Towards the end of the embedded video, I say "Happy Pi Day" in a talk balloon, when Ramanujan's likeness appears, on a stamp facsimile.
Ramanujan came up with some amazing equations, some of them involving pi, which Hardy really wanted to see proved. Short of proof, extended precision number types give us ways to investigate what is claimed. I have some Jupyter Notebooks devoted to that topic.
I also allude to March 14 being an anniversary of Stephen Hawking's death. I think birthdays are usually considered happier occasions, deaths more solemn, OK I'll say it, more grave.
There's an undertone of mourning for Synergetics too, which never made it into schools, much as the Concentric Hierarchy of Nested Polyhedrons is Sesame Street simple.
No one nests polyhedrons anymore, ever since Kepler's stack failed to jibe with the solar system in any precise fashion.
Those seeking literal truths are more easily disappointed, whereas "as above so below" is really about "analogies across scale" (a topic I begin to address in the embedded Youtube). Angle and frequency are separable aspects (shape and size).
I advance the thesis that the high priest language currently centers on "whatsons", especially bosons, the God particle in particular, whereas "thinking about thinking" (philosophy) is considered a relatively stale (as in marginalized) set of language games.
CERN stuff is center ring. It gave us hypertext as another internet protocol (HTTP), recently celebrated this month in the media for turning thirty.
The initially remote vocabulary of Synergetics, with its "quantum modules", was indeed becoming more of a swirling vortex, as particle physics found uses for many of the same names ("spin").
These namespaces became neighbors, with Fuller thinking up a six-edged model for a proton-neutron Feynman diagram.
Maybe some schooling in Synergetics will help one memorize the standard model?
How about organic chemistry?
How does one apply "spherical thinking" in either case?
