Energy and Structure

[Buddy]

I had the idea that the I Ching was something like a mathematical list of all the situations a person could be in, corresponding to the number of influences that can affect us in our lives.

My idea is that the numbers relevant to I Ching are just the mathematical boundaries or ways to separate the influences that are most present in specific situations. Personally, I don't see a direct correlation between the math and specific situations, or any way to make direct correlations, but then, what I don't see ATM is not necessarily relevant, of course.

Would it be possible, to take G's 48 "influences" or whatnot and try to name them and ascribe them to experiences and situations?

My first reaction is 'yes', but I'm not sure how I would proceed with that. I think I'm missing the obvious, in that G's 48 represent some laws of physics we may already be familiar with and to which we're maybe not giving enough attention. After all, there are discoveries in physics we are able to take for granted today that weren't known in G's time. That's similar to how ideas that seemed magical and profound when the TAO was written might come across as commonplace wisdom to some people in today's time.

If nothing else, then perhaps we could try to use what we know to reverse-engineer divination techniques?

Do you know of any esoteric divination techniques with a proven track record with respect to specific outcomes?

AFAIK, divination relies on dowsing-type stuff, IE the subconscious, pendulums, dice/coin throwing, random/chaotic processes and whatnot, and I don't think we could separate this from divining. But, perhaps this "sacred math" was used to construct the "map" which is dowsed, and if the map were memorized it may help give us the potential, with careful observation, to see the influences acting in real-time.

This reminds me of BaGua I Ching and the Feng shui overlay map, but it's all still mysterious to me. I do believe that reality is quantum in nature and that quantum reality is best expressed in general terms ("reality is generality" where and when the generality is accurate) but even the mathematical precision of probability theory still results in predictions of a probability rather than a specific outcome, so, to my perception there's still a gap to cross before divination techniques can have maximum utility.

Would you agree that there is a kind of practical foresight that is natural for humans and if it were unblocked people would rely on that instead of external forms? If there is such a thing, then it would be more beneficial for the general run of humanity to throw away divination techniques for now and concentrate on cleaning their machines, wouldn't it?

For instance, here's two examples:

1) We know a lot about how the dietary experiment helps get rid of brain fog and similar phenomena and improves thought clarity. We have statements from forum members to that effect. What if some of this healthy intervention results in a proper movement of glutamate and magnesium into and out of an ion channel (the NMDA receptor) on a cell where Ca2+ and Na+ going into a cell and K+ coming out of the cell needs to happen naturally and unimpeded?

This is an oversimplification, but the basic idea is that the NMDA receptor functions as a "molecular coincidence detector" in humans and in mouse brains. Experimentation with mice have already fully shown the NMDA receptor's unique property for learning and memory. Enhanced memory is the most exciting thing to me, but there are other benefits. Specifically the mice studies involved at least seven different memory tests which include novel object recognition memory, contextual and cue fear memory, fear extinction learning, spatial maze, spatial working memory (which has been another of your interests) and more to boot.

Also noteworthy, several follow-up studies not only confirmed the original findings but also show that the mice continued to outperform age-matched controls - even at advanced ages - leading to speculation about implications for human Alzheimer's condition and mild cognitive impairment.

Source: Basic Neurochemistry, Eighth Edition: Principles of Molecular, Cellular, and Medical Neurobiology, pg 969-71 for the specific relevant statements and Mae-Wan Ho's work in quantum biology for the deeper context related to human physiology.

2) Do you recall that SoTT was created because it seems people can't remember what happened from one day, week, month or year to another? What's the point of that kind of memory? To be able to hold history in mind long enough to spot, not just simple patterns, but for "coincidence detection", e.g., seeing super patterns or meta-patterns in play so that you can experience a kind of projection of what's developing (coming) and maybe a little bit of time to prepare. This capacity scales to context just like any geometric fractal, cognitive algorithm or feedback loop and can be immediately useful in one's own local context - such as one's wage-driven work or occupation. For example: catching a glimpse of a certain paradigm or economic model changing allows you time to change with it so you don't get stuck with unsaleable inventory, for example.

What has all this to do with Energy and Structure? Not sure yet, but it seems related to an interest in divination. Didn't Gurdjieff say a good businessman can see the future out of necessity?

 

[Buddy]

Would it be possible, to take G's 48 "influences" or whatnot and try to name them and ascribe them to experiences and situations?

I just realized why my first reaction to this question was "yes, but..."

It relates to something Beelzebub said to his Grandson (from the 1950 version of chapter 39) regarding these laws. In this excerpt, Beelzebub is saying the first two laws (Law of Three and Law of Seven) are the most important to try and understand. The reason is related, not to the information itself, but to the person who is doing the studying.

"I repeat, my boy: Try very hard to understand everything that will relate to both these fundamental cosmic sacred laws, since knowledge of these sacred laws, particularly knowledge relating to the particularities of the sacred Heptaparaparshinokh, will help you in the future to understand very easily and very well all the second-grade and third-grade laws of World-creation and World-existence.

