Absolutely Fabulous lecture from a similarly fascinating professor! Great thanks for your work and arrangement of studies and clarification on the cosilinear periodicity of patterning across a variety of contiguous expressions: gene/pheno-types, entropic diffusion, and movement (stable moments., Even the beautiful cracks in T-symmetry are recognizable as traceable 'events' - analogues like spotted-cats with linear tail; the practical squares compared to their rectilinear, well-stripey cousins . 35:02 - Jim Murry's expansion on Turing's theorem of Morphogenesis: or The bit where the lines break into spots.
Like tiled cubes? A hexagon is, of course, a 2 dimensional shape, while our universe has 3 spacial dimensions. However, a hexagon is also a 2 dimensional plane within a cube where the x, y, and z coordinates add up to 0. This is why you see a hexagon when you look at a cube from the right angle.
Thank you! Very Interesting . Regularity leads to symmetry? In a society when is that good or bad? The gaits made me think of how a predatory uses symmetry/rhythm to time the pounce. The idea of the mouse and the ruler made me think of science fiction creatures and what they might look like due to the environment their embryo starts. Best Wishes from Ohio, USA.
Regarding snowflakes: Why hasn't Ian considered the effects of electricity and sound in the formation of the crystal patterns as well as temperature and pressure (saturation)?
Mathematicians would benefit from studying the pattern of atomic weights of the ~3000 types of atoms in the "Cradle of the Nuclides". The Cradle was first published on the front fly pages of the 2000 book, "On The Origin of Elements in the Solar Sustem: Implications of post-1956 observations"
Ian Stewart? Right on. I remember when he used to play piano bits in the studio, etc. for Led Zeppelin or the Stones in the 70s (when Nicky Hopkins or Billy Preston wasn't available). Everyone remembers Led Zeppelin's catchy tribute song to Ian from the Physical Graffiti album, "Boogie With Stu", right? Way to go Stu!
that makes no sense at all. Atomic weights are derived from the number of protons, etc. which make up the atom &, so, for example, the simplest element, hydrogen, has an atomic weight of "1". A question such as your crafty little trick question has no meaning to it, not even in a witty sort of way, since there is no single element to which you could put a weight value. Even if one asked "what is the atomic weight of a human brain?" (and not the sarcastic "mind, not brain" thing), that makes no sense either, since any brain of any animal is not an element (in the sense of it being a part of the periodic table of elements that make up chemistry, etc.) but is comprised of many things which, in themselves, are made up of groups of elements, etc, of which each individual atom would have a particular weight. So, even trying to be witty & "outsmart" one with a non sequitur such as the one you posed, which, in essence, is like asking "what is the atomic weight of a 'concept'..." or "what is the atomic weight of a 'dream'?" Do you begin to understand now? The best replies you could hope for would be witty repartée, such as you can see above this one, since it was written first, i.e., Justin's cheeky retort. Good luck with your studies & remember in the future that mathematics, chemistry, physics & the like are not necessarily compatible with the ethereal, since you're really mixing up metaphysics with cold, hard bound-to-"real world" physics. That is all, you may go now.
Something a little dry about this, haha, I would say...I mean...maybe some humor from time to time...not sure, maybe I've watched too many talks where the person was "more animated"...
Well, I do like to hear that Architecture inspires you. I was actually trying to comment on your statement alluding to men attaching "big words to things".... females are doing the same thing right now with using the feminist movement as a way to twist words against people. check mate.
