Antiquatis

This references posts in this post.

Right now I'm just going to post all this information together in one post and take time to review and sort/organize it to see if there maybe something linking them together. My imagination is somewhat bubbling with all these concepts/ideas in proximity.

I. Abstract Constants
"What is the measure of the faery ring? What is the pace of its dance?"

A)Phi

1.618.. = 1+ sqrt(5)/2 = (a(phi) + a = harmonic relationship between co-planar/intra-dimensional measures. "Holographic" or 'living' number in that it acts as a scalar 'lense' providing a holographic projection of a measure. Geometrically, one can generate 'golden volumes' by using phi to measure a line from a square/rectangular body and turn that line perpendicular to the plane of the perpendicular segments. A square generates one height, a rectangle two (which is architecturally interesting, more later). While phi/pi are both present in the Great Pyramid, phi is a predominant measure, creating the approx 52 degree slopes which, as per the LoO material, "collect power" (create a spatial focus).

B) Pi
3.1415.. = C/d = A/r2 = A harmonic relationship between area and perimeter. Equidistance, volume, and angularity are interesting notions within this lense.

Granted i'm approaching these concepts with an architectural bias and the naivete of someone who isn't very fascile with math, but perhaps there is a useful relationship with pi-measured intervals (architectural space) and phi-measured elements (architectural elements). Visually I see this as a measuring of foreground (phi) elements to a background element (pi). Pi seems to inherently be related to volume (time/space, space/time), measured geometrically as it cuts into a 2d 'world' (planar) while phi seems to bear a more directly relationship to limited dimensions (planes). In nature, euclidian planes are virtual, with scale determining the perception of a 'surface'. Our planet is a (mostly) equidistant-volume whose mass determines a perpendicular s/t attracting force, gravity.

C) Gravity
9.81 m/s^2 : a = fm1/r2 = (G*m1*m2/r2)/m1[G = 6.67300 × 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2] = this creates a stratification of densities within a planetary body. This body is in motion and in motion in relationship to bodies and patterns at many many interrelating scales. Rotation is a predominant characteristic of this motion. Rotation is pi related. Subtle trans-planar motion is oblique (ie, wind shear or tectonic sub-duction). G is perpendicular to the center/circumference of the planet, since it is a field condition. If it is a s/t condition which causes material densities to layer dense-to-expansive, then the reciprocal is a t/s condition which causes spiritual material densities to layer expansive-to-dense along the same "lines of force". I see this as creating a "potentiated distance" in that the body and its place on the planet is kept in 'distanced tension' from the soul and its place, hence our tendency to project idealistic 'heavens' "out there" and 'over us'.

D)4
The number of wholeness or completion. Expounded upon in many analyses of mythology by Jung, Campbell etc. Also, 4 relates pi and phi: 4/sqrt(phi) = approx pi.

E)RS' Inter-Regional Ratio
[I am the least aquainted with this number, especially architecturally. But in the post linked above it is used to translate between s/t and t/s with dreams, which is a fascinating application.)

156.444 - With this I want to link this image and its related webpage. Link. While it contains a large amount of information in an incredibly droll format it is similar to this post in that its a collection of information related to measure and motion (with all the trappings of excessively newagey speculation, yadda yadda). The reciprocal relationships in the linked graphic are interesting: the siting of the virtual pyramid to the built pyramid. The solidity of the capstone in relationship to the SPACE of the chamber. The scale of pyramid to chamber to capstone.

II) Other Abstract Constants

A) e, i - to copy/paste Gopi's response in the thread linked at the start:



I'm still working on digesting this.

III) The Faery Ring

The trance-drumming of the shaman is interesting to consider. It creates a periodic rhythm which allows a person synch up in a wholistic (or musical) fashion. Dancing requires that the body, mind and spirit be in accord for the dance to be authentic.

If a group of 6 people form a circle, finger tip to finger tip, and all are 6' tall (and so 6' tip to tip') -how would pi, phi, and the gravity relate? A correlating image I see is the rotation of a cliche-ufo, or any rotating body (vortex, lenticular galaxy, dervishes, etc). Whats interesting to me is that these are images of very different events, scale wise.

