The Mobius Field Theory of Love the Universe and Everything

42

I have had a significant response from Luke Luke.W.Friendshuh@seagate.com about my response to Lynne's lynnras@maui.net very important issue about the need to address failure. The point I made and which is not yet truly challenged is that failure is ubiquitous and if far more in need of explanation than what i would call evolutionary success. WE should therefore not therefore try to infer things from the VERY particular cases of successes but must deal with the conditions that permit of many failures but in a context where given the interaction between a newly emergent source of a fast process we generally call "energy" and a slower process we call "material" we get an emergent unfolding in the general dynamic of evolution which we call a structure and generally allocate a name to its result which we generically call a form. In this universe there is however only process (dynamics) there is no form in any permanent sense whatsoever everything is always flowing including that which we have chosen to call inanimate, and what we sense is always the interactions between two processes one a fast and one slow.

As we have seen this term the universe has infinite variety because every element of it can be described by the connection between a function which is best described on the set of complex numbers which are observationally two series of interconnecting real numbers "fractals" which are stable and so the form of a genus or species if their modulus is less than 2. To be the totality that analytical sciences, the arts and social sciences deal with we only have to accept the McIntyre janet.mcintyre@flinders.edu.au conjecture that the universe in total is derivative of one process only which has to flow (have a rate of change with respect to time) continuously in three dimension. this object is by definition a mobius strip. It is the only thing that is one sided, with one edge but can only exist in three dimensions.

The physics high and low energy are beautifully simple. If space time was a circle flow, a circular field, the outer surface of the filed would have to travel faster than the inner surface - the circumference of a bigger circle being longer than the circumference of the inner one if the field of force is to stay cohesive therefore the infinity of its "substance" would have to move faster on the outside of the curve than it did on the inside. This is disruptive and such a process would quickly separate out and continue to separate out until it was a sequence of zero depth circles all embedded within each other with no sensual form other than the fact that each successive one was traveling slightly faster or slower than those it was adjacent two. However such a universe would be not be fractal and can easily be constructed in two dimension not three.

However if the field of flow is a mobius strip the above does not happen as described. The circular structure is still there but because it is only one surface with one edge the forces acting within it do not manifest in a separation our of its structure just in terms of its depth, though that occurs, and is what we call "procreation" at what we have chosen to call the biological level, but what is more important because the filed in three dimensional that the disruptive dynamics i have described due to the centrifugal forces inevitable in circular motion also occur within the length, the direction of the flow itself. This is on the curve inevitable in the mobius strip. The same edge on opposite "sides" (what can that mean) of the strip has to move faster than the other for it to stay cohesive but they are the same thing separated in relative time by the flow but so must flow at the same speed but they cannot because one is on the outside of the "circle" and the other is on the "inside". the only way out of this conundrum is the one described for the circle but here it ia absolutely imperative the flow must split in two along its direction of flow. In a mobius field this can only provide temporary relief because then the process has created a one sided field three space with two twists in it not one so the process of "construction" I have described must continue and the "double twisted mobius" strip must split again along its line of flow but this time this rupture will not produce one "quadruple twisted mobius strips" but two single twisted ones intertwined with each other. This is what i believe we call a "structure" a "form" and it always has two parts one flowing faster than the other to create the local basin of attraction we call form but which mathematically is a Mandelbrot set (highly fractal) defined by a function defined over a complex field that that from a particular perspective in time could be described as temporally stable.

I think one of these intertwined mobius strips we may chose to label as energy that always has the potential to disrupt the "form" and the other we might chose to call "information" which provides the apparent organisation that creates the autopeosis we attribute to a particular form that in biology we would perhaps describe as a species - please note that the entity is the species not the structural dichotomy we often introduce here between "male" and "female" or the dynamic dichotomy we chose to introduce by distinguishing between parent and child. this species will replicate itself like the concentric circles do ad infinitum as long as it energy keeps on being energised and its information keeps acting to retain its structure which it will.

However the process is continuous and never stops. We now call it evolution. New species and an occasional genus keep spinning out of the process but it is ONE process in three dimension where nothing every becomes disconnected from anything else but each element, "structure", within it MUST contain all the elements of all the previous processes in the unfolding hierarchy that is the way of the universe we inhabit.

