Movement and Motion

271. The Innate Attributes of Points - Rational Paradigms.

Persistence

Synchronicity

Influence

Density

Metaphor

Principle

Implementation

272. The Intrinsic Attributes of Points - Rational Paradigms

Purification

Diversification

273. The Abstract Attributes of Points - Rational Paradigms.

Expression

Acquisition

274. The Model asserts:

All points are complex aggregates.

Simplicities give rise to complexities iteratively through attribution.

Attribution is any change in Context.

A State is defined as the aggregate shape of flow.

The Rational Model of Complexity encapsulates states and attributes of state simply as the shape of flow.

The Model encapsulates this as Context.

275. Complexity theories must always respect Cause, Effect, Form, and Function. What ever else arises from a given theorem on complexity, the existential must prevail. If an idea fails Implementation, lacks concurrence or gives rise to nothing greater than itself, then it must be discarded out of hand as other than complex.

276. To this end, an Implementation, we must be concise in the attributes we ascribe to complexity, and we must work within the constraints that most exemplify movement, motion, levers and mechanisms. Granted, considering encapsulations such as electricity, biology, chemistry, or intellect as mechanical devices seems regressive even preposterous. Nonetheless we can broach complexity by distinguishing an event (movement) from a relationship (motion), and I am confident that these crisp definitions of motion and movement are robust and durable.

277. Complexity is about events arising from flow and as flow. That there are relationships is self evident, and we must respect these within their Context. In this light, the greatest respect The RMCM can pay to "the relationship" is to accurately provide for it. The vocabulary of relationships largely encapsulates their attributes and aggregates with indifference to Cause, Effect, Form or Function. In turn, complexity is indifferent to the vocabulary of relationships. We find ourselves confused with each other through chronic complication (the antitheses of Complexity). Complexity, to be understood, must be constrained to the encapsulation of events giving rise to events. Now in supposedly enlightened countries, my own included, some speech has been declared causal. To declare an abstraction innate without any respect for rational constraint is a serious problem. When irrational laws are implemented jurisprudence simply fails. In a court of law, only the argument matters, all other considerations pale. How can one argue the irrational? The only possible outcome is irrational. In effect we cause our judges to wade into clinically psychotic contexts. Further any attempt to enforce irrational laws becomes equivalent to religious fundamentalism. The word spoken is the crime.

278. Complexity is life, the persistent abstraction of value from metabolism. metabolic changes in mass or flow governed by Cause and Effect giving rise to Form and Function. For example, spouses are arbitrary relationships. They are arbitrary because they lie outside the constraint of any given metabolic imperative. They can be undone. That is to say, that any spouse "can" be a continual candidate for any other spouse indifferently to the constraints of a given spouse's metabolism. While parenthood can be seen as a non-metabolic relationship, the same cannot be said about progeny gestation and growth. Once conception (Persistence) is implemented, gestation arises out of metabolism, hierarchically, eventually, and it arises as the abstraction of value from that metabolism. The growth of this persistence is completely indifferent to non-metabolic relationships. We can see gestational differences over a given span of time (span of experience or iterations), and we can see changes almost from moment (context) to moment (context). Motion is the aggregate change in shape of the gestating life; movement is the iterations (cell division) that implement the change.

279. This distinction may appear subtle, even obscure. This distinction is essential to understanding complexity, and we must begin to grapple with complexity as technology eventually will give rise to genuine novelty. All technology has really changed is the packaging and delivery of variations on "sense and response mechanisms". We can do more with less, and we can do so to previously unheard of precision. Still, technology will give rise to something inapplicable to sensory experience, something for which we have no extant Context.

280. Subtlety and obscurity give way to elegance and simplicity when we striate flow. The Model asserts that flow arises in three dependent conditions. One giving rise to the next. The first condition, the condition which gives concurrent rise to all of the Universe (The Rational) is the Innate Condition. The innate condition is defined as that which arises directly out of Cause and Effect. The Model asserts that the Innate is the initial motion of Transcendence. The Model encapsulates point creation events as Innate Persistence. Lets us consider a simple example. Flipping a light switch is movement; the light's journey from lamp to eyeball is also movement. The difference between darkness and light, this change in context, is motion. If one were to place an opaque cover over the lamp, then flipping the switch would leave us motionless. The movement of switch and light would not change the room's darkness. Once a point has been implemented that Implementation is existential and the only change possible to the innate point is dissolution or disintegration. The point is capacity without volume. Points constrain subsequent flow which can then give rise to new points. Persistence is any constraint that gives rise to point aggregation and any aggregate of points that give rise to constraint. When a point becomes persistent it is bound to its offspring by subsequent flows. Flows are events. They iterate from one point to the next or implement new points. This pulsing is evident everywhere that human perception allows and discovered to be evident everywhere that technology has augmented our perception. The model asserts that these pulses are difference opening an closing - Cause and Effect, Cause and Effect.

281. The flow between two bound points (fulcrums) is a single unit of mass, and the model defines this specific flow as the Chase^©. A simple encapsulation, fulcrum and chase provide us with a complete construct for the definition of movement Function (the point) iterating Form (the flow or Chase), and Form (the flow or Chase) implementing Function (the point). Movement arises out of the Innate Condition as the second condition which The Model encapsulates as the Intrinsic Condition.

