enjoy gazing at it.Hint: It preceded its algebraic representation.
0 -
Hey Arc,Hey Acme,
That link you posted, http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/03/07/innate-fear-of-snakes/, is from March 7, 2008. It expressed the general understanding at the time that suggested and expressed ambiguity as to a mechanism.
"The final problem that innate brings up is the question of the mechanism that produced the trait. In much of the discussion, theres an assumption that there must be a gene for something if it is universal and innate (although I find no evidence of genetic explanations in the fear of snakes story). In fact, theres never much discussion of the actual mechanism that might turn an alleged gene into an innate trait. What sort of protein might produce fear of snakes? What parts of the brain would it interact with? Do we see any mutations of it that produce other similar phenomena? In other words, theres a black boxing of mechanisms, an unwillingness to think about how the trait might actually arise in a developmental context or function in an organism."[/size]
This new research appears to provide such a mechanism.
http://www.npr.org/b...r-just-for-them
And the researchers found something remarkable in the pulvinar, a part of the brain's visual system that's unique to people, apes and monkeys.
"There are neurons that are very sensitive to snake images and much more sensitive to them than the faces of primates"
The new study appears to explain Mineka's own research showing that even monkeys raised in labs where there are no snakes can quickly learn to fear the reptiles. But it's still unclear whether the brain response of the monkeys in this study showed they were truly afraid of snakes or just had an innate ability to recognize the potentially venomous reptiles.
Your reference to reptilians lead me to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_reptilian_humanoids
"The list of Reptilian humanoids in world mythology" from the above link shows that there has been an unbroken chain of human experience with these apparitions. A hallucination would be the likely precursor to the creation of a mythological reptilian humanoid/god. A continuity from our earliest historical memory would support this idea of a biologic/evolutionary source for hallucinations involving green reptilian like creatures. For people to have such a historical context to this, as you said meme, would suggest our human ancestors had the same hallucinations, and I would suggest that they may originate in the same "pulvinar, a part of the brain's visual system that's unique to people, apes and monkeys."
Acknowledge all. Spoiled it just to shorten the page.
The Abstract on the pulvinar region only mentions its association with visual attention function so I don't see it supporting your assertion. As to the other article, it seems rather full of "probably's", "appears", "suggests" and other such hedgers as go to embellish an inconclusive proposition.
Since we're talking about alien/apparition visitations here I suppose one guess is as good as another.
0 -
snip...
This is one of the questions - like maths plus physics understanding - where disparate disciplines are inseparable in the best.
That is the real difference between Man and Machine - The ability to combine apparantly unrelated matters into a whole that is unachievable by other means.
Here here! I was watching a re-run of Star Trek the other night and came to the impression that going back and forth with Mike & Swan is like mediating between Spock & McCoy. Either on their own seem to miss the mark, but the join by third parties of their approaches takes the day. Nevertheless, they each remain mystified by the other and ever ready to rejoin the agon. It would be more vexing were they not such loveable characters.
Well, I think I ought to shut up & put up. I drew this by hand with a drafting machine, then scanned it and added some digital artifications. It is both pleasing to the eye as I intended it and rigorously mathematically unambiguous and informative as I intended it. Agon indeed!
0 -
good info, people. its on olive trees.
I'm no familiar with growing olives, but I searched out some info for you that may be helpful.
source: >> http://www.floridaconcerts.org/answers_to_some_common_questions%20about%20olive%20trees.htmAnswers to some common questions about olive trees:
...
Q- I have had an olive tree for 5 years but I never got any olives. Why is that?
A- There are many different reasons why you may not be getting olives from your 5 year old tree.
(1) Your tree may have been grown from a pit, olive trees that are grown from pits can take 8-10 years to begin to produce fruit. Our trees are grown from the cuttings of mature fruit bearing trees and will produce fruit in one or two years.
(2) Your tree may need a pollinator. Many varieties of olive trees are self pollinating but there are several varieties that are not and will not produce fruit without a pollinizer.
Manzanillo, Mission and Ascolano to name a few, all require pollinators. Our trees are self pollinating but will bear 15% higher if cross pollinated.
Manzanillo are sensitive to cold and require the Sevillano or Ascolano for pollination.
Mission are cold hardy and also require Sevillano or Ascolano for pollination.
Ascolano require the Mission or Manzanillo for pollination.
We sell the Arbequina (Spanish), Arbosana (Spanish) and Koroneiki (Greek) olive tree varieties, these varieties do not require pollinators and are both cold and drought tolerant.
(3) Too much Nitrogen will cause leaf growth but inhibit flowering also too much rain may cause the flowers to drop.
(4) There are ornamental varieties of olive trees that are used for landscaping that do not produce fruit. ...
1 -
Well, according to the link, the fear of snakes is fairly well supported by the research as being a hardwired evolutionary holdover of the human brain.
...
This seems a more logical answer to the variation of alien physiology than the Earth is simply a rest stop or roadside attraction along some intergalactic superhighway.
I don't discount the evolutionary holdover of aversion to snakes, only that it applies as well to spiders as to snakes. Yet, as I said, we don't see many spider aliens. The 'aliens abducted me' business is more rooted in other psychological phenomena than aversion to animals.
source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080227121840.htmEvolution Of Aversion: Why Even Children Are Fearful Of Snakes
...LoBue and DeLoache explain that their study does not prove an innate fear of snakes, only that humans, including young children, seem to have an innate ability to quickly identify a snake from among other things. One of their previous studies indicated that humans also have a profound ability to identify spiders from among non-threatening flora and fauna. Lobue has also shown that people are very good at quickly detecting threats of many types, including aggressive facial expressions. ...
PS One of the links in the thread you mention here is an article harshly critical of the 'fear of snakes' meme.
http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/03/07/innate-fear-of-snakes/
...
In fact, Hinde’s approach to fear of snakes is far more measured than DeLoache and LoBue, even using some of the same terms (like ‘predisposition’) and he doesn’t rely quite so much on the idea that evolution programmed us with some sort of innate fear (that some people don’t seem to demonstrate). Hinde argues that humans are ‘predisposed to acquire a fear of snakes,’ not that such a fear is inherent in being human: ‘Anecdotal evidence suggests that the extent of the fear shown is much influenced by social referencing – the child looks at others, and especially at a trusted other, and models his or her response to the situation according to the response of that other.’
...
The reptilian humanoid-ish meme is as old as story telling, so social-referencing seems a more logical argument over any evolutionary/genetic connection.
Reptilians @ Wiki >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptilians
0
Connection between fear of snakes and the alien cultural phenomena.
in The Lounge
Posted
See Serpent symbolism @ Wiki. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpent_(symbolism)
How far is Genesis from your guy in Kansas? Why it's within spittin' distance. Then there is Gilgamesh -arguably the oldest written story extant- from which Genesis borrows liberally. Yup; snakes in Gilgamesh too. How about the kiddies & Aesop's Snake & the Farmer? Yup; still a goin'. Kipling's Kaa? Ssssssneaky!
Perusing my link above we find no corner of the world un-slithered.