The first two interconnected mobius strips are that between the universe we occupy and the anti-universe we cannot sense but that is its dual. Our universe then splits along its lateral axis into "strings" (the stuff of high energy physics) that then split again into matter and energy (nuclear physics) from which are formed elements which in turn form molecules which accrete out into the structures of our astrophysical universe, which produce within its field suns working on the basis of fast "electromagnetic style" energy and planets working on slow gravitational organising style energy that produces "solar" systems linking slow and fast energy to produce at one end of the spectrum suns pushing out huge volumes of fast energy from the interaction in their core between fast electromagnetic energy and slow gravitational energy and at the other planets with an insufficiency in size to become energy producing sources so act as a sink for their suns energy and the dissipation of their own residual electromagnetic energy held in abeyance to their sun to receive greater or lesser amount of electromagnetic energy from it determined by their distance from it.

The forces acting on the planets turn them into a huge mixing machine for all the elements and the molecules and their are billions upon billions of these and in some this mixing pot must inevitable produce yet another lateral rift in the fabric of the ever unfolding set of mobius strips that are our universe to produce what we call life which again is an interconnection between a fast "energy" source with a slower organising "information" source to produce a new form, a species. This entity this singleton, can then divide ad infinitum presenting as it dynamic structure parents and children and its formatting structure males and females but actually always being one thing.

I can go onto describe the process evolving to create the emergent processes we call societies etc but I will not.

On this model we have a system of systems processes (SSPs) which with no equivocation whatsoever everything is always connected to everything else but a huge variety of structures and forms (genus) are manifest within this ONE very very very simple process and within each of the elements the variety of species in form is equally massive and within all of these there is prior and posterior parents and children and conjunctive male and female for want of better labels – one has one process continuously generating isomorphies of itself consisting of the two linked local parts of the common singular flow, one fast and one slow we call a “structure” a term probably best attached to the singularity and so two “form” we could chose to call “male” and “female” or阴 ying and 阳 yang {by the way日is the character for the sun the giver of electromagnetic energy and月the character for the inert moon symbolic of gravitational organisational energy working alone while阝(fù yì) is simply singular for a place}

Now the structural mathematics of all this has all been worked out and proved mathematically in Rene Thom’s great but impenetrable book to the non-mathematician “Structural Stability and Morphogenesis”. This work is still VERY highly regarded by all the mathematicians in his peer group and has never been discredited for or by itself. It has been discredited by the use that has been made of it by uncomprehending non-mathematicians.

The key thing to know is that his mathematics is defined over a measure not a metric space. It can therefore never produce any quantifiable predictions that could be statistically tested. It only seeks to explain how ordered, fast and slow, smooth dynamic process can interact to produces the discontinuities (catastrophes) that create the huge variety of structures we sense and our brains construct out of what they believe, find useful to our survival, about the universe we occupy.

The Garden of Eden

10000 years ago we were hunter gatherers. We were closely integrated with the processes of the planet that evolved us. Its bounty was free. We were both of it and from it. We knew and understood that we lived within the same frame of time as most of what sustained us.

We ate what we found meat, fruit, vegetables and grains. Their form depended on where we lived and the seasons. Most of these our bodies cannot convert to fat and store. Most natural food cannot be stored. It goes “bad” (for us) quickly. It putrefies. Some natural foodstuffs, carbohydrates, grain, sugars, etc. are storable. They do not putrefy. Our bodies can convert them to fat. Thus our bodies can store their energy. Because it does not go bad it also can be stocked in grain stores etc.

Our modern, only recently understood view of nutrition, tells us that a diet so composed is healthy. It has great variety. This made us very flexible creatures in terms of our food needs. We did not occupy a food niche that could be vulnerable. We did not need to compete directly with others for our food. If we found another creature occupying a particular niche we could comfortable avoid competing with it and use another sources of food.

Many of the foods we ate contained anti-oxidants These, we now believe, protect us from diseases such as cancer that result from the internal cellular damage that can occur as a result of oxidation. The variety utilised meant we acquired a need for many trace elements. The hunter gatherers varied diet provided these. It was a very difficult diet to become obese on. Very little of what we ate could be converted and stored as fat by our bodies. Carbohydrates are relatively rare in nature.