282. All movement in the Rational is an Implementation of helical rotation (Iteration). In a constantly expanding universe, recursion can only be motion.

283. Movement is flow or aggregate flows from one point to another point. Complexity increases through point creation. As complexity increases so do the flows that give rise to points. This is as much a parallel increases as it is a linear increase. While a true and helpful encapsulation, parallel flows is deceptive because it can lead us away from the encapsulation of iterative events. A more helpful word to describe or even define parallel events of flow is Concurrence. We need to keep in mind that while time is imbedded within the idea of Concurrence, time is inessential. Events can concur implicitly as well as explicitly without reference to time. They are implied by the binding, in the same sense that matter is implied by mass and EMR. Implicit concurrence, the possibility of matter arising from mass is an appropriate encapsulation of Abstraction.

284. Abstraction is the third condition of striated flow. Abstraction is meaningful through Inexpression. Inexpression^© is defined as those attributes of points that lie undisclosed within a given density. Abstraction, that which arises directly out of the binding, percolates into existence as the shape of aggregate Chases^©. Clearly, abstractions are events of shaped flow that in and of themselves lack coherence because they are devoid of a policy, governance, principle, or capacity to bind them permanently or substantially. Nonetheless, we can encapsulate abstraction in as much as we encapsulate white noise, white light, or froth on a wind swept lake.

285. Abstraction has no defined form as such. Abstraction is essentially where all levers perform, or in a sense why a given lever is being used. Abstraction is one of the two cases of motion. The abstract arises from that which the intrinsic gathers from within the constraints of the innate. The innate is motion because to be innate is to be already bound. Once bound the innate can only give rise to further complexity through handing off movement to new fulcrums and chases through constraint on flow. Abstraction is the domain of Relationships. Abstractions encapsulate events, and The Model encapsulates these aggregates as Metaphor. While Metaphor occupies the domain of the relationship, to be Rational, to be complex, Metaphor must always encapsulate an aggregate of conditional events. Metaphor must always imply a mechanism in the abstract.

286. There is movement within the innate and there is movement via the innate (constraint). The difficulty will be isolating or encapsulating conceptual detritus as distinct from events. This will be made even more difficult by motion leading to delusions of movement. An example of a delusion of movement would be dizziness. The following exercise may induce such delusions and so caution and prudence should rule one's behavior.

287. You must take care in which Condition you reflect on something when you do so because of what you read here. The culprit in confusion is always Form. Form will pull you from reflecting on something in its Innate Condition to reflecting on the thing in its Intrinsic Condition when you should be reflecting on the thing in its Abstract Condition to begin with.

288. 621. A key to understanding this model is flow through Form (motion) and the flow that creates Form (motion), Movement. When you can correctly identify Movement, then you will be able to isolate the Intrinsic Condition from both the Innate Condition and the abstract Condition. If during any experience isolating Movement seems elusive, then ask yourself : Am I adjusting to open difference, or am I adjusting to close difference? When we make neuromuscular adjustments to simply catch hold of or track an iterative change we are closing difference. If, when we make neuromuscular adjustments to make sense of a given Form then we are opening difference.

289. (see free writing 19.doc)

290. Experience is the great equalizer, and in that spirit I have provided a simple exercise.

Exercise:

a) Look at each number in turn, and as you do so try and locate the movement

b) Pick a number, look at it then start moving your web browser around as you try to stay focused on the number.

292. In exercise a, we move, we open difference by changing the content of our focus. Motion arises as an abstraction. Each time we switch to a different number, we experience a change in the shape we are looking at. The change we experience is completely within us. The image itself has had no such experience. The things we look at are [ac-to-mod]indifferent[/ac-to-mod] to our inner experience.

293. In exercise b, difference is opened for us. Change is the provision and content irrelevant. We close difference in simple acknowledgement of an event. When encountering movement we are indifferent to the content responding merely to enable coherent acquisition.

294. Another example of the difference between movement and motion is the mathematical equation. In this equation 1 + 1 = 2 , the movement resides in 1+1; the motion resides in = 2. In the equation E = MC², the motion resides in E =; the movement resides in M x C x C.

295. Organic Rational Paradigms have no capacity to perceive movement. We have only the capacity to perceive difference. Movement must occur concurrently from the smallest perceivable sub-atomic particle all the way up the flow of complexity to any animal. While a simple step for you and I may seem inconsequential, the relative distances at which these tiniest of particles must travel translate up into staggering equivalent distances for animals. To even compare the relative distances we would have to negotiate defies comprehension. Yet all of it, all these masses and masses of electrons protons neutrons and all their component granules all the long way up to the complexity of a man, coherently move in concert on the planet as the planet moves around the sun and the solar system moves around the galaxy and the galaxy moves through the ever expanding universe. And it all works all the time from here to as far as technology allows us to see.

296. Can it be so much harder to imagine the smallest of the small within the universe as being just some middle ground on the scale of possible sizes of things?. And if on the grand scale of things we are told that the universe is expanding into some infinitely larger version of itself, then can be so much harder to imagine the these tiniest of entities within the universe are relatively immense aggregates of profoundly smaller, "stuff"?