My blog is a secular discussion of This Model - it is not as strict as the text on the website will become. Further explanations will be provided by a "BLOG DISCUSSION" link.

Ambivalence RMCM© - The Rational Model of Complex Mechanisms© Function Point Fulcrum

Art from the last ten years, an artist's reflection on the search for the ground of his being.

1. Function : a zero volume container - (also Point or Fulcrum).©

2. The RMCM defines Function as a zero volume container, a container of Attributes. Function is the simplest implementation of the innate in our universe
   
3. Because we now have the Chase©, we have at our disposal three encapsulations through which we can further consider all increasingly complex phenomena.
   
4. However, we need to begin by considering the mutual ideas of "very large" and "very small". Why do we need to? The sciences and math "do" deal with size to the extent possible when confined to the attributes of "matter". Outside of issues dealing directly with "matter" the question of size is an open question, and everyone is welcome to participate as equals, in good faith and in good conscience. We also need to consider "size" because This Model presumes limitless "size", although we express it a little differently.
   
5. Because we presume no a priori (from Cause to Effect) limit to size we can introduce the idea that size is actually some limitless direction to which it speaks. Do you remember way back when you where learning basic math skills? This is just simple division and nothing more than that I promise you. Dividing one by three is simple and straight forward. "One" divided by "three" equals decimal "three" with a decimal "Zero one" left over. Divide the leftover "zero one" by "three" and it happens again. Now you have a decimal point followed by two "threes", and you still have a decimal zero zero one leftover. You can do this over and over again adding decimal value "threes" to the "small" end of the decimal number 0.3333333 … . If you stop dividing, then the operation remains incomplete. To resolve this you need to keep dividing, so there is a completion imperative innate to division. While it is not always expressed; it remains.
   
6. The completion imperative makes the learner ambivalent about stopping or continuing. We tell them nothing more about this task left incomplete, and we expect them to cultivate an indifference toward the conundrum. The Model asserts that we miss an extremely important attribute of greater truth about our universe that these arithmetic phenomena are telling us. How then do you describe where all these threes are taking us?
   
7. Greater precision is one way to describe these marching threes. Smaller and smaller differences is another, and these perpetually smaller differences are marginalized through statistics declaring the numbers too small to be meaningful. The question is begged by another question. What difference does it make? The difference it makes is to children who find this experience of irrational numbers unpalatable. What we can do about this becomes quite clear later in the model, and we need not fight about it.
   
8. These marching threes do describe a endless shrinking of size. These arithmetic simplicities in and of them selves, if you think about it, deny the probability of a "Big Bang". The universe would shrink endlessly, and because there are so many of these kinds of numbers and so many kinds of endlessness, the universe would break into as many pieces as there are numbers into which it could shrink. Such a collapsing universe would break into endless numbers of pieces as it shrank endlessly.
   
9. While we are still in the context of marching numbers, we need to consider those that march toward the bigger than zero side of size. But consider what happens when we use the same two numbers, one and three, and we multiply them to do this. One times three equals three, the end. What happened? The arithmetic is inappropriate for our needs here. Arithmetic proper simply hasn't caught up with technology. We have to go into algebra to find something even remotely similar to the completion imperative that resides in division. In other words, we have no anti-division. While we have no arithmetic anti-division, we do have machines that can do this. And we will get into machines a little later. Right now we have to understand function and to do so we need to complete the "other" direction of this "endless size" phenomena. The marching numbers can be seen on odometers in cars, and they are used by computers to track time like an odometer. These machines or mechanisms are built with a built in technical completion imperative. The numbers are rolled over physically by the engine, by the wheels, or by some other mechanism bound into the trajectory of the car.
   
10. The limits to counting upward in size are capacity, energy, durability, and time. On this end of the scale we are advised that unlike the other end this end is the magic end that has no limit to its size. Space we are advise extends infinitely in all three dimensions. This hypothetical one-way extension is, of course, backed up by all kinds of exotic theorems and statistics.
    
11. Yet we still have these relentless irrational numbers, and that is what they are actually called, irrational numbers. Uncountable quantities of them. Surely they are there to tell us something about reality. We have in our own modest way, come up with a plausible explanation as to what it is that they mean.
    
