(.. And then spinned as
non-correct spelling..)
Blog-post # 621:
(621 = 3 * 3 * 3 * 23.)
First off,..
Happy (base-10) Pi-Day.
“Happy bidet?”
“That too, but no.
Pi-Day.”
“Pay-day, then?
That’s good.”
“No, Pi-Day.”
“Friday?”
“No, today, Wednesday.”
“When’s day?
When it’s not night.”
“But Pi-Night is finite.”
“Like iron-pyrite?”
“Ironically, quite right.”
“But don’t pirate that
pyrite (from the pine-nut
planet), whether it’s
Pi-Day or Pi-Night, right?”
“Quite.”
“But I hear that pi
is 3.141…,
but yet it’s never done.
Never done it’s been
in which base, again?
Uh, base 10?”
“No,..
he’s our 1st-base man.”..
…
..
.
Ten (and a half)
new (and semi-new)
art (and semi-art)
inanimations:
(Math — and, yes, in some
cases pi — was used to
various degrees to plot
each of the images above.
Though I’m not in the mood
to explain it all, though.)
(And think of the three
related “Helices” images
as looking like 4-leaf
clovers or crisscrossed
hourglasses rather than
swastikas, please..)
—————————
—————————
Anagrams, 20:
..
.
Permutations,
glassiness, and
desire:
=
Stone prisms are as
tangled inside us.
—
Time’s long shape
traversed stones.
=
Its strangeness does
overlap them.
—
Lightning-clouds were
rain/ice/destiny.
=
Inside any is glowing
electric thunder.
—
This quite clear
tableau:
=
That cube is
equilateral.
—
Helices stir..
=
.. Their slices.
—
Its ellipses
each spherical:
=
Pi is all these
circles’ shape.
—
Stephen Hawking..
=
.. Knew the shaping,
=
.. Knew the phasing.
=
(He knew this pang.)
—
Light’s duality is
these waves seen.
=
Glassy hues have
else twisted in it.
—
Equinoxes descend.
=
Nixed sequences do.
—
Spanned as
non-asymmetry:
=
Many ends
transpose many.
—
As otherwise:
=
So was either.
—
Surrealism is to so bend.
=
Blossoms arise under it.
—
As is weirdness:
=
Sin was desire’s.
—
Meanest/corrupt/hypocritical
cheaters/liars of Lucifer’s
baddest nastiness:
=
US Republicans are
rotten/racist/psychotic
fascists,.. are damned
to Hell’s fire.
—
The sly, rude, asinine
assholes’ language
dominated over us.
=
As our demagogues have so
yelled/risen in hate, sin,
and lust.
—
Racism is a lie as
constant as forever.
=
Fascists are evil,
are satanic morons.
—
The Antichrist is
as stupid.
=
It shits that crap
inside us.
—
Those urinals are
knotted with sieves.
=
Sinks/toilets have
turned as their woe.
—
A sundial revolves.
=
Vulvas are so lined.
—
Stupidest bow-tie:
=
It be so twisted up.
—————————
—————————
Them pigs ‘r real mean.
So, hey, you best not..
truffle with ’em!..
—————————
Said on first day after
the change to daylight-
saving time:
“I heard that people had
‘lost an hour of sleep’
due to the time-change
last night.
..
Well, it then must’ve
been _their_ hour of
sleep, I suppose, that
_I_ got last night!”..
..
(“And I’m not giving it
back to them, exactly.”)
—————————
“Dinner last night was
really darn tasty.”
“Was?! Use proper
grammar, now now.
Hey, come on, did you
actually mean to say
that it isn’t tasty
anymore?”
“That’s right, since
it’s now mostly just
poop inside me, then
indeed, it’s not at
all tasty anymore!”..
..
({With a defeated sigh..}
..
“Uh, I concede. True,
it probably isn’t tasty.”)
..
—————————
—————————
(Stupid) Thing to say:..
When stuck in traffic
due to road-work,
exclaim,..
“Road-work!?..
But this road ain’t
workin’!”..
—————————
—————————
Non-ironically,..
it was a _bare witness_..
who did _bear witness_
.. to the orgy..
—————————
One difference between
me and President Trump:
I have a scatterbrain..
But Trump, however, has..
scat _for_ a brain!..
—————————
—————————
Some math-plot fun:
(Then the answer to last
week’s colored-block
puzzle.)
Back on Sep 30, 2016 (in
blog-post # 538) I posted
about what I call the
‘quasi-ellipsoid’, a 3-D
form with a cross-section
that is an A by B ellipse,
and where every cross-
section perpendicular to
that ellipse and passing
through the ellipse’s
center is a circle (which
shares its center with
the ellipse, which too is
the center of the quasi-
ellipsoid as well).
Now,.. (I mean, then)..
I posted at that time a
plot of the front and top
of the quasi-ellipsoid.
(The top has a profile
that is an ellipse with
the same size and shape
as has the elliptical
cross-section I mention
above.
The front has a profile
which is a circle with
diameter equal to the
largest diameter of the
ellipse.)
But, for over the
previous 25 years or so
since I first thought
about this form, I had
just been assuming.. —
and let this be a lesson
to you all about just
assuming anything!.. —
that the 3rd orthogonal
profile, from the side,
was also elliptical or
somewhat elliptical.
