Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Fractal iterations

Some of my responses to Balder's post here follow:

"If a new planetary cathedral is to be erected, I think it will be fractal."

If by fractal one means what the videos indicate, that each repetition iterates. I.e., while repeating to some degree each iteration adds something novel and is not quite the same. I often get the feeling that with some complexity-chaos theories a fractal is the same repeating pattern ad infinitum, more a formal wish fulfillment of stable, unchanging Form. And like our friends the image stigmata, always in media res, this gives pause for "our delighting in the endlessly fruitful in-between," in-between itself being one of those prepositional schema.

"This musical enclosure has the capacity to call whales and other great creatures out of the deep."

Including but especially the patron/matron saint of IPS, Cthulhu.

"I think there is a sense, which most of us have felt, where a vital or ‘awake’ generative (en)closure – a practice retreat, a therapeutic encounter, a relationship, etc – seemed to greatly amplify qualitative space."

Ahem, like, IPS.

What I'm thinking with fractals though is that it is not only the content that changes with each iteration but the principles/laws as well. It seems that with 'restricted' complexity theory the iterative laws or mathematical patterns remain the same at each level of scale, often because they are considered universal and/or Platonic Forms of some kind. I've argued that case with the MHC in the real/false reason (RFR) thread.

Whereas for a more 'general' complexity it must use a more differential calculus that shows not only a change in content but a change in the mathematical equations as well. This is especially so since math itself is created by mental content, not the other way around. So one thing I wonder with these videos is whether the mathematical programming that makes them run is the same iterative loop or whether the math itself is programmed to change at each level of scale? Another thing I wonder in terms of modeling human stages of consciousness is why do mathematical models like the MHC keep the formal math iterations instead of changing them at beyond formal consciousness iterations? I explored that as well in the RFR thread.

For example, this article explains well and simply Riemann geometric space, where parallel lines can cross and the 3 angles of a triangle can equal more or less than 180 degrees. This of course takes into account something Bryant and Einstein talk about, that gravity curves space, time and light. So we have different maths (geometries) for each iteration.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.