"There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't" - seen on a T-shirt.

"Shit happens, but in a patterned way." - my paraphrase of Chaos Theory.

Relevant links to this blog:

The 5 tenets - Common Universal Pattern aka 'is'
The broken circle's place in 'is'
The syntax of 'is'
Binary Agreement Theory (B.A.T.)


I continued reading Chaos: Making a New Science last night, and want to give some quotations from it here, each with an editorial comment attached. In a way, similar to a kid aspiring to be a great rock guitarist practicing his air-guitar endlessly, I did a lot of mental air fist-punching as I was reading (I felt a bit like Tom Cruise in that classic scene from 'Risky Business'!). I was saying "Yes! That's what I've been trying to say!" a lot, or "That fits exactly within my theory." Or "My theory fits exactly within that idea." Not claiming that I've invented or re-invented Chaos Theory, I'm claiming that it doesn't unravel my theory at all, in fact it supports it, includes it, but most significantly, is included within it. I'm taking chaos theory out of the lab, one natural step further.

I also had the epiphanous moment where I had the thought that may be the source of all my serendipities whereof I so often speak....I view such events and occurences that way because they reinforce the theory of 'is' precepts. So, it's like I've "been there before". Effect-cause relationship. As I do more and more reading, regardless the topic, book, conversation or website I choose, I experience the "I know this already" feeling at some perceptible, awareness level.

So, on with the quotes:

"He [Kuhn] deflated the view of science as an orderly process of asking questions and finding their answers." [note: my theory boldly claims, and shows (or will show) to hold the potential for all answers]

"In Bejamin Franklin's time, the handful of scientists trying to understand electricity could speak almost as easily to laymen as to each other, because they had not yet reached a stage where they could take for granted a common, specialized language for the phenomena they were studying." [note: not only am I developing a specialized language, but my theory, by its own definition must extend beyond a science laboratory, and be a part of a layman's existence and awareness]

"Under normal conditions the research scientist is not an innovator but a solver of puzzles, and the puzzles upon which he concentrates are just those which he believes can both be stated and solved within the existing scientific tradition." [note: my theory simultaneously solves itself with scientific tradition, and rejects scientific tradition as an unnecessary, and therefore unbearable, or sheddable, restriction]

"Then there are revolutions. ...its central discoveries often come from people straying outside the normal bounds of their specialities. The problems that obsess these theorists are not recognized as legitimate lines of inquiry." [note: I'm certainly outside the normal bounds of my specialty (which, if asked, I would claim to be education; and yet education is a key to presenting the theory in an understandable format); I'm certainly obsessed with it to some modest degree {smile!}, and I doubt too many at this point would recognize my writing so far as legitimate...but wait till I figure out the right way to get what's 'in here' (pointing to head) 'out there' (pointing to screen)!]

"A few freethinkers, working alone, unable to explain where they are headed, afraid even to tell their colleagues what they are doing --- that romantic image lies at the heart of Kuhn's scheme, and it has occurred in real life, time and time again, in the exploration of chaos." [note: believable precedence exists, if required as authentication through some bizarre stretch of illogic!]

"Others felt that for the first time in their professional lives they were witnessing a true paradigm shift, a transformation in a way of thinking." [yup!]

"To some the difficulty of communicating the new ideas and the ferocious resistance from traditional quarters showed how revolutionary the new science was. Shallow ideas can be assimilated; ideas that require people to reorganize their picture of the world provoke hostility." [begging the question "how to unfold the theory, to what audience, in what forum or fora, with what timing? My current thinking is to continue dumping scattered mind-pieces here, like dumping out the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, and then gather a more-organized picture together in the form of a cohesive website and/or book or publication of some sort]

"Established sciences take for granted a body of knowledge that serves as a communal starting point for investigation." [my theory changes and re-defines the communal starting point, and makes it common even beyond the established sciences...totally in-step and more generalized than even that which exists today]

"New hopes, new styles, and, most important, a new way of seeing. Revolutions do not come piecemeal. One account of nature replaces another." [Punching fist in air! and shouting a mental "yes"!]