My interest in this information is its application: the great pyramid, as per the LoO material, was a tool for meeting the self - the application was healing, understanding, encountering, evolving. I'm curious as to how all these things can be intentionally used in the s/t waking world to facilitate trans-regional "health". For example, using the Inter-regional ration to translate between an hour-of-the-body vs an hour-of-the-soul, we might be able to assess what one hour of waking healing work might mean in the reciprocal soul-realm.

I'm curious to eventually understand how this applies to built things in the world - their measures, materialities and the motions they engage in.

Here's a Modular system i've been working on:

A basic notion for artists when learning to figure draw is to proportion the length of a body 8x the length of the head, chin to top. This is an 'aesthetic' approach to modulating proportion and might be considered 'beautiful'. If we take a very general human height to be 6', then divided 8 times we end up with roughly 9" per division. To scale out with phi:

U1(9(phi) + 9 = 23.56" (1'-11 1/2") rounded to 2'.

Modulated Series:
1) Here i'm relating 8 modulated magnitudes in relationship to Hall's Proxemics. These are rounded into architectural units.

Unit = 9" [Intimate]
U1 = 2' [Intimate]
U2 = 5'2" [Intimate,Personal]
U3 = 13'-6" [Personal, Intimate]
U4 = 35'-3" [Personal, Social]
U5 = 92'-3" [Social]
U6 = 241'-6" [Social, Public]
U7 = 632-3" [Public]
U8 = 1655'-1" [Public, Civic]

This is a translation between modulated s/t measures and psycho-social measures which relate to t/s measures. The scalar designation 'civic' is my own. Part of my interest in investigating modulation is that designers and architects have often described certain spaces as having particular impacts on feelings, even if its mostly unconscious. One professor of mine would often remark about an internal cubic volume (Kahn's Exeter Library).."There's just SOMETHING about that volume." Another, remaking on a massive neo-classical Italian church ("It's puzzling but you just CAN'T feel bad in that space"). The first professor went on to say that, as an architect, when you experience something profound or interesting, you soak it in and then measure it. The Exeter library is approx 30' x 30' x 30'. I'll have to dig through my notes, but I recall measuring out a relationship between those values and a fully functioning human field-of-vision.

In trying to understand t/s and s/t I've translated them as:

space = place
time = moment

so:

s/t = place determines the moment (spatial 'law' overrides temporal 'law')
t/s = moment determines the place (temporal 'law' overrides spatial 'law')

1) Should those phrases read "Spatial law overrides temporal potentiality"?
2) Change is what is important, as it is motion, which requires a transmutation across regions. The body resides in the s/t sector, the spirit in the t/s sector, the soul is (like the vesica piscis) an ante-chamber or hybrid-ream between the two. Soul (what might also be called 'mind')incorporates the conscious, sub and unconscious states, with the ego cycling between these thresholds as we wake and sleep. This is a diagrammatic explanation and feedback is appreciated.

Think of space and time, the two aspects of motion, as a ratio; that helped me. Also, reading Larson's work added to my conceptual foundations, giving me a clearer view.


I always liked this one the most (in reference to the consciousness' point of observation in the material realm, physical reality):

space = local
time = non-local

It's easier to think of a specific person, place, or thing as having a locality in space; and, a thought, idea, or state (or just time) as having non-locality in space.

Take careful note of the inverse translation of these concepts as the consciousness' point of observation moves into the temporal realm (unconsciousness, dream state, non-physical, etc...).

space = non-local
time = local

Here, anything that is "intangible" in waking physical experience has locality in time and anything that is "tangible" in waking physical experience is non-local in time.


As per the RS (Bruce or Gopi may have corrections):
s/t = 1/n
t/s = n/1

s/t can be taken as having one unit of space per n units of time: motion in space; and t/s can be taken as having n units of time per 1 unit of space: motion in time. Remember that the natural datum is Unity and not zero, so there is no "overriding", just, less than unity (less than one towards zero) and greater than unity (greater than one towards infinity).