Likewise, an all-round awareness of everything concerning these sacred laws also conduces, in general, to this, that three-brained beings irrespective of the form of their exterior coating, by becoming capable in the presence of all cosmic factors not depending on them and arising round about them - both the personally favorable as well as the unfavorable - of pondering on the sense of existence, acquire data for the elucidation and reconciliation in themselves of that, what is called, 'individual collision' which often arises, in general, in three-brained beings from the contradiction between the concrete results flowing from the processes of all the cosmic laws and the results presupposed and even quite surely expected by their what is called 'sane-logic'; and thus, correctly evaluating the essential significance of their own presence, they become capable of becoming aware of the genuine corresponding place for themselves in these common-cosmic actualizations.

"In short, the transmutation in themselves of an all round understanding of the functioning of both these fundamental sacred laws conduces to this, that in the common presences of three-brained beings, data are crystallized for engendering that Divine property which it is indispensable for every normal three-brained being to have and which exists under the name of 'Semooniranoos'; of this your favorites have also an approximate representation, and they call it 'impartiality.'

Note the implication of a relationship between identifying with information and an ability to understand it. To me, "impartiality" is one way to represent our "genuine corresponding place" in these terms.

 

[monotonic]

You bring up all good points. There is no free lunch. I thought however that divination might hold some clues concerning cosmic laws, or another perspective. There is the map and then there is the subconscious of the user, which determines the effectiveness of the divination. The map is only a tool, and could be used consciously or subconsciously. I was meaning to use the map with conscious knowledge of how to apply it, drawing on observations of the world, rather than divination. It's not really unlike keeping a chart on the wall as reference so you can glance at it. Eventually the understanding you internalize makes it obsolete. Even then, it is helpful to have for demonstration purposes or conferences or swapping notes.

For instance, this thread is full of charts and graphs with lines of numbers. We are guessing that these formations are important to cosmic laws and the goal in the end, is to ascribe significance to them on our level, no?

 

[Buddy]

You bring up all good points. There is no free lunch.

Perceptive. Indeed, conscious labor and intentional suffering (Being Partkdolg Duty) relates as much to the energy we expend on building our personal maps as it does on helping others in various ways.

I thought however that divination might hold some clues concerning cosmic laws, or another perspective. There is the map and then there is the subconscious of the user, which determines the effectiveness of the divination. The map is only a tool, and could be used consciously or subconsciously.

Yep. To me, an important consideration is accuracy. For example, when I researched I Ching (book of changes), I realized this 'book on changes' has, itself, been through changes over the years. Just thinking about learning I Ching as part and parcel of my overall life aim induces a kind of pre-frustration in me that feels like a kind of warning to back off and think about it first, so I do. For me, some activities are better experienced as recreational hobbies rather than serious pursuits connected to aim. That said, I Ching is still attractive to me.

For me, related to divination is Gurdjieff's apparent attitude towards things psi in nature - psychic abilities in general, perhaps, for people in the Work. He seemed to disfavor them and warn against chasing them or getting entranced or spell-bound if you happen to start noticing something like this developing in you. Why is that? (Please note I'm not referring to you necessarily or exclusively when I use second-person address)

Most people seem to think psychic abilities, divination abilities, or whatnot are a gift or a sign of evolution - as if psi abilities are a sign of advanced development. But maybe some psychic abilities, or certain qualities of a given psychic ability are retrograde in nature, in the sense that they existed in the past when we were not quite Man and Earth was not quite so concrete, metallic and solid and maybe even still connected to the moon. I don't know for sure, though, but G's writings provoke these thoughts in me.

When I think of divination, I tend to think there are natural, practical abilities latent in us that make the old-school understanding of psi look like a game of marbles as compared to three-dimensional chess.

I was meaning to use the map with conscious knowledge of how to apply it, drawing on observations of the world, rather than divination. It's not really unlike keeping a chart on the wall as reference so you can glance at it. Eventually the understanding you internalize makes it obsolete.

Well, if the map is useful, then it already represents your internal understanding to some extent, correct? Or should it? To my mind, there's always an unnecessary level of uncertainty here. I mean uncertainty at the granular level and unnecessary because we still have to make it our own so that we understand our own assumptions or axioms. If the map is a global map, then that's OK. G provides us that. It's OK, because in terms of using G's cosmology for our framework, we are using global methods (a programming term) and global methods can tell us what things have to be accounted for but can't tell us how to account for them. Filling in the details is an individual user requirement in this context, OSIT, and may involve searching for pieces of the picture across a broad landscape of experiences and subjects. For instance, Chaos or Complexity theory and the dual concepts Involution and Evolution provide lots of info onto which G's Law of Octaves can be mapped.

There's another risk for anyone having a preferential reliance on other people's stuff - at least maybe in the beginning and where we're not speaking in global terms. The risk of "selection and substitution", or what Pirsig calls the "Cleveland Harbor Effect". Here you go navigating your way through life with a map you didn't make and are not making as you go along and you find yourself out of touch with where you are literally or figuratively in terms of the forces currently active in your life (maybe it's midnight, waves are high and it's hard to see). So, you refer to this handy map and, based on your observations of buoys and other structures around you, make navigation decisions appropriate for maneuvering and eventually docking in Cleveland Harbor, only you're really in Boston Harbor. If you make it to a berth without mishap it's by pure luck or coincidence in harbor design. Or maybe a Guardian Angel.