12. To us mere mortals they represent smallness as distinct from bigness. However, science assures us that the minimum size of the universe is limited, and hence the Big Bang. Let us assume that science is right in its own context - a material Universe called SpaceTime. Maybe it is our concept of size that is obscuring a more complete picture.
    
13. There is another way of encapsulating the infinitely large. You could (and we do) legitimately encapsulate them as lines that are infinitely outward bound. Then you could legitimately refer to those not outwardly bound as inwardly bound. This would mean lines that can never intersect. They never intersect because they are extending into and out of unique origins.
    
14. An imaginary projectile traveling along such an axis would appear to enter our universe then disappear without appearing to leave our universe. It would shrink to a undetectable size at the point it entered. How short would the event be? It would be profoundly short. Even by Technologically Augmented Standards of short, it would be profound, beyond expression. How fast? In comparison to the speed of light, the speed of light would be glacially or even geologically slow. Outside the constraints of Einstein's material (plasma, gas, liquid, and solid) universe of SpaceTime, there is every speed; there is every direction; there is every time. Understand please that whether Einstein was right or not, I would have no idea, and the model is indifferent. This model deals with the origin of material, the behavior and origin of mass.
    
15. You may have to reflect on this for quite a while before any comfort is possible. Please resist the urge to compare with others how long it takes for "you" to "get it". We sacrifice the whole truth of any given experience for the value to which we are constrained.
    
16. A line that extends from the endlessly outward to the endlessly inward would be a line capable of an abstract binding that would give rise to many dimensions. Any expression extending at ninety degrees to its flow would be an attribute of a three dimensional point. It might even acquire a partial spin from our perspective.
    
17. Nonetheless we call this line the Delta Axis© We define it as a line that extends from the endlessly inward to the endlessly outward.© How is it possible for lines that can never touch each other to work together? In this model we have rejected the omnibus word system(s) in favor of the word metabolism(s). Instead of systems we ask that you try to think in terms of metabolisms. These lines to be complex, must themselves be aggregates of things other than us. The model asserts that they are aggregates of things of greater simplicity as well as of things of greater complexity. While the flows along these lines may not fully account for point creation in and of themselves, the metabolism(s) to which they belong could quite plausibly do so.
    
18. The Delta Axis© implies that we are bound into our universe and that our universe is bound into metabolisms complexer and simpler than itself. This inward way is on the immediate inside of our immediate inside. This outward way is on the immediate outside of our immediate outside.
    
19. We are suspended between an aggregate of simplicities and an aggregate of complexities. We are suspended within time, space, the outwardly endless, and inwardly endless. We are points; we are fulcrums; we are function. These three words are different contexts of the same thing. Of the three I decided that function is the better word for our needs. It is the least toxic to general usage in its adopted use here.
    
20. Through function we achieve location, and through location we achieve iteration. Function expresses the simplest simplicity in our universe. Because it is complex, it is unchanged by the rise of its complexity. Regardless of how complex a construct we consider, Function is its simplest context. This is a reliable test for complexity. The interest under discussion must be seeable without exception as function, for it to qualify as complex or as a complexity. If the interest fails this test then it is a complication and not a complexity. We will find that function enables our second condition, because it is the primary existentially. Function embodies all the attributes of every construct in the universe. Function, this zero volume container, has no need of the material (plasma, solids, liquids, gases) that comprises the known universe.
    
21. Function cannot be moved from its spatiotemporal identity. It cannot be moved because function is the architect of movement. It is as function that transcendence acquires the attributes for mass. Transcendence transmogrifies into mass as cause or effect when either cross through a functional attribute. In effect, we will be elucidating the attributes of Function as we reconstruct them at a level of complexity that provides access to the knowable incorporeal. When cause finds an attribute of function, it is extruded into or constrained into effect. The shape into which cause is constrained is the angle of flow. Every three dimensional angle is always at 90 degrees to the Delta Axis. Time is at 90 degrees to the delta axis; time is also at ninety degrees to space. Regardless of whether the effect is spatial or temporal, effect is an absolute perfect spatiotemporal event bound through functional attributes to cause. Case, effect, and function are perfect because they are attributes of God.
    

tbc/dwc