To survive we therefore had to eat regularly during the day because we could not store energy easily from our diet. However many of our foods were highly nutritious and available in large quantity so this was not a problem. Unlike other creatures we did not have to spend the whole day foraging and eating. We had time for art thought and enterprise. Much of this time was spent teaching our young and learning as young. Humans do not reach sexual maturity till after more than ten years of life and intellectual maturity till our late teens or early twenties

Our diet then based as it was on fruit and vegetables thus helped avoid the diseases attributable to cellular age such as cancer and made obesity a rare pathological event. A diet of protein, fat and fruit and very little starchy food convertible into fat ensures this. We were slim and destined to remain so. To keep up our energy level we eat regularly throughout the day. Obesity was a rarity.

Some of our food could be stored but such food was not produced naturally in a form or quantity sufficient to sustain our survival. It needs to be cultivated to be used thus. Enough was available to store a small amount as body fat. We could thus use this small store for energy when other food was scarce. Hunter gatherers did find enough of this to create stores of energy both within and without their bodies. The Garden of Eden's bounty thus had a sufficiency that could sustain us even when other sustenance was scarce.

We did use some of our planet's plenty created within a very different frame of reference to our own, timber and stone for example. The former is renewed on a time scale of many hundreds of years and the latter on time scales of millions. However given the small number of humans that could survive as hunter gatherers the exploitation rate of such forms was so low as compared to the processes creating them that they were being replaced faster than they were being used up.

In such a world the concept of property had little meaning. Everything was a free gift of nature. In the Garden of Eden nothing exists in a sensible form except fleetingly. Each was a short term by-product of the process of being whither they were animals, trees or rocks. All that found sufficient to exist did so for its allotted time and was then passed on as feedstock to the other processes of which they were but a part of what is one whole.

Without storable property communal investment in protective security was not needed. There are no stocks of food worth acquiring that could sustain one beyond a few days. There is no incentive to try to acquire an unknown foraging area. It is of doubtful use without the local knowledge and understanding its indigenous peoples required to exploit it. This is generally peculiar to those humans who have adapted through learning to exploit the place they are born into. In this man evolved in a manner unusual in the evolution of the Way. We evolved to understand our environment. This enables us peculiarly to adapt either ourselves or alternatively our environment to survive within it. However before modern technology this knowledge and understanding took some time, perhaps several generations, for a group in a territory to acquire.

Without modern technology could any of us, other than Eskimos and Bushmen, live in the Arctic or the Kalahari Desert? The understanding “know how”, required to survive as a hunter gatherer in such a context is in the communal experience of the people of that place, a place of which they are an integral inclusive part.

It should be noted also that survival in such contexts is a communal not an individual affair. Local humanity is then clearly the unity not the individual people or lifetimes of which it is composed. Eskimo men could probably learn to make their own clothes and rear children. Eskimo women could probably learn to find food animals and hunt. However the cost of acquiring such “know how” in the extremis they face as a community is the difference between life and death. In hunter gatherer societies the community with its local knowledge of its environment is clearly the viable entity not the individuals composing it. In extreme circumstances, such as that of the Artic or Kalahari Desert individuals are very clearly organelles not organisms.

Unique local understanding, “know how” and knowledge learned and stored in the community is the community’s intellectual property. Possible usurpers simply do not have access to it. In such a context acquisitively inspired violence, war, has little purpose. It is to be observed that generally other living things do not do war. Modern man did. A main issue in this work will be to explore why this might be.

In hunter gather group's, internal security, policing of property physical or intellectual is unnecessary. Viability is an attribute of the community not an individual characteristic. Those with the physical strength or intellectual guile could take what they want by force or subterfuge but to do so is to seed their own destruction. If they did so act and were discovered they could be excluded from the nurture, support and security the group offers. In the harsh environment in which they live, without the support and protection of others, death is then certain. A hunter on his own who cannot hunt through injury and all are injured at sometime, will starve to death. In this socio-economic context individuals are not viable without the group except for very short periods of time. What individuals have is not heritable what the community has is.

In such a context to be injured or ill, and on your own, is synonymous with death, i.e. exclusion from the process of being. Even now when symbolically excluded from his group by having a bone pointed at them Australian aboriginal simply die. For such people exclusion is far more of a fear than physical violence. The emotional violence wrought by withdrawing support, the withdrawal of love, is what is feared above all else. To this day the fear of rejection is so very very powerful that is is still a deep rooted characteristic of all humanity. It is an extremely powerful, much feared, tool in the hands of those who effect to use it.