In your formulation, I would revise it as such: s/t = locality intersects with non-locality. t/s = non-locality intersects with locality.


Motion is abstract change in three dimensions; if you accept the fundamental postulates of the RS/RS2, then you can safely say that the only universal constant is change. Motion doesn't transmute across regions.

The body, soul/mind, and spirit all have s/t and t/s aspects; the soul is not a hybrid of the body and the spirit, it is a component (just as the body and spirit are) of the whole. Don't forget the densities and the sub-densities that these aspects of being exist within. The s/t and t/s aspects of a 5th density spirit look different from that of a 3rd density body.

Correction on your diagram of the psyche: the ego is the most dominant aspect of consciousness (wakefulness), it is the "me" or self-conscious facility; it doesn't "cycle" through consciousness and unconsciousness because it is a component of both - just dominant in consciousness because Ego needs a locale (identity) to bind to. I personally don't use the concept of sub-consciousness because the psyche can be described (if you desire) with varying strata (I like to use the density model and Spiral Dynamics) between the unconscious and the conscious (as there are "layers" between the deep ocean abyss going all the way up to the light ocean surface).

As more content in the unconscious is made conscious (reclamation of complexes, resolution, psychocartography, etc...), the less dominant the ego becomes and the more available the anima and animus (and others too) become in your conscious waking state as well as the "doors" the complexes open.

Thanks for the reply Tulan!
I'm going have to work on figuring out how to understand things from that system-frame, because I haven't figured out how to adjust myself to that frame (mathematical/RS2, etc).

It seems complicated, but it really isn't. The RS/RS2 only makes use of ordinary mathematics, of which you are probably better versed in than I am (I'm self-taught, and have had less saturation than I would have in a University setting).



The Reciprocal System, as a system (and later, as a holism via the RS2) departed from the mainstream scientific systems - they were/are primarily differentiated systems without a homogenizing deductive foundation - the Reciprocal System is that, an axiological/deductive (a priori in this case) keystone from which conclusions about our physical and non-physical reality (and non-reality) may be inferred.

Three things grow from differentiated systems: hierarchic systems, holarchic systems, and reticulated holisms. Modern day "science" is a melting pot of ideas - not a Bad Thing, but it does serve to confuse when it is unchecked; as entropy increased in the [mondern day scientific] system it began to self-organize in an attempt to survive (viral meme), morphing into a hierarchy because few, if any, of modern day scientists' apprehension was Tier 2 (systemic or holistic) so it defaulted to the only structure that would support it - Tier 1. It's not only structured as a hierarchy of scientists but also as a hierarchy of ideas, theories, and wild guesses. As you may be aware, corporate hierarchies are notoriously difficult to climb because each "boss" at each level is defending their position; a similar situation has arisen with the scientific institutions of the last century. As a scientist you have to "fight your way to the top and defend it once you get there" - ideas have to do the same thing (not conducive to innovation is it?).

Holarchies are hierarchic systems that can be erected on demand and dissolved once they have served their purpose - I've seen few instances of this and few reasons why it would be useful. Reticulated holisms (Social Memory Complex would be a good parallel) are much more rare than hierarchic systems because all of the individuals must have a holistic apprehension; it's only as strong as its weakest link.

The Reciprocal System of Theory is the result of Larson "checking" that pot of scientific ideas. The Reevaluation of the Reciprocal System of Theory (RS2) is the result of Nehru/Bruce/Gopi checking the RS pot of ideas. At each check evolution occurs; innovation may stagnate for what is being left behind, but evolution is occurring. The RS2 is a reticulated holism; there are differentiated (individual) ideas from many different domains working in concert (rather than increasing entropy) to produce synergy (ampliative; the result of the parts working in concert is greater than the whole as a sum total) - if you'll notice, at each check, there are fewer and fewer members of the set (the allegory also applies to the entities in participation, not just the ecosystem of ideas and conclusions).

The RS and RS2 did this by starting from scratch and constructing a base set of postulates from which physical and non-physical phenomena can be deductively described (resorting to the inductive experiments and observed results of science to validate the logical conclusions of the framework).