I had never actually got
around to plotting the
quasi-ellipsoid from
that vantage!..
Until.. just very
recently..
And boy was I wrong!..
Here again are the plots
of the front and top
(from my Sep 30, 2016
post) on the left side
of this image; but this
time I have included the
side-view too (in the
lower-right).
I may have made a math
error, but I figure that
the straight-looking edges
of the profile are indeed
in-fact straight lines.
(By “edges”, I am talking
about the edges of the
profile specifically.
Though the particular
points on the quasi-
ellipsoid’s surface that
trace out the straight
lines of the profile are
actually NOT straight
in 3-D.
Say there is a bright
light shining at the
quasi-ellipsoid from
exactly its side. Then
the shadow that is cast
would have some straight
edges.
But if the quasi-ellipsoid
is rotated even slightly
in-relation to the light-
source, then the shadow
would cease to have those
straight edges.)
And I figure that these
lines, the straight edges
of the profile (and which
trace out the top/bottom
extrema of the left-to-right
contours represented in the
plot of the front-view {seen
in my image’s lower-left}),
have slopes of:
+-squareroot((A/B)^2 -1).
So, the slopes (rise over
run) of the straight lines
(yet straight only as seen
from the side, though, but
not in 3-D) in my side-view
plot, since B/A = 1/2 for
this quasi-ellipsoid
in-particular, are (where
plus or minus depends upon
which one of the four
profile-edges we are
referring to):
squareroot(3)
and
-squareroot(3).
(Thus, for a quasi-ellipsoid
with B/A = 1/2, by drawing a
horizontal line through two
of these straight side-view
profile-edges, we happen
then to make an equilateral
triangle.)
–
Also, if you want to trust
my math,..
I figure that the volume
of a quasi-ellisoid, in
terms of half the major (A)
and minor (B) axes of the
elliptical cross-section,
is:
B^3 * pi * 4/3 *..
.. (sum{k=0 to infinity}..
c^k*(2k)!*(2k+1)!/(k!)^4),
where c equals the constant
(1-(B/A)^2)/16.
(The ‘()!’s represent
factorials.)
I don’t know (yet) if the
infinite sum has a closed
form, though.
And if A = B, the sum is
considered to equal 1, so
the volume formula becomes
simply the volume of a
sphere of radius B {which
also equals A in this case}.
Note:
It looks like I had, back
in that Sep 30, 2016 post,
confused in my formula the
entire lengths of the
ellipse’s axes with half
the length of those axes.
The formula is actually
for half, analogous to the
ellipse’s major and minor
radii, not to its major
and minor diameters.
The quasi-ellipsoid still
has the same shape either
way, however, but is either
8 or (1/8) times as massive
as it should be if you were
to wrongly assume radii
instead of diameters or
diameters instead of radii.
But regarding any ratio of
A/B, though, it doesn’t
matter if you assume radii
or diameters (as long as
you assume the same for
both A and B).
—————————
Answer to colored-blocks
puzzle in my previous
post:
Each group of blocks, as
I said, is made up of 16
new blocks in addition
to those of the previous
block-group, with 4 new
blocks of each of the
four colors.
The generation of each
new block-group consists
of 4 moves, with four new
blocks, one block of each
color, added to the group
on a move.
So, on a particular move,
a new block of each color
(r = red, p = purple,
y = yellow, c = cyan) is
generated in whichever
direction (up, right,
down, or left) relative
to the position of the
just-previously-generated
block of the same color,
depending upon the move-
number (1, 2, 3, or 4),
as follows:
. 1 .
4 r 2
. 3 .
. 1 .
2 c 4
. 3 .
. 3 .
4 p 2
. 1 .
. 3 .
2 y 4
. 1 .
(Going clockwise or
counterclockwise; starting
with, on move 1 of the
particular block-group’s
generation, a move up
or a move down.)
And,..
On any particular move,
every new block of each
of the four colors is
generated the same number
of grid-squares (from the
just-previously-generated
block of the same color)
as also too are each of
the three new blocks of
the other colors
generated from their own
color’s most-recently-
generated block.
And this number of grid-
squares — which is the
same number, on any
particular move, for each
color — is the minimum
number of grid-squares
needed so that every
single block of the four
new blocks (one of each
color) can be generated
within an empty grid-
square.
(So, at least two of the
newest blocks — or at
least one, maybe, if you
begin with another seed-
group — will be touching
previously-generated
blocks; and the other new
blocks may or may not be
adjoining previously-
generated blocks.)
(Also — note — it is
possible that the nearest
empty grid-square in the
appropriate directions
for two or more blocks
might be the same square.
In this case, neither
color of block is to be
generated in that square,
and the ‘minimum number
of grid-squares needed’
is then increased further
so that the new blocks
are generated somewhere
beyond the problematic
empty grid-square.
This is why, for the
particular seed-group
I give, the central
grid-square will never
be filled.
Because the groups are
being generated
symmetrically, and thus
a move which would have
placed any color in the
very center would also
have placed another color
in the center as well —
a no-no.)
—————————
—————————
No no-no’s, now now!..
.. Hey, and not _even_ any
_biblical_ no-no-ings..
—————————
—————————
Leroy
Hyperthetically 