With this tool, in environments of the type described, men and women are truly equal. Brutish violent behaviour as a means to an end, including indulgence in perverted procreative urges such as rape, are simply not viable strategies. Those using them can very easily be excluded from the succour of the community and so find themselves consigned to death.

All this suggests an idyll. A time in which the universe, nature and human groups were all in perfect balance one with another. This is a false perception.

It ignores the Universe's, nature's Way, as an ever changing unfolding evolutionary process. Humanities uniqueness is in its capacity to gain a perspective from which to understand the flows, this process stimulates. These are always distinct from the forms momentarily created by them we sense and know. We have the ability to understand what creates what we sense and thus have the potential to access the Way of the universe in a manner different from that available to other manifestations of its processes.

In considering our understanding of the “Way” every moment should be seen in proportion to its cosmic context. On this our planet' existence is a fleeting event. The form we call life upon it is of even less significance. Within that a distinct human life form is barely noticeable. Within humanity's ambience modern civilization is a trivially short un-noteworthy experience. Yet here we are choosing to comment upon it.

This is written by a Britain from Reading, a city 40 miles West of London who now lives in Suzhou a Chinese city, 40 miles West of Shanghai. London could claim a history of nearly 2000 years Reading perhaps 1000. In human terms these two cities have been of socio-economic significance for only 500 and 200 years respectively. Suzhou is referred to by Confucius 2500 years ago as the capital of the Kingdom of Wu. It remains socially and economically significant today.

Americans are overwhelmed by European historical perspectives. They will be blown by China's when its 2500 year old history bursts into global focus during the 2008 Olympiad. This event has origin in a European civilisation with roots are as old as China's. Unlike China the civilisation they supported no longer exists except as ruins but its ideas are stored to permeate our lives.

Like Reading Suzhou is close to a great modern metropolis, Shanghai.was an insignificant fishing village when the British created it 200 years ago. It is now a globally significant city. From a Chinese perspective it is a recent Western intrusion of short term significance to their way of being..

In planetary terms these historical perspectives distort reality. Global warming could drown three of these cities this century. In cosmic terms this is not worth comment. To see things from these three points of view, human, planetary and cosmic, matters. Understanding the significance to humanity of our capacity to learn how to store actively can only be seen in its true depth when viewed simultaneously from all three. Our capacity consciously to plan to store the surpluses thrown up by the “Way” is highly relevant to our species perception of its integration with it.

Humans noted that seeds carelessly scattered when gathering a natural crop gave a renewed resource a year on. From this we grew to understand we had the capacity to nurture such occurrences through the process of cultivation,. Cultivating, farming, storable carbohydrates, freed us from a day to day perspective based on seasonal local availability. Crops grow on an annual, solar, cycle. Our perspective became, solar and celestial rather than lunar and seasonal..

The Evolution of War and Violence

The Evolution of War and Violence

In considering our understanding of the “Way” every moment should be seen in proportion to its cosmic context. On this our planet' existence is a fleeting event. The form we call life upon it is of even less significance. Within that a distinct human life form is barely noticeable. Within humanity's ambience modern civilization is a trivially short un-noteworthy experience. Yet here we are choosing to comment upon it.

This is written by a Britain from Reading, a city 40 miles West of London who now lives in Suzhou a Chinese city, 40 miles West of Shanghai. London could claim a history of nearly 2000 years Reading perhaps 1000. In human terms these two cities have been of socio-economic significance for only 500 and 200 years respectively. Suzhou is referred to by Confucius 2500 years ago as the capital of the Kingdom of Wu. It remains socially and economically significant today.

Americans are overwhelmed by European historical perspectives. They will be blown by China's when its 2500 year old history bursts into global focus during the 2008 Olympiad. This event has origin in a European civilisation with roots are as old as China's. Unlike China the civilisation they supported no longer exists except as ruins but its ideas are stored to permeate our lives.

Like Reading Suzhou is close to a great modern metropolis, Shanghai.was an insignificant fishing village when the British created it 200 years ago. It is now a globally significant city. From a Chinese perspective it is a recent Western intrusion of short term significance to their way of being..

In planetary terms these historical perspectives distort reality. Global warming could drown three of these cities this century. In cosmic terms this is not worth comment. To see things from these three points of view, human, planetary and cosmic, matters. Understanding the significance to humanity of our capacity to learn how to store actively can only be seen in its true depth when viewed simultaneously from all three. Our capacity consciously to plan to store the surpluses thrown up by the “Way” is highly relevant to our species perception of its integration with it.