...this thread is full of charts and graphs with lines of numbers. We are guessing that these formations are important to cosmic laws...

I would say definitely important to our internal modeling of our understanding of same...

...and the goal in the end, is to ascribe significance to them on our level, no?

...and as long as the significance ascribed is tentative, based on current level of understanding, OSIT.

I'm starting to feel a little uncomfortable, like I'm wasting your time. I'm thinking we have substantially diverged from where I imagine you wanted to be at this point on the thread. I feel like I should offer apologies for engaging this discussion without being able to help you map the introduced concepts to your preferred subject - the audio work you mentioned. That said, I'm glad, at least, that the reference to the online Wave chapter has been useful thus far.

 

[monotonic]

The original subject of this thread was concerning negative resistance and oscillation. I thought that these concepts could help fill gaps in others' understanding, to help plug the concept of FRV more snugly into our understanding of physics. Vibration is usually considered from a one-sided perspective, so to see the other side of the coin where negative resistance expediently describes how vibrations begin, rather than only how they die, may be helpful to some.

So far the discussion has only been able to connect FRV and negative resistance, which was mostly done by Laura years ago. There's nothing new under the sun!

There is a lot of material in this thread to go through when I want to study all these things. However my reading list is endless, and I must take it one word at a time (and I'm not a fast reader). Obtaining new study materials is opportunistic at best, so I don't know when I'll be able to add intelligently to this thread.

Now I realize you're probably confused because I've only been addressing ideas that I understand already. Now I feel stupid. All this time I've been really unsure whether we were getting anywhere or not. I, for sure, wasn't.

As for wasting my time, I'm flattered, but as time is subjective, only I can waste my time. :D

I don't think I'll stop having ideas about uniform negative resistance fields, emergent modal oscillation and so on, and I'll post those here. I have mostly been about working with clear observations in a non-speculative way, since I've been hung up on "what iffing" too many times before. I was enthusiastic about G's stuff because I see indications it has a solid background. But, as far as this thread is concerned I don't see much progress despite multiple opportunities to feed my imagination. The important connections are unclear because I haven't been able to study what G wrote, and I don't think I should do that just yet.

I agree with everything you just wrote at any rate. Only if I am firstly a conscious person, will Psi energy be of any actual use. And almost anything else is more convenient than Psi!

Thank you for the interesting discussion. I think we couldn't help but meander, considering the scope of the topics here. I do look forward to your responses, and I feel like I'm recognizing something whenever I read them.

 

[Buddy]

Now I realize you're probably confused because I've only been addressing ideas that I understand already.

Well, I was mostly just wondering.

I was enthusiastic about G's stuff because I see indications it has a solid background. But, as far as this thread is concerned I don't see much progress despite multiple opportunities to feed my imagination. The important connections are unclear because I haven't been able to study what G wrote, and I don't think I should do that just yet.

Well, when you get a roundtuit...there's lots that could be discussed - possibly in other threads. Take your observation of time as subjective for instance. G said it's the only thing in the universe that's not objective since it's not a fraction of anything else:

Only Time alone has no sense of objectivity, because it is not the result of the fractioning of any definite cosmic phenomena. And it does not issue from anything but blends away with everything and becomes self-sufficiently independent; therefore, in the whole of the Universe, it alone can be called and extolled as the Ideally-Unique-Subjective-Phenomenon.

All else is a fractional part of something else - a larger pattern. Self-similar patterns are fractals and octaves are fractals. When, in ISOTM, he talks about how (paraphrasing) the branching patterns of trees are similar to the patterns of leaf veins, rivers and blood vessels and air passages in the lungs, etc, he's talking about self-similar patterns, or fractals. In terms of octaves,

I agree with everything you just wrote at any rate. Only if I am firstly a conscious person, will Psi energy be of any actual use. And almost anything else is more convenient than Psi!

Well, don't forget the holography angle: in that numerous researchers, including Bohm and Pribram, have noted that many para-psychological phenomena become much more understandable in terms of the holographic paradigm. This is the Holographic Universe connection.


I wanted to leave you with one more idea: the word "center" as an antonym for "dissipate." Many people are unaware of this, but you can find it on some nursing entrance exams and it's context concerns the proper mixing of chemical compounds where the two chemical behavior choices are given as "to dissipate" or "to center." This also seems like a useful way to think about energy.

Earlier when you specified an interest in finding out what starts a vibration, I thought of "intent" and then energy being attracted and centering around intent. It may not be useful, but it covers the context of vibration and resonance in that intent is established in the player of a piano or a plucker of a string on one end and the structure of the piano or instrument body is the sounding board providing the resonance on the other end.

Anyway, I just wanted to mention that in case it might have a fit here somewhere.

Thank you for the interesting discussion.

