Circle Theory

[tenchi_no_kashaku]

Here we go!
(hope I'm posting in the right place)
I have a theory called the "circle theory."
Whether metaphoric or physical,
everything is a circle. If one thinks about it, from a distance many
shapes look almost as a circle.
Shapes are circles with flat sides and sharp angles.
Nececarily circles do not need a constant slope of pi.

Naturally we think of happenings as parts of natural cycles.
Such as weather, climate, dispositions, schedules, etc. Also
as in the saying ,"what goes around, comes around."

Even a straight line is a circle. Think in life, cells are circles (more spherical), all the same. But what makes up the shape of the circle?
Particles in various geometric shapes, also circles. And atoms, as we
think of them, are circles( for the most part). The pieces of the particles
are circular as well. Now here's the good part. I found this paradox
while searching one day:

The curvature of a
circle's circumference decreases
as the size of the circle increases. For example,
the curvature of the earth's surface is so negligible that it
appears flat. The limit of decrease in curvature is a straight line.
An infinite circle is therefore... a straight line!


That's all I have right now for my theory.
I hope for some input or response.

 

[27x]

"what goes around comes around" It's called karma, just to let u know.

Anyway, if you think about it, there is a size to an atom. If we could somehow srhink ourselves and come up with a measurment of an attom, then we could then measure hte space between it, and so on and so on.

The curve could go on to decrease on those units between an atom, and so on. Really, for a sphere (3D) to have a curviture that is a straight line, it would have to be an infinitely big object. Otherwise it would only be a shell, representing half of the face of the circle.

For a circle (2D), it would also have to be infinitely big, or it would only be a half circle.

Also, I would work on putting your theory on a white bord, or graph paper, and working it all out. After several rought drafts you might have it.

Then post it again in a more sensible format. Although it doesen't need to be organized, it helps to get it all worked out on your head then get it on paper, because then your mind is a little more cleared up. Also it's much easyer to post a theory when it is in a completed format, depending on how you want it to look.

You're circle theory is working really good, however you seem to be going circles. You need a goal, or a question, that your theory proves, to make it a,"theory."

But really its a good start.

Good day.  

[AbrAbraxas]

in quantum physics it is theorized that the entire universe is curved and if you travel in one direction long enough you will end up where you began. and in string theory the strings are though of as loops twisted in different ways to cause different forms.
in history and culture and theory there are many analogies new and ancient that support cyclical views of every conceivable topic and i agree that it is worth considering in any circumstance.  

[Skanky Randy]

I sense validity here as well. The circle is, after all, the most organic shape in nature. So if it works on the level of the physical, why not in the realm of the metaphysical?  

[Niniva]

Skanky Randy

I sense validity here as well. The circle is, after all, the most organic shape in nature. So if it works on the level of the physical, why not in the realm of the metaphysical?

Unfortunately this isn't technically true. I a circle by definition requires that all parts of it be exactly the same distance appart. This does not exist in a technical sense, certainly not in nature, and if you would like to get skeptical about it, it doesn't even exist by anything man made....

Things can be "circular" if you like, but they are certainly not circles. This of course is in the technical sense but you are going to have to deal with it if you want to theorize about it. You will have to deal with the idea that there are no perfect circles and thus no matter how you calculate out your "circle" theory you will always be off ever so slightly.

Quote:

An infinite circle is therefore... a straight line!

This may or may not be true, I would dissagree heartily that an infinite circle is a straight line. It is, after all, not a cricle if it does not curve around and meet itself at some point. If it continued on forever then it technically is not a circle at all....by any stretch of the definition. It's a line, with zero slope, and therefore not a circle.

I like your abstract form of thinking but unfortunately no matter how you look at something it is still metaphysically the same....you cannot change the fact that a straight line still has zero slope, and you cannot change the fact that a circle has to satisfy the definition of a circle to be called a circle.

Quote:

in quantum physics it is theorized that the entire universe is curved and if you travel in one direction long enough you will end up where you began. and in string theory the strings are though of as loops twisted in different ways to cause different forms.

I don't know about this either. Quantum physics is a hobby of mine, and I discussed string theory at length with a professor of mine who worked at the Fermi Lab continuing work on the string theory and I have never ever heard of quantum physics saying anything even remotely similar to this.

In point of fact this is a direct violation of relativity as you cannot get so far away from something that you are near it again, dimensionally this is impossible and I'd have to see some math to back it up but I'll digress this back to basic physics.

Basic physics:

A circle is actually thought of as an infinite amount of straight lines, we measure the centripital force by measureing the stright line force of something if it were to come off a circle straight, things do not travel in a circular direction, they tend to travel in straight lines, if what you are saying is true then we are indeed wrong about the whole of physics and we could not calculate forces in straight lines to any degree we could only calculate oppsing centripital forces and thus they are never consistent because our angles will be off.

What I am saying here is that reality is based upon moving straight, not moving in a circle. That we live in four dimensions, and one of those dimensions is time. If what you are suggesting is true, then you are saying that eventually we stop moving forward in time and start moving backward until we reach zero again. This cannot be since time is a dimension that can be measured in only two directions, forward and backward and it does not involve any sort of an angle. This is relativity, that time and distance are relative. Then again time is a strange dimension and it is measured based on a constant, unlike any other dimension....the speed of light, which is the kicker. If relativity turns out to be true, you will also have to deal with the idea of the speed of light. If a particle is traveling at that speed then technically speaking it is also not traveling at all, and thus there are no shapes and no directions and that particle is theoritically everywhere all at once.

In point of fact, if relativity is true, then there really are no circles. There are only straight line graphs which depend solely on the point of view, not only that but in actuallity reality is based off light particles being both here and everywhere else at the same time, which means that technically distance and time (velocity) become one point at the speed of light and thus there are no circles, there are only points which stretch out in singular directions the slower the velocity of a particle is.

In any case, the circle is a nice metaphore but I think your theory would have a difficult time taking off unless it can deal with some fundamental problems......the biggest one being that circles don't technically exist in nature....circular things do, things that are roundish do, but a perfect circle you would never find.