Humans noted that seeds carelessly scattered when gathering a natural crop gave a renewed resource a year on. From this we grew to understand we had the capacity to nurture such occurrences through the process of cultivation,. Cultivating, farming, storable carbohydrates, freed us from a day to day perspective based on seasonal local availability. Crops grow on an annual, solar, cycle. Our perspective became, solar and celestial rather than lunar and seasonal.

Crops can be grown in quantity and stored. Long, now extinct civilisations, depended on this. Moses demonstrated its truths to the Egyptians in the story of the seven years of plenty followed by the seven lean years. The Assyrian's accounting tablets and the Incas knot records testify to the social significance of such know how. Recording and accounting were created to assist storing it and then became means of wider communication. Only one civilisation based on this form has lasted hardly touched and intact into the present time, China.

This approach to being requires sustainable propriety in land. This demands social institution to evolve to protect it and its produce. Wealth invested in farming, irrigation, seed grain, fertilizer, and storing its products grain silos etc. need protecting from nature and people

The wealth created and stored does violence to natural order. It exclude people and nature from its bounty. Uncultivated plants become weeds. Creatures feeding on cultivated plants, crops, become pests. People inside society seeking to acquire them other than through a market become criminals, those from outside enemies to be eliminated with the weeds and vermin.

A state with access to significant lethal force is required to protect such investment in stock and other stored accumulated value, wealth. Access by others other than those granted the privilege is thus prevented. Plants, animals and people seeking “unauthorised” access need to be ruthlessly neutered or eliminated for such a system to be successful. Authority and associated power over others is thus institutionalised. Plants become weeds, animals vermin and other peoples enemies to be eliminated ruthlessly in the survival interest of this vegetarian civilisation. So much for the pacific ideal of the arable farmer. The one thing that is simply not true is that vegetarianism and its associated activity of farming is in its substance pacific. It is instead in its essence aggressively martial. Agrarian societies do violence to the natural order and are only sustainable by doing continuous violence to the rest of nature including their own species. Cultivators both create enemies and are enemies to be feared

Societies based on cultivation differ hugely from hunter gatherer and modern societies inthis. They are based on propriety and the power over nature’s provision it seemingly provides. Violent exclusion is the means to their ends. Violence has to be practiced to sustain them.

Propriety excludes other humans from access to stored value in developed land and stores of crops. Violent acquisition is then a viable strategy. It leaves a usurper in possession of immediately usable wealth. Knowledge (intellectual property) on farming is publicly available. The written or recorded language such societies acquire for accounting purposes ensures this knowledge is stored. Such knowledge is not exclusive to those with particular local knowledge. The usurper of an agricultural developed community acquires immediately usable stored sustenance and a resource, developed land that can be exploited to future benefit.

In this system socially organised violence is thus necessary to protect what one has. For similar reasons socially managed violence, war, is a viable means of obtaining sustenance and procreating new societies based upon one’s own. The basic social entity has changed from globally diverse locally cohesive communal groups to societies, states. These are based on the use of violent ruthless exclusion. This is required to protect what they have from the understandably self righteous violence of the disposed or similarly acquisitive. There is thus a direct correlation between vegetarianism and violence. Farmers may not be violent to other humans but the institutions they require to operate are just ask the few American Plains Indians that are left about the non-violence of farmers.

In such a world war is the tool societies naturally use to penetrate others to procreate their way of being and develop new sustainable approach to wealth creation and accumulation. In such a world women move from being equal partners in power to being property to be possessed or taken.

To be sustainable such societies needed to be larger than other similar ones so they can overwhelm potential usurpers by force of arms. To be large requires an exceedingly stable and effective system of administration sustainable over time.

The West failed to discovered such a system and as a consequence was plagued by wars, rape and pillage. China found the Confucian and Taoist “Way” of providing a sustainable social stable base supporting effective agricultural. This extolled family stability and obedience. This was to be echoed in and modelled in the impartial behaviour of state officials appointed on the basis of merit not influence. It worked. China became and remained for centuries the sole continuing success story of the agricultural system. Family stability and its associated imperial administrative system dissipated disruptive social behaviour and provided a stable foundation of institutionalised authority in which agricultural could flourish to generate the wealth to support the institutional power required to sustain it.