Thank you for the opportunity to have it. :)

 

[monotonic]

Do you want to start another thread? I want to share my own understanding, but since this is a very nonlinear discussion I think it deserves its own space. At first I didn't realize how much I valued our discussion outside of this thread's topic. If we're both game, I'd like to continue. However you're much more well-read than me, so I worry my insights are somewhat elementary to you.

 

[Buddy]

Do you want to start another thread? I want to share my own understanding, but since this is a very nonlinear discussion I think it deserves its own space. At first I didn't realize how much I valued our discussion outside of this thread's topic. If we're both game, I'd like to continue. However you're much more well-read than me, so I worry my insights are somewhat elementary to you.

I'm willing to participate in whatever topic in which we may have mutual interest. I prefer to leave the topic and thread details for you.

...and I feel like I'm recognizing something whenever I read them.

Probably that's because we're interested in the same stuff. We just need to find a common language, that's all. For instance, I read back through your initial posts and determined that a couple of ideas kept sending my thoughts off on tangents (although I recognize my responsibility here). For one, you use 'resistance' as a global term and then specify negative or positive depending on whether resistance is above or below zero. I suppose that's fine in an audio context, but for me, neither 'resistance' nor 'breaking point' retained meaning with a context switch to mountains or minds or that Wave chapter.

I think I've resolved that issue for the most part. For me, the dual concepts 'coherence and decoherence' are more familiar and meaningful across contexts. And tonight, when I thought of your expression of 'accumulation' (of energy) and that reference to a possibility of an inability to be an energy sink and then I compare it to Jeffery Satinover's 'energy wells', the light went on, "ah, that's what he meant!"

Now I look at that mountain and see a chunk of it balanced between the pull of gravity on the one hand and a weak force of coherence to the rest of the mountain on the other hand. An input of energy at the right vibration and intensity tips the balance, adding attractive force to the pull of gravity or adding inhibiting force to the already weak coherence with the rest of the mountain. Depending on context, there are other ways to view the process as well. Certainly, "mountain" 'as a whole' is just a conceptual entity anyway. The actual patterns that compose it may indeed consist of aggregate patterns having varying strengths of coherence to each other.

If I have time tomorrow, I'll see if I can offer a summary of my understanding of your initial posts and questions. If we're on the same page, then we may as well continue on this thread. Considering the topic title, I think the potential for bringing lots of useful information to light is enormous. But that's a tentative assessment ATM; at least with respect to the audio hardware referents.

However you're much more well-read than me, so I worry my insights are somewhat elementary to you.

Well, I figure I'm both, well-read and not-so-well-read, both wise and foolish, both smart and dumb and all points (energy wells) in-between. I'm sure you'll see soon enough. No need to worry, all is lessons and I guess energy simply flows wherever there is potential.

 

[Buddy]

I went back to the first posts on the thread to offer my summary of understanding and, as it turns out, a few questions about the ideas presented.

The basic idea is that energy is stored in structure. A structure that's near the breaking point releases its energy. This often takes the form of oscillation. In other cases it may be sporadic or chaotic releases. This principle can be applied extremely broadly. I had the idea while studying feedback loop instability in audio circuits.

Since this is the main idea and you have the idea that this principle can be applied extremely broadly, I have a question or two about the above.

The basic idea is that energy is stored in structure.

That makes sense. The "weight" in a very old-fashioned clock is the stored (kinetic) energy, since, in a gravitational field, the weight is wanting to move toward the ground and you can connect a string to that weight and coil it around a shaft that can turn as the weight pulls on it. Other examples: an atom, a chemical compound, a battery, a living biological entity; a live tree or person, animal, plant - and all of that as contrasted with their "dead" (structurally non-energetic?) counterpart which would be completing a process of accelerated decay at that point.

A structure that's near the breaking point releases its energy.

By "breaking point", you refer to the meaning in "A structure at the verge of disintegration?"

This often takes the form of oscillation. In other cases it may be sporadic or chaotic releases.

Either releasing energy as a regular rhythmic swinging back and forth with respect to a median point or basically a short spurt or sputtering release of energy?

I had the idea while studying feedback loop instability in audio circuits.

I'm not very familiar with audio circuits, so what happens when a feedback loop becomes 'unstable'? Noise is introduced into the system, energy is lost, something verges on disintegration? or is it something else? Of what does the instability consist?

An avalanche would be an example. The structure of the cliff has settled into a structure that carries the weight of the cliff. But once that structure is broken, the release of energy is exponential.

An electric arc or discharge could be considered an avalanche of electrons. Sustained-arc transmitters used a constant arc kept at the breaking point to create oscillations used to transmit early radio waves. A structure at the verge of disintegration exhibits instability; instability makes resonators into oscillators. It can turn anything really into an antenna, to oscillate (mechanically or electrically) at its self-resonant frequency.

I believe I understand what you're saying with those examples, but I don't see a functional difference between resonators and oscillators. In fact, don't the words 'resonate', oscillate' and vibrate' refer to the same essential phenomena? Is there a difference between resonators and oscillators that's meaningful to the aforementioned principle?

