Talk:3010: Geometriphylogenetics - Revision history

162.158.74.69 at 15:26, 14 November 2024

2024-11-14T15:26:23Z

172.68.245.207: /* Is this a flatworld reference? */ new section

2024-11-14T14:33:35Z

‎Is this a flatworld reference?: new section

Quantum7: An alternate "missing links" diagram

2024-11-14T13:44:38Z

An alternate "missing links" diagram

172.71.26.43 at 15:21, 13 November 2024

2024-11-13T15:21:48Z

172.69.194.78: Images outlines for points of diversion in the chart

2024-11-13T10:18:01Z

Images outlines for points of diversion in the chart

172.70.86.111 at 09:32, 13 November 2024

2024-11-13T09:32:19Z

172.69.43.183 at 23:46, 12 November 2024

2024-11-12T23:46:27Z

172.71.175.23: Circles are descended from polygons and squares are descended from triangles

2024-11-12T21:48:48Z

Circles are descended from polygons and squares are descended from triangles

172.70.43.29: Adding family tree

2024-11-12T20:14:29Z

Adding family tree

162.158.41.73: Carcinization comment

2024-11-12T20:11:41Z

Carcinization comment

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 : --[[User:Quantum7|Quantum7]] ([[User talk:Quantum7|talk]]) 13:44, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
-== Is this a flatworld reference? ==
+; Is this a flatworld reference?
-Intentional or unintentional, treating geometric shapes as related life forms is quite reminiscent of flatworld.
+Intentional or unintentional, treating geometric shapes as related life forms is quite reminiscent of flatworld. {{unsigned ip|172.68.245.207|14:33, 14 November 2024}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:33, 14 November 2024
Line 45:		Line 45:
	:[[File:geometriphylogenetics_annotated.png]]		:[[File:geometriphylogenetics_annotated.png]]
	: --[[User:Quantum7\|Quantum7]] ([[User talk:Quantum7\|talk]]) 13:44, 14 November 2024 (UTC)		: --[[User:Quantum7\|Quantum7]] ([[User talk:Quantum7\|talk]]) 13:44, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Is this a flatworld reference? ==
		+
		+	Intentional or unintentional, treating geometric shapes as related life forms is quite reminiscent of flatworld.

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 Why was phylogenetic analysis required to establish this relationship? Reuleaux triangles are an intermediate form, demonstrating a close relation between circles and triangles. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.130.208|172.71.130.208]] 06:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
 ''Obviously'', he's doing phylogenetics wrong: the pentagons (& hexagons, not shown) should also be shown as descending from the circles. Plus, the ovoids (far more than a middle step between lentiform & triangle, truly an extant branch in their own right) are not represented ''at all''. A major oversight, to cut such corners, given the point he's circling about?
@@ Line 43: / Line 42: @@
 If anyone would like to peer review me, I've filled in the "missing links" https://jimmysfiles.com/misc/evolution-of-shapes.png {{unsigned ip|172.69.194.78|10:18, 13 November 2024}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:21, 13 November 2024
Line 42:		Line 42:
	Exciting new research may have found the universal common ancestor, which is being called a 'point'.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.111\|172.70.86.111]] 09:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)		Exciting new research may have found the universal common ancestor, which is being called a 'point'.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.111\|172.70.86.111]] 09:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

−	If anyone would like to peer review me, I've filled in the "missing links" https://jimmysfiles.com/misc/evolution-of-shapes.png	+	If anyone would like to peer review me, I've filled in the "missing links" https://jimmysfiles.com/misc/evolution-of-shapes.png {{unsigned ip\|172.69.194.78\|10:18, 13 November 2024}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:18, 13 November 2024
Line 41:		Line 41:

	Exciting new research may have found the universal common ancestor, which is being called a 'point'.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.111\|172.70.86.111]] 09:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)		Exciting new research may have found the universal common ancestor, which is being called a 'point'.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.111\|172.70.86.111]] 09:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	If anyone would like to peer review me, I've filled in the "missing links" https://jimmysfiles.com/misc/evolution-of-shapes.png

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:32, 13 November 2024
Line 39:		Line 39:

	[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland Circles are descended from polygons and squares are descended from triangles], at least according to the renowned expert [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Abbott_Abbott Edwin Abbott Abbott]. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.175.23\|172.71.175.23]] 21:48, 12 November 2024 (UTC)		[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland Circles are descended from polygons and squares are descended from triangles], at least according to the renowned expert [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Abbott_Abbott Edwin Abbott Abbott]. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.175.23\|172.71.175.23]] 21:48, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	Exciting new research may have found the universal common ancestor, which is being called a 'point'.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.111\|172.70.86.111]] 09:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 06:31, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
 :There are two competing theories of the origin of circles. They are either very basal polygons (having one side) or very derived (having infinite sides). It's possible that both are true and 'circle' is a polyphyletic group. [[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 16:19, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
+::Circles are priests, obviously. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.183|172.69.43.183]] 23:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
 Someone should add something about how circles and triangles are related through trig in a way that the rest aren't. Sorry I am new to this and don't know how to format my comment correctly.
@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 It also reminds me of the quadrilateral family tree (google it, I guess), which has always bothered me exactly because it shows just how unapplicable phylogenetics is to geometry, or they are just super incestuous in a time-traveling sort of way? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.43.29|172.70.43.29]] 20:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
 [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland Circles are descended from polygons and squares are descended from triangles], at least according to the renowned expert [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Abbott_Abbott Edwin Abbott Abbott].  [[Special:Contributions/172.71.175.23|172.71.175.23]] 21:48, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:48, 12 November 2024
Line 36:		Line 36:

	It also reminds me of the quadrilateral family tree (google it, I guess), which has always bothered me exactly because it shows just how unapplicable phylogenetics is to geometry, or they are just super incestuous in a time-traveling sort of way? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.43.29\|172.70.43.29]] 20:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)		It also reminds me of the quadrilateral family tree (google it, I guess), which has always bothered me exactly because it shows just how unapplicable phylogenetics is to geometry, or they are just super incestuous in a time-traveling sort of way? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.43.29\|172.70.43.29]] 20:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland Circles are descended from polygons and squares are descended from triangles], at least according to the renowned expert [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Abbott_Abbott Edwin Abbott Abbott]. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.175.23\|172.71.175.23]] 21:48, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:14, 12 November 2024
Line 34:		Line 34:

	'''Obviously''' both triangles and squares descended from circles. But, while triangles evolved from circles with protrusions that extended into points for improved dynamics, squares evolved from circles that developed flattened sides for more stability. Looking forward at their descendants, we see that both shapes have crab-like descendants. But again, developed from very different mechanisms: The evolved triangles's points split and reformed into the crab claws, while the squares evolved into rectangles which developed concave ends that eventually consolidated into the crab claw shape. [[2314: Carcinization]] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.73\|162.158.41.73]] 20:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)		'''Obviously''' both triangles and squares descended from circles. But, while triangles evolved from circles with protrusions that extended into points for improved dynamics, squares evolved from circles that developed flattened sides for more stability. Looking forward at their descendants, we see that both shapes have crab-like descendants. But again, developed from very different mechanisms: The evolved triangles's points split and reformed into the crab claws, while the squares evolved into rectangles which developed concave ends that eventually consolidated into the crab claw shape. [[2314: Carcinization]] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.73\|162.158.41.73]] 20:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	It also reminds me of the quadrilateral family tree (google it, I guess), which has always bothered me exactly because it shows just how unapplicable phylogenetics is to geometry, or they are just super incestuous in a time-traveling sort of way? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.43.29\|172.70.43.29]] 20:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:11, 12 November 2024
Line 32:		Line 32:

	Reminds me of pedigree genetic charts as well, anyways you geomreationists are so absurdly wrong it's laughable /j [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.130\|108.162.238.130]] 13:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)		Reminds me of pedigree genetic charts as well, anyways you geomreationists are so absurdly wrong it's laughable /j [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.130\|108.162.238.130]] 13:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	'''Obviously''' both triangles and squares descended from circles. But, while triangles evolved from circles with protrusions that extended into points for improved dynamics, squares evolved from circles that developed flattened sides for more stability. Looking forward at their descendants, we see that both shapes have crab-like descendants. But again, developed from very different mechanisms: The evolved triangles's points split and reformed into the crab claws, while the squares evolved into rectangles which developed concave ends that eventually consolidated into the crab claw shape. [[2314: Carcinization]] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.73\|162.158.41.73]] 20:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)