The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Plato's one = clock tick source
Replies: 0  

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List  
Tom Potter

Posts: 497
Registered: 8/9/06
Plato's one = clock tick source
Posted: Sep 9, 2013 9:37 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

As Plato's "ONE" is the essence of
physics, philosophy, religion and reality,

if you have time and brains to spare,
take a look at this
"challenging, and sometimes bizarre piece."

If you have no time and brains to spare,
ignore this post.

If you have time but no brains,
make a short negative comment about this post,
or post a useless reference without explaining
how it relates.

***Plato's one***

"This difficult second part of the dialogue is generally agreed to be one of
the most challenging, and sometimes bizarre, pieces in the whole of the
Platonic corpus. It consists of an unrelenting series of difficult and
subtle arguments, where the exchange is stripped of all but the bare
essentials of the arguments involved. Gone are the drama and colour we are
accustomed to from earlier dialogues.

The second part of the dialogue can be divided in the three following parts:

Hypothesis n.1: If it is one. The one cannot be made up of parts and cannot
be a single part, because a part must be section of a whole, in order to be
different from many. So it has not a beginning, a center or an end thus it
cannot be spherical or linear. Since the one cannot be touched because has
got no parts, it is neither anywhere nor into itself, because it would be
many. Therefore the one cannot move and cannot dematerialize in order to
reappear in another place. The one must be itself and cannot be different
from it. The one does not take part in the flowing of time so it is

Hypothesis n.2: If the one is. The one is, it must be and it is part of the
being. The one is part of the being and vice versa. The being is a part of
the one, the one is a whole that is a group of sections. The one does not
participate of the being, so it must be a single part. The being is
unlimited and is contained in everything, big or small it is. So, since the
one is part of the being, it is divided in as many parts as the being, thus
it is unfinished. The parts are themselves sections of a whole, the whole is
delimited confirming the presence of a beginning, a centre, and an end.
Therefore, since the centre is itself at the same distance from the
beginning and the end, the one must have a form: linear either spherical or
mixed. If the whole is into some of its parts, it will be the plus into the
minus, and different from itself. The one is also elsewhere, it is
stationary and in movement at the same time.

Hypothesis n. 3: If the one is not. If the one is not it participates of
everything different from him, so everything is partially one. Similarity,
dissimilarity, bigness, equality and smallness belong to it since the one is
similar to itself but dissimilar to anything that is, but it can be big or
small as regards dissimilarity and equal as concerns similarity. So the one
participates of the non-being and also of the being because you can think of
it. Therefore the one becomes and perishes and, since it participates of the
non-being, stays. The one removes from itself the contraries so that it is
unnameable, not disputable, not knowable or sensible or showable. The other
things appear one and many, limited and unlimited, similar and dissimilar,
the same and completely different, in movement and stationary, and neither
the first nor the latter thing since they are different from the one and
other things. Eventually they are not. So if the one is not, the being is

A satisfactory characterisation of this part of the dialogue has eluded
scholars since antiquity.

According to Ficino:
"While Plato sprinkled the seeds of all wisdom throughout all his
dialogues, yet he collected the precepts of moral philosophy in the books on
the Republic, the whole of science in the Timaeus, and he comprehended the
whole of theology in the Parmenides. And whereas in the other works he rises
far above all other philosophers, in this one he seems to surpass even
himself and to bring forth this work miraculously from the adytum of the
divine mind and from the innermost sanctum of philosophy. Whosoever
undertakes the reading of this sacred book shall first prepare himself in a
sober mind and detached spirit, before he makes bold to tackle the mysteries
of this heavenly work. For here Plato discusses his own thoughts most
subtly: how the One itself is the principle of all things, which is above
all things and from which all things are, and in what manner it is outside
everything and in everything, and how everything is from it, through it, and
toward it." (Klibansky, 1941)"

short or long,
round, square or shapeless,
heavy or light,
short lived or long lived,

is quantized using one's ONE,

which is the tick source
one uses to quantize objects and events.

I suggest that Plato's "one"
is basically the tick source
one references [Cross-correlates] everything to,

which in the short run is a heart beat,
and in the middle run
days, months, years,

and in the long run
the tick source that has the highest auto-correlation.

Zero = nothing.
Not zero = something.
Not zeros are referenced to another "something"
which is ultimately referenced to a universal "one".

1^n = being
"i", the square root of minus one = becoming.
i^n = time.

One = the ultimate tick source auto-correlation = the ultimate being = God.

Tom Potter

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.