This idea can be applied to people as well. A mind that's at the breaking point may become "unstable".

In a context of "mind", "breaking point" is a metaphor from material reality. And about a disintegrating and releasing of energy...you mean like a person going through an identity crisis displaying anxieties, confusion, frustrations, etc?

I also wonder if the electric current or voltage potential from the ground up causes a similar gradient in the brain, which acts to polarize thought and possibly cause mental instability if the mind is maladaptive, IE it cannot sink the current.

What current? What "electric current or voltage potential from the ground up" is being referred to?

The most interesting development I had was the idea that based on this you may posit that where there are growing oscillations or instability or possibly chaos, there is a decaying structure. This would mean any positive feedback loop, anything releasing more energy than it receives, does so because a structure which served to "shore up" the energy is eroding. I thought this was an interesting idea to try and apply anywhere you observe a large release of energy.

I'm not sure yet about any equating of "growing oscillations or instability or possibly chaos" with "a decaying structure" as a principle, although I can imagine certain scenarios in a material context where such might be the case.

There may be useful correlations for these ideas within Chaos or Complexity Theory, though, if we keep in mind that "chaos" is a human judgment vis-à-vis a human idea of "order" and is linked to human purposes and goals. The universe or DCM may not care one whit what we think of any transitory 'state' within its ordering processes.

With regard to Complexity Theory, where complexity has been reduced and purposeful order prevails, there will be existing structure - not "containing" the energy, but guiding it, OSIT.
This subject is context-sensitive, though. For example, on the one hand, if the servers and all the computers in the office went down all at once, then human business chaos would ensue as people scramble to figure out how to regain contact with others in the company and reestablish transaction communications with suppliers, shippers, sales force, other staff and customers. That's complexity arising from a previously organized and efficient structure having fallen apart. In this type of situation, human energy will follow all kinds of paths until an order has been created wherein all the details of the business become simplified and routinized again.

On the other hand, a color dotted 'noise picture' appears as a chaos of dots, but when you stare at a center point for a few minutes, eventually your mind will discover an organization in the scheme - that particular organization that reveals the image (a simplicity) hiding therein. That's also complexity, and nothing about the image has changed, but it's a complexity where hidden order has been discovered by a mind that believes that if there is something meaningful there it will be found.

One thing that intrigued me was in ISOTM where the action of the moon on life on the earth is compared to that of the weight in a clock.

Yes, in G's time, the "weight" in a clock stored the energy needed to drive or power the flywheel or 'escapement' mechanism. To me, "weight" is the key word because it's meaning can so easily be associated with 'gravity', 'coherence' (quantum theory, quantum philosophy and quantum biology) and "impression" - especially a force of impression.

As you're no doubt aware by now, the entire living biosphere of Earth is a lateral octave in G's cosmology that provides energy needed to cross the gap between Mi and Re on the vertical octave to do energy exchange with Earth and then on to the moon as the last note. You may also recall that the notes or set of vibrations between the first Do and the first gap (Do, Re and Mi) represents one of the three major oscillations (the "bottom" story in Man) which involves the sex center, the moving center and the instinctive center.

Oscillation itself could be considered a pattern, so perhaps the oscillation of organic life is supplying a pattern for the moon which will eventually become an oscillator itself under the influence of a new cosmic tension.

Well, actually, oscillation is a pattern. A guitar string (for example) that's vibrating in one of its natural patterns appears like that sine wave. If you look at this 'wave' when it's in motion, you'll probably notice there are certain positions along the string representation (baseline) that appear to be standing still. These positions, or points, are called 'nodes' and between each node there are other positions that appear to be vibrating back and forth between a large upward displacement to a large downward displacement. Those points are called 'anti-nodes'. So, a standing wave is not really a wave so much as it's an alternating pattern of nodal and anti-nodal positions in a standing wave pattern. Of course, there are other patterns of sine waves and each of those patterns are associated with one of the natural frequencies, or harmonics, of the guitar strings, but nodes and anti-nodes position changes still apply.

Not sure yet about how this understanding of oscillation and pattern can be transferred to the moon, but I think I'm getting close. :)

---------------------------

Since reading the Wave Chapter 27, you said that you've only connected FRV and negative resistance so far, so I'm wondering what's left to connect?

I don't think I'll stop having ideas about uniform negative resistance fields, emergent modal oscillation and so on, and I'll post those here.

Please do.

 

[Buddy]

In the post above where I said:


...the entire living biosphere of Earth is a lateral octave in G's cosmology that provides energy needed to cross the gap between Mi and Re on the vertical octave...

That should read "between Mi and Fa."

 

[monotonic]

By "breaking point", you refer to the meaning in "A structure at the verge of disintegration?"

Yes.

Either releasing energy as a regular rhythmic swinging back and forth with respect to a median point or basically a short spurt or sputtering release of energy?

The way the energy is released is determined purely by the medium or nature of the resonator. Nonlinear resonators may cause chaotic oscillations, whereas simple mechanical oscillators may swing back and forth very predictably. A resonator has two parameters, "reluctance" and "confidence". In nonlinear resonators these parameters are not constant, but changing depending on the state of the oscillator, producing either a bent motion or a even a highly chaotic one.

