On the Euler's theorem on polyhedrons (double metaphor 101)

(please do take note: this document is not ultimate perfection)

#######################################################################
Intro:

Why it is good to kill all the giants even if their shoulders are comfortable.

"
Only a moron would see beauty in Euler on polyhedrons
What a proud would say so, seeing all or saying so.
"

Stupid quote of the day:
	“To understand the universe, you must know the language in which it is written and that is mathematics”

#######################################################################


Chapter 0: A proud 'all seeing' boy point of view
##########

The theorem  "blabla" then s − a + f = 2.
	Where: 	s is the number of summit.
			a is the number of vertices.
			f is the number of faces.

Example for Plato's 5 regular polyhedrons:

 				s 	f 	a
----------------------------
Tetrahedron 	4 	4 	6
Hexahedron 		8 	6 	12
Octahedron 		6 	8 	12
Dodecahedron 	20 	12  30
Icosahedron 	12 	20  30


Comment: nice piece of geometry but this is a corruption for thought.
From the get go, the geometer pretend to be like God "seeing all"  <-- full hubris confirmed.

On a historical note Egyptians were not thinking this way.

Chapter 1: Introducing limits in perception
##########

Directly following Egyptians;
	The only way to instill self limit, doubt and as a result the superiority of God is to formalize our limits with partial blindness.

Starting point: the number 3 for the simplicity of it's representation.

Formalization of the problematic:

		"You are in a room with tree exit points"

			                .
						   / \
						  /   \
						 /     \
						.-------.
					   / \     / \
					  /   \   /   \
					 /     \ /     \
					.-------.-------.

				 Net of the Tetrahedron

		"You perceive only what's on the ground"

With this simple axiom, naturally divides the theorem in two parts:
what you can see with your eyes vs what what is to be seen.

Problem of the 3:
Tetrahedron 	s 	f 	a
--------------------------
Visible         1   3   3
Invisible       3   1   3
--------------------------
Sum  			4 	4 	6   <-- world famous, moronic science.

Conceiting the "You are in a room with tree exit points" pb,
we have to consider tow different ways for exiting the room.

Hard exit: Visible exits, connected to the same level: the ground.
Soft exit: Invisible exits, going up or down.

Problem of the 4:
Hexahedron	 	s 	f 	a
--------------------------
Visible         4   1   4
Invisible       7   5   8
--------------------------
Sum  			8 	6 	12

'Going higher in dimension' (Octahedron, Dodecahedron, Icosahedron) is not a good idea.
Ezekiel, the one who saw God's awe with his own 'eyes' is much more interesting.


Chapter 2: Ezekiel 101
##########

"God sits on a throne, in a middle of a square. On the summit of the square are powerful beings,
which are also 'wheels': they are the ones interceding for everything below the square level.
They are wheels within wheels within wheels"

because they connect to the triangle level !!

Let's go down !

Chapter 3: Till the secret of Memphis: the shapelessness
##########

Problem of the 2: "You are on a finite line aka a segment"
Segment		 	s 	f 	a
--------------------------
Visible         2   0   1	 	segment
Invisible       0   2   1    	discus
--------------------------


Problem of the 1: "You are on a point"
Point		 	s 	f 	a
--------------------------
Visible         1   0   0	    point
Invisible       0   0   1   	circle
--------------------------

Problem of the 0: "You are not"
shapelessness 	s 	f 	a
--------------------------
Visible         0   0   0	 	void
Invisible       1   1   1       seed
--------------------------


Intermezzo: 'Look a tree that's seems so nice' (but it's a trap)
###########

An nice, sweet & smooth introduction to hell (tbdl).


Chapter 4: Tree of life vs 'Tree of life'
##########

Now we have a have description of different level: 4,3,2,1,0
With these first notions that may be fragile but have a good base,
we can begin to articulate everything.

A close inspection of the work of liars give the solution.


Original: 									Non operative copy: check gematria or demonology
											https://www.pinterest.com/pin/775674735791884030/

                .     						.-------.
			   / \							 \     /
			  /   \							  \	  /
			 /     \						   \ /
			.-------.						   	.


	#########################			#################
												.

			.-------.						.-------.
			| 		|						| 		|
			| 		|						| 		|
			|		|						|		|
			.-------.						.-------.

                .           				    .
			   / \							   / \
			  /   \			  				  /   \
			 /     \						 /     \
			.-------.						.-------.

												.
												|
			.-------.							|
												|
				.								.



		################# 			#########################

				J								1

A kind warning:
	I dare u all morons, if you think i'm in full delirium
	do not forget to let me know what website(s) you possess
	and to brag about it's security.

	One way or another, You'll feel the blow. Mark my word.

One can always choose to embrace the truth in a suave and non harmful way,
if not interested, god has a plan for that too (do not try, trust me :p ).


Chapter 5:  going higher in dimension: the double metaphor 101
##########

Previous considerations were grounded ones, to reunite what is visible from what isn't we have to go 3D.
We have to 'close' the forms and 'connect' them.

Closing the pb of the 3: self evident
	we close the triangle to get the tetrahedron.

Closing the pb of the 4: tricky
	naturally we would like to close the square in the form of a cube, but that would be an error.
	Doing so would be a lost of meaning (more on that later)
	We have a choice to do here: let's continue to follow Ezekiel, only one thing sit on the square: God and it's throne.
	If we represent God by a point this would naturally close the form to give a square based pyramid aka 'a pyramid'

Uniting the 3 and the 4:
	Having done that there is immediately a problem because there is major disconnection between these representations.
	Maybe that can be fixed by mirroring the forms.

	So to sum up:
		a bi-pyramid (mirrored pyramid regarding it's base)
		a bi-hexaedron (mirrored hexaedron regarding it's base)

Closing the pb of the 2:
	to close the segment, we have to choose the a triangle
	then a bi-triangle (mirrored triangle regarding it's base)

Closing the pb of the 1:
	nothing to do, already closed.
	but it is not connected; ok then we'll connect that floor to the next with a circle

Closing the	pb of the 0: the fun part
	On a theological point view this is death, we are 'under the earth'.
	And who's dead and risen ? (i let you figure that out for yourself).
	Dead: no connection between this level and the mortal level
	Risen: we draw a circle with extremities the zero level and the summit of the 4 level

	Ok then, but that's not completely satisfying because only one connection,
	and all there have 2 layer of connections.
	We draw another circle with extremities the zero level and the lower summit of the 2 level


Chapter 6: Circular reasoning seems annoying
##########

At this point we have 3 forms with straight lines, the higher part of the drawing.
And bellow, mortals, dead and circles, the lower part of the drawing

Let's focus on the higher part: what could that be ? A map of your thought.

2D point of view:
	quadrivium, trivium, morality
	but the morality part is a weak point: very binary by nature


Chapter 7: mixing the good and the and together
##########



chapter 8: Dynamic
##########

A bit of sum up: profound patterns appears from geometry after surrounding it's own arrogance.