## Thoughts > Math Defines How We Think

The Math and Design Paradigm Nature Uses

Let’s discuss two subjects that are rarely if ever grouped together, yet are profoundly interconnected, math and philosophy.

Euclidean Geometry, the study of shapes of logic, is based on squares, flat planes, straight lines, and singularities. Everything from computers to kitchen sinks are designed using this form of mathematics. It is thousands of years old. Nearly all our technology is based on it.

There is another form of mathematics that nature uses to build everything from the atom, to us, to galaxy clusters. This form of mathematics has a couple different names, Energetic Geometry or Geodesic Math. It doesn’t use flat planes, straight lines, or singularities. It uses angle, frequency, and duration.

Energetic Geometry was used for the navigation in getting us to the moon and back.

There are two important aspects to our entrenched use of Euclidean Geometry, and how they affect how we think about things. The first is that there is nowhere in nature any physical evidence of Euclidean Geometry. In the entire known Universe, there isn’t a single physical square, flat plane, straight line, or singularity. It is entirely theoretical.

It’s a form of math that’s an illusion because nature doesn’t use it. Any object that you may own that looks to you like it has a straight line or flat plane, appears that way to you because our eyes can’t see close enough to see the physical imperfections. When we look close enough, we find no straight line or flat plane at all. When we look closer, we find the item we think is solid not to be solid either. Make no mistake; these are illusions to us, due to our limited physical powers of observation.

Why nature doesn’t use Euclidean Geometry however it turns out is far more interesting.

Euclidean Geometry is based on edges. It’s based on insideness and outsideness. Energetic Geometry is based on interconnected systems, which are never independent, always and only coexisting with each other.

The design principle for Euclidean Geometry is based on otherness. Here you have a triangle. Inside the triangle is the inside of the triangle. On the other side of the line making up the triangle is the outside. This could be summarized as a me or you design principle.

The design principle of Energetic Geometry is an entirely different picture. Energetic Geometry’s design principle is one of intercooperation, and never alone. It is edgeless. It is seamless. Nature it turns out always designs with an intention of intercooperation. This could be summarized as a me and you design principle.

All great religious leaders from every culture have always professed the interconnectedness of all things. But up until the 20th century, we have always had to go by their word alone. But now a most profound discovery has or hasn’t been made.

Through scientific discovery, no matter how hard we try to find a particle that makes up everything, we haven’t found it. For a while we thought it was the atom. Many still believe today that everything is made of atoms, which is in fact correct. Where the misconception still remains is that many people think today that the atom is a particle, or a singularity, which is isn’t.

And the remaining 99.9% of those who know about protons, electrons, and neutrons, don’t know its been forty years since we’ve proven that they aren’t particles either, but instead systems like the atom on a much smaller scale. Scientific discovery has inadvertently verified the existence of the design priciple of Nature, God, Buddha, Allah, or whatever deity you feel close to.

Everything we see around us is made up of systems within system within systems, all working together. This isn’t something I’m making up. This is hard, cold science of what we’ve found when looking at the very big, to the very small.

And so we now come full circle to see where nature is also gifted with a playful sense of humor because all the machines we’ve used to discover this interconnectedness design principle of about nature, including language (the first industrial tool invented), are based on Euclidean Geometry or edges. The very illusion of otherness we’re seeped in from the roof over your head, to the way we think about ourselves, is the trail that’s led us to this profound scientific discovery.

So what does all this mean?

We as a species will graduate when we can accept, embrace, and live from this place of interconnectedness. And if we can’t, we may not be long for this world squandering away our resources for our own personal well being.

I’m not pointing this out as because I’m able to live from such a place, I’m no saint. I’m just pointing out an scientific observation.

Wanting to live a way, and actually doing it are two different things entirely. But having a destination is an integral part of ever reaching it.

1. Dave Zeiger says:

You make a link between Euclidean delineations and language, which I find particularly interesting.

The Whorfian Hypothesis states that language delimits what and how we can think… that the constructs and assumptions of any language lays out a ‘concept space’ containing all possible thoughts which might be entertained by one limited to that language.

In terms of Euclid and the WH, the Indo-European group of languages, after parting ways, could be said to have taken a turn toward a European/Euclidean concept space, vs a distinctly non-Euclidean turn in the Indic and Oriental forms. Thus, the West has remained highly Euclidean (to the point that, a century after Special Relativity, we still think largely in terms of ‘absolute space’ and particles). The East, much less so, and supporting a strong tradition (complete with language to express) non-absolutes and non-exclusives. [Aspects of this explored in THE TAO OF PHYSICS by Fritjof Capra.]

Just thinking out loud… thanks for the seed!

Dave Z

• leifthor says:

Very interesting point, that Euclidean Geometry is more western, or how it effects our concept of existence. Language it turns out is both a help and hindrance to human beings. Its a help in that it allows us to communicate with one another, but its a bad thing in that our language is a quantification of our experience. So when I say tree, you think of an image in your mind of your idea of a tree. It has edges, it has a boundary of where the tree begins (roots) and ends (leaves). The only problem with this form of communication, where everything has a boundary defining it, is it has little to no basis in reality. Let’s go back to the tree. If we take the tree out of the dirt, it will die, remove the air, it dies, remove the light, it dies, remove gravity, it dies. So by scientific understanding, the tree doesn’t have an edge, or boundary. It LOOKS like there’s a boundary, or there’s an illusion there’s a boundary, but we know this not to be true. Here lies the fault of language, its not accurate, and has caused more misunderstanding than it may have provided in helping mankind. This “view” of life where existence is filled with separate things, each on it’s own, only serves to separate us from our world, since it teaches us Universe designs things separately, when nothing could be further from the truth. There’s not a single atom in the known Universe that isn’t integral to some other action/or part.

You can apply this principle to pretty much anything you see including yourself. We think of ourselves as edged, somewhere around our toes, and the hair on our head. Most believe that within this space is what or who we are. But we now know through science this simply isn’t true. If any of us would die in under 5 minutes if we’re deprived of oxygen, where is our edge? When you and I are talking in a room, exchanging air together, humanity is more “as One” then we may want to acknowledge since the air we may be breathing may have partially just exited either of our lungs. These two key things, one a tool enabling people to communicate ideas and thoughts, and the other an illusion through this tool to make it appear things within our Universe are apart, separate, when this isn’t the case, is enough to drive us mad, and often does. Thanks for the comment and good point:)