I'm not very familiar with audio circuits, so what happens when a feedback loop becomes 'unstable'? Noise is introduced into the system, energy is lost, something verges on disintegration? or is it something else? Of what does the instability consist?

A single transistor alone is very nonlinear and will distort a signal. To make this distortion inaudible, many transistors are used and a feedback loop is created so that the best transistors can control the rest. This way distortion is reduced. The control transistors measure the error and apply a fix. However if there is too much of a delay in applying the fix, then the error passes, then the fix is applied, but the fix is now an error which triggers the control transistor to apply another fix. So the amp goes around and around, chasing its own tail so to speak. These oscillations can happen anywhere from 200KHz-200MHz, and often overpower proceeding appliances, causing interference with radios for instance. They can cause noise, humming, static, failure, or just plain misery. This is the feedback theory POV, which is easier to talk about. However any such circuit when investigated will exhibit negative resistances interacting with resonances, and the cure could be understood as canceling the negative resistance. Both explanations are correct, and only in language are exclusive of one another.

I believe I understand what you're saying with those examples, but I don't see a functional difference between resonators and oscillators. In fact, don't the words 'resonate', oscillate' and vibrate' refer to the same essential phenomena? Is there a difference between resonators and oscillators that's meaningful to the aforementioned principle?

By oscillate I mean the vibrations are growing or sustained. To resonate simply means to bounce, or vibrate in sympathy with another source of vibration, but does not imply that the source of energy is local. So the definite difference between these terms is where resistance is in relation to zero. For oscillation, it is zero or negative. For resonance, it is positive but close to zero. Vibration generally refers to a more "forced" periodic motion, whereas resonance is a tuned kind of vibration. Vibration is like a car engine, resonance is like a chime. That is how I understand these terms, based on how I've heard them used.

In a context of "mind", "breaking point" is a metaphor from material reality. And about a disintegrating and releasing of energy...you mean like a person going through an identity crisis displaying anxieties, confusion, frustrations, etc?

Yes. In the case of a coping person, it may be one internal structure eroding but the whole structure is not compromised, so there is no overt outward display of instability. In other cases the whole structure may be compromized, or there will simply be no structures that can "catch" the structure that's eroding. In the latter case there will be an outward instability but it will be controlled.

What current? What "electric current or voltage potential from the ground up" is being referred to?

There are electric currents flowing between the ground and the sky. A current flowing through a medium will have a voltage gradient between the source and destination. That is, the current is felt at all points in the river, not just at the beginning and end. Anything falling within this gradient feels a fraction of the whole of the current. Individual neurons may be affected by such a current, depending on their alignment with it. As I understand, the more evolved brain sections are covering and above the more primitive sections.

I'm not sure yet about any equating of "growing oscillations or instability or possibly chaos" with "a decaying structure" as a principle, although I can imagine certain scenarios in a material context where such might be the case.

There may be useful correlations for these ideas within Chaos or Complexity Theory, though, if we keep in mind that "chaos" is a human judgment vis-à-vis a human idea of "order" and is linked to human purposes and goals. The universe or DCM may not care one whit what we think of any transitory 'state' within its ordering processes.

So far I've only been referring to mechanical phenomenon, nuts and bolts stuff. All of my psychological ideas don't need more than that; I'm just showing how a my ideas could be connected with psychology. Understanding negative resistance in relation to psychology may help with the foundation for understanding our "machine".

With regard to Complexity Theory, where complexity has been reduced and purposeful order prevails, there will be existing structure - not "containing" the energy, but guiding it, OSIT.

Is there a distinction between levels of observation? As I've been designing circuits for a while I can understand the indirect relationships between one part of a circuit and another, but a beginner will wander back and forth as if through a maze, seeing the parts in view but not the whole, until he is able to draw a map. Similarly, I think we must walk before we can run. The data most close at hand is what we can see from where we are, and it is often all we have with which to improve our understanding. Perhaps on a higher level energy is merely "guided", but we live in the pixels, and lots of surveying is necessary to get a glimpse of the big picture. This involves understanding basics first.

Not sure yet about how this understanding of oscillation and pattern can be transferred to the moon, but I think I'm getting close. :)

My thought was like a tape recorder, where tape is moved past an electromagnet modulated by an audio signal. Pretty simplistic, but we know that moving water underground can hold energetic recordings of past events.

Since reading the Wave Chapter 27, you said that you've only connected FRV and negative resistance so far, so I'm wondering what's left to connect?

I'm still wondering about the connection between energy and structure, IE information theory. Information seems inseparable from structure.

 

[Buddy]

Either releasing energy as a regular rhythmic swinging back and forth with respect to a median point or basically a short spurt or sputtering release of energy?

The way the energy is released is determined purely by the medium or nature of the resonator. Nonlinear resonators may cause chaotic oscillations, whereas simple mechanical oscillators may swing back and forth very predictably.

