Literally

The catch may be in the fold.  The pun is in the journalism.  The trick or narrative may be in the math and physics.  The point is: what is a dimension?  Not to mention: what is a point?  A point may represent a perspective in space as well as what it may represent in view of the perspective.  A point has no dimension.  Two points represent 1 dimension or a line.   Three non-linear points determine a plane or represent 2 dimensions.  Four non-planar points, require 3 dimensions and represent volume or space.  But dimensions are one level below the point[!]

Time is often referred to as the 4th dimension.  But returning to a point as representing no dimensions, 4 points equilaterally spaced require 3 dimensions (x, y & z).

(1-21-16)

1.):  Forward (Ironically), Para~graph Three!, Coordinary, Rough Philosophy, Order of Inserts.

2.): FOOTNOTES PAGE January 2016 (page 1),  Literally , Nadir, Dimentionalism(sic).

Then there is the Platonic Cave(or ideal). 
The tetrahedron is the most basic platonic form or ideal.  At least in our geometry, four points are the most that can be in perfect contact with each other.  Although a review of the perspectivism of Plato may be necessary. 

2-20-11 Under consideration

Navigation / Divagation and Stochasticism...
-----
From :

[A,B updates]
[2-18-11 Blank(updated)Network- Parallel Channel(See The Pair o' Lax View ) Updates under construction. SERIOUSLY these are a serious sorting of views.]

[See Follow Up]

[Note Jumping the Gun Again! i.e breaking in-box of (news) sorts
(AKA: sports metaphor not target or weapon analogy)
Meaning the CPAC divide regarding the Islamophia section of The Progress Report is hint at the LAME O' PHOBIA of Platonic Dialogue not to mention a cave[of irony] of or con tent... or CAP]
-----

UNDER CONSTRUCTION:What conservatives really want. By George Lakoff (good read)
Find NY Times article on Egypt
and improve Aristotellian, Rand and Fourth Law of Logic connections, regarding Parallax View (the perspective, not the movie) relates to Pair o'Lax Views, A & B. Not to mention BTW: Going Egypt or Cheesehead. Let alone Ike.

[NOTE: see labels below, and note date of posting will remain in heading(lede) as this post may be relocated, but never without notation. Also except in this case which is under construction, the bottom links (after a certain date) connect to the immediately prior posts.]

The New Compendium

NOT!
Really...probably not.
But it sounds like an epoch
and not quite an anthology,
but hopefully not an achronism.

THE POINT?
A cover page of sorts.
Yeah that's the ticket!
...the dynamics of progress,

Six Things Everybody Knows About Deficits ...
That Are Completely Untrue
Which I rephrase as truths:

1.) Current and future spending are not the problem with the defecit, except for paying for our history.
2.) Social Security is not a big deal to fix(separately), but could be impacted by the budget and other decisions.
3.) Austerity and investment are different stories, that both have an impact on the budget and winning the future as well as the now.
4.) Concessions should not be trickle down but incentives should be target up.
5.) Wall Street is not fixed enough to be that big or permanent a part of the solution.
6.) Social Security is not on the same budget table as Medicare and Medicaid and calling them "entitlements" is misleading, and means testing or tax changes could address their impact on our economy.

[Mis-click of the mouse of the day]
Slash Segue(Aristotellian)[A]
Maybe you had to be there.
The Bill Thing.
The Frackin' Thing.
The Club of Construction.[ B ]
The King Tut of Rhetoric
Not to mention Divagation.

BTW: Going Egypt depends on who you ask, and I am not asking Stephen or Steve King***. And Going Wisconsin should not mean Going Cheesehead*. But I will tie this up with a preamble. If I may paraphrase and extend the remarks of a caller to the Norman Goldman Show: If you are not for "a more perfect Union" you may be Un-American. If you are not willing "to promote the General Welfare" you may be militant against "the Blessings of Liberty", but one can take words (and rhetoric or puns) too far. I suggest the word militant not be used, and that nowwhere near the tactics be used in political protests** but just who expects whom to turn the other cheek? There seems to be a slippery slope in the free speech zone.

* my original intent was a pun on Ed Head, which is not a Soft Head, but then there may be a lede to leader in the eventual link.[I believe it was a caller to the Ed Schultz Show that lead me to independently think that the failure of unions in Wisconsin would put a whole new spin on the name Cheeseheads.]

** the right to protest and any intent to break the law, includes the right to be arrested but not beaten, though we should understand that resistence is not futile but few put up with it well

*** see previous clause "divagation" link and prior line "Tut" for the two Kings.

[A,B updates]
[2-18-11 Blank(updated)Network- Parallel Channel(See The Pair o' Lax View ) Updates under construction. SERIOUSLY these are a serious sorting of views.]

[See Follow Up]

[Note Jumping the Gun Again! i.e breaking in-box of (news) sorts (AKA: sports metaphor not target or weapon analogy) Meaning the CPAC divide regarding the Islamophia section of The Progress Report is hint at the LAME O' PHOBIA of Platonic Dialogue not to mention a cave[of irony] of or con tent... or CAP]

Scatmonger?

I am not going to say, I saw it coming,
nor take responsibility for the May day of Ed,but there may be a silver lining.

Hint: Platonic Dialogue under Bat Cave.
It's not a quid pro quo for turning or tipping the tables
and it's not all that.