Interdependent hexagons

Posted by hexnet ::

Breaking news from the world of HEXAGONS:

While reviewing the hexagonal news this morn, I ran across an article describing some sort of Hexagon Project out of Scranton, Pennsylvania. Looking into it further, I expected to find that—like many hexagon-identified things these days—the "hexagon" was a purely metaphorical branding feature. To my surprise though, it not only involves literal hexagons, but the hexagonal geometry seems to have been deliberately and consciously chosen for very hexagonally-aware reasons. The project's page explains, under the heading "Why a hexagon?":

"The hexagon is a composition of complex relationships, interdependent lines, like bonds of human connection, strengthened in multiples into an infinite network of connections. It maintains its own presence as a shape, symbol of light and life, yet, structurally, destined to be part of a whole—a splendid architectural element, infinitely expandable."

Watts on Hexagons

Posted by hexnet ::

[Edit 2013-10: The existence of this post has bothered me since I first published it three years ago. Basically, this was intended as the first installment of what was to have been a sprawling series of posts attempting to reconcile what I will loosely term "Eastern monism" with the semantically precise, mathematical ontology I have been trying to develop in light of hexagonal principles—and in a real, meaningful way, not just in some fake-ass pop quantum mysticism sense. I won't recapitulate my whole line of thought here, but suffice to say I had and continue to have more substantive and I think relevant ideas on these matters than those expounded in this limited post, which by itself I think ends up conveying either that I misunderstand or misinterpret people like Watts, or that I am not particularly interested in the finer implications of what they tried to communicate. And I would like to think neither is true. Watts was a huge intellectual influence on me in my youth, and it was writings such as his that actually turned me from my earlier phase of hexagonal thinking as a teenager—only to return to it with more clarity of thought over a decade later. And having later become of aware of his passing references to hexagons, I was very eager to draw out these ideas and sort of riff on them with the greater perspective gained from the ensuing years. But I left the task unfinished, and, again, I think this post, by itself, is sort of weird. I gave serious thought to deleting it or leaving it unpublished in this latest iteration of the site, but ultimately decided to leave it here, with this disclaimer. I intend to revisit these issues at some point, hopefully in greater detail, at which point I will perhaps modify or edit this post further.]

"Where is it writ large that talking monkeys should be able to model the cosmos?" – Terence McKenna

Some sort of ideogram or something in a thing idk I remember reading a short but eloquent endorsement of hexagons by Alan Watts once, probably seven or eight years ago. Since I wasn't particularly interested in hexagons at the time, I quickly forgot about it, and where exactly I had read it. However, times have changed and my hexagonal thinking has evolved, and with the advent of Google Books and all, I recently decided to look into the matter further. After an exhaustive search, I found two mentions of hexagons in Watts' books, which I shall now share with you, and duly expound upon.

I am not entirely sure either of these is in fact the passage I remember reading, but if it were either of them it would be this first one, which can be found in the essay What on Earth Are We Doing?, from the collection Cloud-Hidden, Whereabouts Unknown:

Hexnet.org v.3.0 release notes

Posted by hexnet ::

“When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.” – Hunter S. Thompson

Scorcher The last components necessary to make this site passably acceptable to me were completed last evening. Thus, as promised, on time and under budget, I hereby declare this site to exist. Several important facts to keep in mind:

First and foremost, the site is of course not really done. Also it still sort of sucks. But it is functional enough that it stands on its own, does not have any overtly malfunctioning content, and generally seems to work pretty well, so rather than delaying any longer I am just going to put it out there. But I expect to be adding many useful and pertinent features and content items in the coming weeks and months. So check back often or something.

Tags:

The way of the tau

Posted by hexnet ::

Dozenal tau unit circle An astute reader recently brought to my attention the nascent movement afoot to replace π in common usage with the number now unfortunately known as 2π—viz., 6;349419 (dec. 6.283186):

(For a reasonably convincing argument on why the letter τ (tau) in particular should be adopted for this value, please read Mr. Hartl's manifesto.)

The fundamental point here is that, in trigonometry and all other manner of angle-measuring endeavors, what we care about is the radius of a circle, not its diameter. The one follows from the other to be sure, but at the end of the day the diameter is more usefully considered twice the radius than the radius is half the diameter. A circle is a circumference around a center—it is the measure of this distance between center and circumference that is elemental to the idea of a circle, not the rather incidental fact that its full width is twice that same distance.

Pardon our delay

Posted by hexnet ::

Oh the huge manatee I seem to have taken an unintentional hiatus from putting my ass into this project, due largely to the fact that it has of late been too hot to move, think, or do anything at all really. Come hell or high water though, I will "launch" this site by the first of Sextilis, being actually the fifteenth (13th;) anniversary of the launch of my first Hexnet site, back in 1995. That is probably an unnecessarily dramatic theme to tie in with this whole procedure, but it seems silly to allow such an auspicious date to pass unobserved. Also, I really need to get on with this. I mean, I have numerous medium-term goals to tweak the layout—I want to clean up and expand the links section, among other things—but most of that can wait. I am really just trying to wrap up a bit of library content, actually. Which at this point seems fairly silly, since I long ago gave up on my original idea of having some sort of centralized "Hexagonal Manifesto" or what have you, in favor of a more modular if somewhat disjointed collection of one-off content items and such. Anyway, since 1 August falls lamentably on a Sunday this year, which is a terrible day to do anything PR-wise (as is the entire month of August, really), I expect to do some sort of formal what have you by next week some time. Or you know whenever.

That is all. Thank you for your attention

Tags:

Civilization and its contents

Posted by hexnet ::

Civ V screenshot Anyone following the hexagonal news of late has no doubt noticed a flurry of stories related to the upcoming release of Civilization V, and in particular its new hexagonal tile system. In this blog's opinion, the adoption of hexagonal tiles by the Civ franchise is a long overdue development, and frankly one that should've been incorporated into at least the last two Civ releases. Indeed, many DOS-based strategy games have used hexagonal tiles going back to the late '80s, and one has to wonder why Civilization ever used square tiles. (I remember playing the original Civilization in the early '90s, well before the advent of my own hexagonal illumination, and thinking that, in fact, it would be better with a hexagonal grid. I can only imagine part of the media excitement here—aside from just the general awesomeness of hexagons—is due to the fact that many, many other people have had the exact same thought over the past twenty years.)

Hexnet logo light blue Hexagon horizontal light blue