Yes, I did a bit of research on nonlinear resonators, so I see what you mean.

A resonator has two parameters, "reluctance" and "confidence". In nonlinear resonators these parameters are not constant, but changing depending on the state of the oscillator, producing either a bent motion or a even a highly chaotic one.

Also yeah because I looked up those parameters. At first I thought you were into Circuit Quantum Electrodynamics (cQED), but then I found a paper that addresses the relationship between nonlinear distortion measurements and nonlinearities which are the physical causes for signal distortion in loudspeakers, headphones, micro-speakers and other transducers and I figured that was closer to home base.

A single transistor alone is very nonlinear and will distort a signal. To make this distortion inaudible, many transistors are used and a feedback loop is created so that the best transistors can control the rest. This way distortion is reduced. The control transistors measure the error and apply a fix. However if there is too much of a delay in applying the fix, then the error passes, then the fix is applied, but the fix is now an error which triggers the control transistor to apply another fix. So the amp goes around and around, chasing its own tail so to speak. These oscillations can happen anywhere from 200KHz-200MHz, and often overpower proceeding appliances, causing interference with radios for instance. They can cause noise, humming, static, failure, or just plain misery. This is the feedback theory POV, which is easier to talk about.

And easier for me to understand.

However any such circuit when investigated will exhibit negative resistances interacting with resonances, and the cure could be understood as canceling the negative resistance. Both explanations are correct, and only in language are exclusive of one another.

It sounds a lot simpler now, but I confess to wondering why the preference for speaking of cancelling negative resistances when the feedback POV explanation is also correct and more familiar - especially to Wave reading non-audio buffs. :)

By oscillate I mean the vibrations are growing or sustained. To resonate simply means to bounce, or vibrate in sympathy with another source of vibration, but does not imply that the source of energy is local. So the definite difference between these terms is where resistance is in relation to zero. For oscillation, it is zero or negative. For resonance, it is positive but close to zero. Vibration generally refers to a more "forced" periodic motion, whereas resonance is a tuned kind of vibration. Vibration is like a car engine, resonance is like a chime. That is how I understand these terms, based on how I've heard them used.

Thanks for that explanation.

There are electric currents flowing between the ground and the sky. A current flowing through a medium will have a voltage gradient between the source and destination. That is, the current is felt at all points in the river, not just at the beginning and end. Anything falling within this gradient feels a fraction of the whole of the current. Individual neurons may be affected by such a current, depending on their alignment with it.

To establish what effect, if any, an environmental electrical current could have on neurons and if any effect is relevant to their normal workings, would people have to understand the way electricity really works and that, in the body, current flow consists of the movement of positive sodium and potassium atoms, negative chlorine, and numerous other more complex positive and negative molecules?

Otherwise, maybe some literature on relationships between power-lines, smart meters and the human body would contain some useful info? I don't know.

As I understand, the more evolved brain sections are covering and above the more primitive sections.

Yep, that's also what I understand as a layering analogy.

So far I've only been referring to mechanical phenomenon, nuts and bolts stuff. All of my psychological ideas don't need more than that; I'm just showing how a my ideas could be connected with psychology. Understanding negative resistance in relation to psychology may help with the foundation for understanding our "machine".

OK, I just felt I had to do my due diligence to the concept of negative resistance and its relatives in order to see the conceptual framework a bit better. I hope you don't mind that I took the time to try and understand all this during the discussion. Sometimes I get kind of frantic because it seems I can't understand ideas unless I can see the theoretical framework or other foundation from which the ideas arise.

My off-forum buddies describe it as an inability to look at details independently of the big picture as if they were quoting a syndrome from DSM-V, yet those same people will admit that meaning is contextual. Go figure.

With regard to Complexity Theory, where complexity has been reduced and purposeful order prevails, there will be existing structure - not "containing" the energy, but guiding it, OSIT.

Is there a distinction between levels of observation? As I've been designing circuits for a while I can understand the indirect relationships between one part of a circuit and another, but a beginner will wander back and forth as if through a maze, seeing the parts in view but not the whole, until he is able to draw a map. Similarly, I think we must walk before we can run. The data most close at hand is what we can see from where we are, and it is often all we have with which to improve our understanding. Perhaps on a higher level energy is merely "guided", but we live in the pixels, and lots of surveying is necessary to get a glimpse of the big picture. This involves understanding basics first.

Yeah, I think I misspoke there. At the time I wrote that, I was recalling how biological systems are really 'open' systems in terms of their interactions with their environments. I was also thinking in terms of flexible or fluid structure 'boundaries' as electrostatic "walls" or a form consisting of an alignment of atomic or subatomic particles as 'nodes' which appear relatively fixed when compared with an inner circulating energy or higher intensity vibrations. IOW, incapable of containing as in to cut off all contact with surroundings. Not that you meant it that way - it's just the way I was thinking.

Not sure yet about how this understanding of oscillation and pattern can be transferred to the moon, but I think I'm getting close. :)

My thought was like a tape recorder, where tape is moved past an electromagnet modulated by an audio signal. Pretty simplistic, but we know that moving water underground can hold energetic recordings of past events.

