Subjectivity in Mathematics – Implications of Richard Buckminster Fuller’s Energetic Geometry – Katta Spiel

blogPost from the Buckyverse Zotero collection.

Page content (https://katta.mere.st/subjectivity-in-mathematics-implications-of-richard-buckminster-fullers-energetic-geometry/)

Skip to content Katta Spiel Critical Access in Embodied Computing Home Teaching Teaching Open Topics Methodological Approaches Critical Theory of Media and Informatics Theories & Methods Research Research Current Projects Past Projects Past Projects CHI 2020 WS Nothing About Us Without Us Publications CV Design Design Drawings Technologies Textiles Textiles Pattern Blog Contact Contact Privacy Policy Back Subjectivity in Mathematics – Implications of Richard Buckminster Fuller’s Energetic Geometry Posted by Katta February 15, 2017 4 Comments on Subjectivity in Mathematics – Implications of Richard Buckminster Fuller’s Energetic Geometry This is an essay I have written as part of a Philosophy of Science course with Blay Whitby in Summer 2016. Abstract I compare Euclidean and Energetic Geometry to show how there is a set of mathematical languages, which are subjected to interpretation. This theoretical exercise provides deeper insights into the agendas and world views mathematical concepts carry and deconstruct the presumed ‘neutral’ or ‘objective’ stance that is largely attributed to them. The Point of Euclidean Geometry There is a large desire in human society to order the world it exist in, because “being able to see connections confirms our hope that our world is under- standable and not just a bunch of senseless accidents” Meyer, 2006, p.5. Consequently, around 300 BCE Euclid attempted to structure space by formally defining Elements Euclid and Joyce, 1996. There is just one problem. “(…) There seems to be nothing in nature that is absolutely straight enough to be a “true” line segment” Meyer, 2006, p.7. Hence, Euclid’s geometry has to produce a symbolic system that is tightly cou- pled to rigorous rules of precision. Otherwise the geometry cannot function as an abstraction beyond a visual depiction (ibid.). This means that the underlying axioms of which formulae are deduced have to be both strict and generally applicable at the same time. It is all the more surprising then that Euclidean geometry does not give strong definitions for its pre-axiomatic building blocks such as the point and subsequently also lines and planes Meyer, 2006, p.22. Rather, they remain undefined. Considering that Euclid’s geometry demands rigour and proof through axioms, it appears inconsistent that when it comes to the core parts of these axioms, Euclid relies on ’common’ knowledge of what constitutes a point. Through this, Euclid offers a subjective gateway into geometry. It becomes then situ- ated within the tools that are used to work with them (e.g., pen and paper vs. computational construction) and depends on context, that, for the sake of comparability gets abstracted away to defend the objectivity of a system, whose grammatical base has not been properly specified. Following this, Euclidean geometry constructs meaning through the formulae and abstractions of the world, which is limited by the axiomatic space it provides. We will see how this defines discursive limits and how representations of the world contain ideological and subjective points of view. Fuller’s Critique During the first half of the 20th century, Richard Buckminster Fuller – alongside being a well-received architect – publicly criticised the construction of the Euclidean right angle. Fuller points out, that it relies on the opportunities and limitations provided by the instrument used. Next to the already often cited ones (ruler, compass and pen), Fuller adds another important agent into this set: the flat surface on which a right angle is constructed on Fuller, 1999a, p.175. This pre-axiomatic critique of Euclidean geometry can also be seen as a critical approach to the prevalent world view at the time as it shows itself by the methods and spaces spanned open by geometry as a way to measure the world . To Fuller, mathematics as a discipline and geometry as a part of that discipline is full of ”inconsumerable ratios and a barrel full of clumsy constants” Fuller, 1999a, p.178. Constants such as π or e are difficult to conceive. This shows how not only the instruments, but also the creations they produce are lost in the resulting complexity. ”Whatever happens in the depths of matter, disappears behind ever larger apparatuses, which we cannot look inside and even if we could, we would not see anything and even if we saw, we wouldn’t understand it, since the quantal world doesn’t bother to shape itself in our form of sensual experience. In one word: the constructive mediatedness of our perception is in theoretical and practical aspects so overwhelming, that it becomes understandable, that some physicists don’t really know what their matter actually is.” Mutschler, 1998, p.33, translated from German. To Fuller, this is not acceptable. His ontology requires a world that has an image that is as easily perceivable as the world itself (Heidegger might agree, see Heidegger 1926/1967). Euclidean geometry and mathematical constants put a layer on the world, which does its elegance no justice Fuller, 1999a, p.178. Its abstractions fail to simplify the direct world, but rather construct purely nonphysical constructs such as straight lines Fuller, 1999a, p.173. Those who practise Euclidean geometry agree (cf. Meyer 2006, p.5). The three dimensional space became more and more of a problem. ”The leitmotif of the 19th century, which con- nected maths, physics and philosophy, the >space problem < emerged: How can the natural space be described mathematically." Mehrtens, 1990, p.44, translated from German. Energetic Geometry With the feeling ”(…) that