"As chaos began to unite the study of different systems, the unexpected possibilities extended, one physicist wrote, to "physiological and psychiatric medicine, economic forecasting, and perhaps the evolution of society." [see note about communal (read 'universal') starting point above]

"Those studying chaotic dynamics discovered that the disorderly behaviour of simple systems acted as a creative process. It generated complexity; richly organized patterns, sometimes stable and sometimes unstable, sometimes finite and sometimes infinite, but always with the fascination of living things. That was why scientists played with toys." [sometimes this, sometimes that, covering everything, mirror images, playing both ends towards the middle, simultaneously...have you heard these words, in various parsed forms, before in my blogs?]

"But simulation brings its own problem; the tiny imprecision built into each calculation rapidly takes over, because this is a system with sensitive dependence on intial conditions. Before long, the signal disappears and all that remains is noise. Or is it? Lorenz had found unpredictability, but he had also found pattern. Others too, discovered suggestions of structure amid seemingly random behaviour." [I look for and see patterns in everything...esp. patterns of three's as I discussed in a recent blog. My theory begins with the 'seed', before those initial signals have become distorted, inevitably or not]

"Smale was looking at nonlinear oscillators, chaotic oscillators, and seeing things that physicists had learned not to see." [I've often been called creative which I used to deny, equating it with artistic. I've learned the more creative you are, the more things you notice; science limits view through specializations, as Gleick points out here, scientists 'learn not to see' because they limit their perspective to the micro-view of a discipline; my theory includes all micro-views as essential parts of its macro views]

"They imagine surfaces not just in the one-, two-, and three-dimensional universe of Euclid, but in spaces of many dimensions, impossible to visualize. Topology is geometry on rubber sheets. It concerns the qualitative rather than the quantitative." [see tenet #5 for the description of the playing field for my theory...in a word, {ALL.....NOT-ALL}]

"Like Poincaire, Smale wanted to understand them globally, meaning that he wanted to understand the entire realm of possibilities at once" [note: I use the word 'simultaneous' here]

"For a simple system, the shape might be some kind of curved surface; for a complicated system, a manifold of many dimensions [note: see tenet #5 again]. A single point [I call a 'dot'] on such a surface represents the state of a system at an instant frozen in time [I call it the 'is'-SEED]"

_____________________________________________________

I won't go on, but I could. Am I simply being arrogant, implying that I possess this God-like piece of knowledge that will unlock all the mysteries of existence, the universe and beyond? Perhaps. Perhaps not. My theory doesn't make judgements. It sits in the gap of the broken circle, in neutral territory between pure opposites, having access to both, judging neither, having tolerance for both and defaulting to the right one.

I'll tell you what I am, though. I am emboldened to pursue it for as long as it needs to be pursued by me, and for as long as I choose to pursue it. With an honest and frank admission of fairly total lack of self-value for most of my living years, I have persistently viewed myself and my offerings as being unworthy of contemplation. That self-view has shifted dramatically in the past five or ten years, and is exponentially reinforcing itself with each passing day, just as the theory predicts it would.....with chaotic, apparent setbacks from time to time (bipolar manic attacks, for instance). Probably learning pauses, or some other pattern not yet recognized.

I'm off to Ottawa to visit with my brother and his wife for Easter, so I leave you with best wishes for the holiday; to my Christian and other religious friends, I'll reflect with you on the holy significance at this time of the calendar. To everyone, of course, I simply wish you PEACE and, to anyone wanting it... lots of chocolate! This peace link will take you to an article from the National Catholic Reporter, titled "Along with jelly beans and chocolate rabbits: guns and GI Joes: Grandmothers for peace protest war toys in Easter baskets".

They say if you stand at the corner of Portage and Main in Winnipeg long enough, eventually you'll meet whoever you're waiting for. They also say you'll find virtually anything on the internet....I'm guessing this article is pretty good proof of that...I entered the words 'peace, Easter, chocolate' into google, and got an astounding 1,620,000 hits. Things like that amaze me!

"I've learned that no matter how thin you slice it, there always two sides." - age 58

Posted by Evydense on Wednesday, April 12, 2006 at 9:25 a.m. | Permalink