Yeah, I get it now. There certainly are many ways to view and understand the role of Moon in the Cosmology.

Since reading the Wave Chapter 27, you said that you've only connected FRV and negative resistance so far, so I'm wondering what's left to connect?

I'm still wondering about the connection between energy and structure, IE information theory. Information seems inseparable from structure.

Well, now that you've stated it, I better understand my intuitions on this thread. And here is where I see strong associative connections to every non-linear subject that's been mentioned on this thread thus far and lots more to boot - including G's General Law.

ATM, I'll just ask how familiar you are with the two fields Information theory and Thermodynamics? I ask because results from calculations in Thermodynamics are essential for several other fields of physics as well as for chemistry, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, etc. If nothing else, you might want to look into "entropy" as a component in each field because it's been forty years or more since a practical discovery by Myron Tribus that they are the same thing, whereas before that, it seems no one had even considered the possibility. That is, you might want to look into it unless you're already familiar with all that.

Interestingly, as another outcome of his work, Tribus has been credited with the "Perversity Principle" - a principle to which Steven Covey (The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People) has a correlate.

Tribus:

"If you try to improve the performance of a system of people, machines, and procedures by setting numerical goals for the improvement of individual parts of the system, the system will defeat your efforts and you will pay a price where you least expect it."

Covey:

"Whoever tries to manage his business only looking at figures will soon not have anymore the figures nor the business".

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myron_Tribus

It seems as if we just found their real secret of success. :)

 

[monotonic]

I have never studied thermodynamics or information theory, but I've heard some things here and there. If there are any well-written introductions online I'd be interested.

Yes, engineers really like feedback theory. However both negative resistance and feedback are mathematical descriptions of the phenomenon. In essence they cannot be separated, and include each other by definition. As I said, only in language are they exclusive. BUT, if you only understand one and not the other, you lose out on some useful perspectives. For instance if you only understood oscillation from the feedback POV, you would never guess that the light-frequency oscillation of an electric arc may be caused by negative resistance. So question, how to you apply the feedback POV to a field of molecules in an electric arc? It's not straightforward. Where is the feedback in the molecule? It may be there, but if so, it is not obvious to me. If you understand both points of view, you can see oscillation mechanisms at work in more places. This is exactly how I made the connection with plasma and 3D modal oscillation.

Furthermore, from the feedback POV, you need trigonometry just to figure out whether a circuit is oscillating or not. Understanding negative resistance, you can often measure the problem directly and stop it at the source without needing to mess with a bunch of unnecessary calculations. But that is just for my field of application.

Perhaps the unique fields of knowledge brought up in this thread can connect resistance and feedback in a new and unexpected way, so that the schism doesn't dement us.

 

[Buddy]

I have never studied thermodynamics or information theory, but I've heard some things here and there. If there are any well-written introductions online I'd be interested.

Get The Feynman Lectures on Physics (Richard Feynman's Redbooks) if or when you can. Feynman is very much against misrepresenting information or telling outright lies just because something is difficult (even for some engineers) to understand.

Anything you can find online could probably be useful as a primer and you'll probably want to make the determination of what's well-written for you.

One thing that seems to make the subjects difficult for some people is the difference between appearance and reality. For instance, just because something looks organized (that is, neat or symmetrical), it doesn't mean that it is organized in a thermodynamic or informational sense. Keeping that in mind may help.

Perhaps the unique fields of knowledge brought up in this thread can connect resistance and feedback in a new and unexpected way, so that the schism doesn't dement us.

It seems to me that connecting resistance with feedback is just a matter of understanding that there can be an unwanted source of energy (negative resistance) of some type that isn't coming from a feedback loop and it's messing with the wanted flows in the circuit design.

Here's my loosely worded explanation:

Feedback means an energy quanta or signal of some sort that is connected with a system like a designed circuit, and that upon exiting the circuit, at least partially feeds back into a circuit naturally, accidentally or intentionally.

Positive resistance means friction like an energy or signal loss, and is sometimes just commonly called resistance.

Negative resistance means a source (as contrasted with a load) or input of signal-energy that can be unwanted and can come from other than a feedback loop. Unwanted sources of extra input (negative resistance) can even be glue joints or defects in a resonator cavity if such is being used.

 

[monotonic]

There is a distinction between positive feedback and negative feedback. Depending on the timing of the feedback signal, it can change polarity at certain frequencies. Positive feedback exhibits negative resistance and instability. Negative feedback tends to exhibit indefinite resistances, IE extremely high or extremely low, but positive.

Resonators can act analogously to levers. That is, they can convert a high-travel-low-torque movement to a low-travel-high-torque movement. The total energy is the same, but the possible application and use is changed.

I had wanted to slide this in the discussion at some point but never got there. However today I realized something else.

A rigid object that is not ordinarily resonant, can be made resonant by the application of negative resistance. In this way a rigid object with the right properties can become a switch and a lever, at the right frequencies. Adding this to Laura's explanation of FRV, when we resonate, we are levers.