the whole universe must be the starting point for his enquiry (…)” Morrell, 1986, p.613, Richard Buckminster Fuller understood mathematics as a generalised form of learning which – in his opinion – should be oriented on patterns found in nature (ibid.). While I personally am not inclined to distinguish between nurture and nature, this perspectives make sense within the then contemporary major scientific paradigm. Because Euclidean geometry is insufficient for Fuller, he developed an alter- native geometry, which he claims to be intuitive and supporting human creativity. This is especially important to him. It is interesting though, how – despite the thousands of years of the history of humankind full of innovation and archi- tecture – he claims to have developed a more fitting system that is supposed to be better for exactly what has been already achieved with an old out-dated one: the creatively built and inspiring environment in which he thinks. To Fuller, every physical force (such as warmth, electricity and magnetism) can be described in energetic terms. A geometry delivering a more intuitive image of the world, should, hence, follow this, which is why he calls his approach Energetic Geometry . He starts with new basics, in order to follow a more strict construction of his postulates Fuller, 1999a, p.178. For this, he first defines his tools with the goal of an explicit mention of the inscription of tools in the the- ory they are being used by. This does neglect, that the implicit assumptions of Euclidean Geometry are not effectively circumvented, but rather made explicit. ”The apparently simple and unproblematic idea of a »point« had to be rethought, and »the phenomena accommodated by the packaged word point will always prove to be a focal center of differentiating events.« For Fuller, geometry did not describe a timeless space of pure Cartesian form, but rather a universe where lines »cannot go through the same point at the same time.«” Nye, 2009, p.88. Fuller tries to abstract from the undefined grounds of Euclidean geometry and defines his core elements as events and vectors connecting those. This equivalency to points and lines is being presented by Fuller himself in Fuller 1999b. Geometrical deliberations are especially suitable for equivalent theories due to their strictly axiomatic build up. ”(…) Equivalence of axiomatic theories is given ipso facto, since every mathematical system of axioms can be described differently achieving the same. Whether something is an axiom or a theorem depends on its place in a network of mathematical relations, which can be differently arranged while accomplishing the same thing.” Mutschler, 1998, p.29, translated from German. Energetic geometry, hence, provides a different way of expressing the same things as Euclidean geometry. Geometry as Construct While Fuller is by far not the first who voices issues with Euclidean geometry (see, e.g. the concept of spherical geometry Katz and Imhausen 2007, S.4), he does provide a unique ’solution’ to the spatial problem. He does not base his work on the right angle, but rather on the rigid construct of triangular bodies and derivations thereof. Polyhedra are especially fascinating to him and also provide a way to illustrate how geometry is constructed by the language and the implicit ideologies roaming through it. Buckminster Fuller describes polyhedra as such: (…) Every vector (line) leads from one center of a sphere to an- other and therefore represents the operational effect of melting two forces. Every vector (line) consists of two halves, each of them be- longing to one of the spheres and each half of the line represents the radius of each tangential sphere, which all are in a right angle to the identical tangent point and construct a continuous straight line: Through that it is defined that a unit (represented by the inter nuclear vector-module) necessarily holds double the value, which means: unity is inherently two, since it represents the unity of at least two centers of energy. Fuller, 1999b, S.183, translated from German In comparison, the definition of a polyhedron from a Euclidean perspective: A polyhedron is a three-dimensional solid bounded by a finite number of polygons called faces . Points where three or more faces meet are called vertices . Line segments where exactly two faces meet at an angle are called edges . The vertices and edges of a polyhedron make a graph called the graph of the polyhedron . Meyer, 2006, S.418 It should be mentioned, thought, that rigid polyhedra are rare to find and often constructed by humans. “There were only a few polyhedra to be found in nature or the man-made world at that time in history: rooms of buildings, which are basically rectangular parallelopipeds; the pyramids of Egypt; and perhaps a few other examples.” Meyer, 2006, S.432. Therefore, polyhedra are more of a thought experiment in other versions of geometry. Interestingly enough, although Fuller attacks the straight line with a passion only two years earlier Fuller, 1999a, he now re-establishes it. He also just renames points and calls them centres of spheres. Hence, it is not necessarily the mathematical consistency, he attacks in Euclidean geometry. His agenda is a different one. The difference between the two definitions can be seen especially in the lines (or vectors). Fuller’s centres of energy are loaded with meaning while Euclidean geometry tries desperately to keep all meaning out, which necessarily fails. The basis from which we construct, analyse and depict the world around us, is, hence constructed in and off itself only providing another tool to express what we perceive. Another example for a different dialect within geometry is Hilbert’s. ”(…) You can extract the graphic model of Euclidean geometry from the abstraction of Hilbert geometry.” Mutschler, 1998, p.35, translated from German. Since one geometrical system can be translated in another, we can understand it as a language system. In that context, we can see mathematics as one language and different versions of it as dialects. However, then geometry cannot be what it claims it is: an accurate depiction of the perceivable world. ”If it depends on the phrasing of a theory on whether a space is Euclidean or not, whether reality consists of particles or fields, then we cannot naively understand the theoretical concepts as portrayal of a world being for itself.” Mutschler, 1998, S. 35, translated from German. Fuller’s energetic geometry, hence, shows how mathematical systems are subject to interpretation and are con- structed through their perception every time. The societal agreement on how to ’properly’ construct the meaning given by Euclidean geometry is fairly rigorous in the western world; that doesn’t necessitate only one way to understand it, though. References Euclid and David E Joyce. Euclid’s Elements . Clark University, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, 1996. Richard Buckminster Fuller. Dymaxion Comprehensive System – Einführung Energetischer Geometrie (1944). In Richard Buckminster Fuller, Joachim Krausse, and Claude Lichtenstein, editors, Your Private Sky: R. Buckminster Fuller: The Art of Design Science , pages 172–181. Springer, 1999a. Richard Buckminster Fuller. Energetische Geometrie (1946) /Dichteste Packung von Kugeln). In Richard Buckminster Fuller, Joachim Krausse, and Claude Lichtenstein, editors, Your Private Sky: R. Buckminster Fuller: The Art of Design Science , pages 182–183. Springer, 1999b. Martin Heidegger. Sein und Zeit . Max Niemeyer Verlag Tübingen, 1926/1967. Victor J Katz and Annette Imhausen. The Mathematics of Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, India and Islam: A Source Book . Princeton University Press, 2007. Herbert Mehrtens. Moderne – Sprache – Mathematik: Eine Geschichte des Streits um die Grundlagen der Disziplin und des Subjekts formaler Systeme . Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, 1990. Walter A Meyer. Geometry and its Applications . Access Online via Elsevier, 2006. William R. Morrell. Some Perspectives of Fuller’s Mathematics – An Undergraduate’s Assessment by William R. Morrell, Yale College, Class of 1986. In Robert W. Gray, editor, Synergetics Dictionary Online , pages 613–618. Online: http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/ SynergeticsDictionary/status.html , 1986. Hans-Dieter Mutschler. Die Welt als Konstruktion. In Kurt Komarek and Gottfried Magerl, editors, Virtualität und Realität. Bild und Wirklichkeit in den Naturwissenschaften , pages 25–42. Wien; Köln; Weimar : Böhlau, 1998. David E. Nye. Energy in the Thought and Design of R. Buckminster Fuller. In Hsiao-yun Chu and Roberto G Trujillo, editors, New Views on R. Buckminster Fuller , pages 86–98. Stanford University Press, 2009. Posted by Katta February 15, 2017 Posted in Philosophy , Philosophy of Technology , Research Post navigation Previous Post Previous post: EROC 2017 Workshop ‘Announcers – Your greatest promotional weapon’ Next Post Next post: Presentation and Journal Paper: Evaluating Experiences of Autistic Children with Technologies. Join the Conversation 4 Comments CJ Fearnley says: August 12, 2019 at 12:09 am I agree that “mathematical systems are subject to interpretation”. I got that idea most poignantly from Morris Klein’s “Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty”. You may be interested to know that I have explored the idea of subjectivity in Buckminster Fuller’s work in the essay “The Objective, The Subjective, and The Nature of Design Science” at http://blog.cjfearnley.com/2018/03/14/the-objective-the-subjective-and-the-nature-of-design-science/ Reply Ebuc says: November 17, 2022 at 1:42 pm Do you know where I can find Universal Section of energetic geometry Chart C copy right 1944 graphic that is the last page in Synergetics 2? Randy Reply Katta says: November 19, 2022 at 8:45 pm I don’t have access to the manuscript at the moment unfortunately. Reply Richard Fischbeck says: February 11, 2023 at 12:56 am Inside cover of Synergetic 2? Reply Leave a comment Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * Comment * Name * Email * Website Please enter an answer in digits: eight − 4 = Δ This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed. Categories Crafts (29) Crocheting (15) Felting (2) Knitting (12) Pattern (17) Miscellaneous (19) Geeky Stuffs (12) General (2) Politics (6) City Council Weimar (3) Research (16) Accessibility (1) Autism (3) Critical Computing (1) Disability Studies (2) Games (3) Human Computer Interaction (5) Natural Language Processing (1) Perception (2) Philosophy (6) Philosophy of Technology (3) Text-Based Games (1) Usability (3) Roller Derby (2) Announcing (1) Officiating (1) Travels (18) America (1) Michigan (1) Europe (17) Baltic Sea (1) Bavaria (2) Berlin (1) Prague (10) Vienna (2) Weimar (1) Uncategorized (4) Past November 2019 October 2019 August 2019 July 2019 April 2019 February 2019 July 2017 February 2017 September 2016 August 2016 June 2015 February 2015 December 2014 November 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 December 2013 January 2013 October 2012 September 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 Katta Spiel , Proudly powered by WordPress. Privacy Policy This website uses cookies to improve your experience. I'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Reject Read More Privacy & Cookies Policy Close Privacy Overview This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience. Necessary Necessary Always Enabled Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information. Non-necessary Non-necessary Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website. SAVE & ACCEPT