Hex 25 - Without embroiling quantum physics

[my_key]

I came across this today.....or perhaps it came across me, but anyway and immediately thought of Hex 25 Innocence / Without Embroiling / Not Entangled.

"Entanglement is a quantum physics term that refers to two distinct particles that become connected and start behaving as a single system independent of the distance between them. "

I'd not come been aware of this physics terminology before and found it interesting. So to behave without entanglement in the quantum physics field one must be un-connected irrespective of how far you are from the other influencing particle.

Wilhelm -
Ch'ien, heaven is above; Chên, movement, is below. The lower trigram Chên is under the influence of the strong line it has received from above, from heaven.

Over to you quantum physicists out there for more clarification

Mike

 

[rosada]

"The devil made me do it."?

rosada

 

[bradford]

You'll find the connection here:

 

[meng]

*squinting*

 

[bradford]

I came across this today.....or perhaps it came across me, but anyway and immediately thought of Hex 25 Innocence / Without Embroiling / Not Entangled.

Do you know the sort of confusion and entanglement that you get from being duplicitous or false or untrue to yourself and others? That is the kind of entanglement that Wang refers to. Entanglement is a very limited gloss for Wang, useful only in a narrow range of contexts. Much more appropriate to its use in the Yi is the more fundamental meaning of duplicity, falseness, artificiality, etc. And nowhere does it even remotely concern the "spooky action at a distance" of quantum physics.

 

[rodaki]

*squinting*

*rubbing eyes*
. . what happened to the pipe player? and who is this peace cat?? and does Mojo know about this??????

LOL!!

(cough . . sorry for the intrusion to your thread Mike -parenthesis closed)

 

[meng]

*rubbing eyes*
. . what happened to the pipe player?

Looks like he inhaled or experienced a flash back. (Mojo just shakes his head )

On the quantum/Yi comparisons, I find some really fun ideas to play with. For h25, for example, matter behaves differently when it is observed, in that, that which is happening all around will be observed as being or occurring in a single place. The wave function breaks down into particles (particulars), becoming observable but only within a contextual field. This, to me, behaves in the same way as when I inquire of the oracle: it is one, but when a specific context is applied, it breaks down (or opens up) to 64 particulars, each with 6 interchangeable potentials.

To conceptually view a wave requires seeing in a 25 way, with neither eye on particulars. Could apply to 61, and maybe 20.6, too.

 

[Sparhawk]

Bro, you should change your name to Chong-cat...

 

[meng]

Bro, you should change your name to Chong-cat...

I'm much better now.

 

[Sparhawk]

I'm much better now.

Nooo!!! The Chong-cat was IT! Pass the pipe.

 

[rodaki]

aah . . I think I see . . smoke clouds up the sky . .

puff!! cat expires . .
pipe-players, peace-cats . . Mojo is in good company me thinks

 

[my_key]

You'll find the connection here:

Brad - Thanks for this ....it so blew my mind. However without wishing to offend anyone it all looked Greek to me.

Much more appropriate to its use in the Yi is the more fundamental meaning of duplicity, falseness, artificiality, etc. And nowhere does it even remotely concern the "spooky action at a distance" of quantum physics.

So the fundamental meaning is more about "duplicity, falseness, artificiality"......so more about being untrue to yourself. Now I'm seeing some sort of space thing connection in here on a personal level. Staying detached from the falseness while being aware of it. Close enough to observe it but far enough 'away' to not let it grab you and suck you in.

Strange also that you use the word spooky.....now where did that come from? Is it the 'action', the 'distance' or the 'quantum physics' that you attribute spooky to?

Meng I like your input here. There is certainly a lot of fun to be had playing with these comparisons of the old and new sciences.

For h25, for example, matter behaves differently when it is observed, in that, that which is happening all around will be observed as being or occurring in a single place. The wave function breaks down into particles (particulars), becoming observable but only within a contextual field.

So once you have observed the behaviour (seen it for what it really is) then you can disentangle yourself from it. However, you are not necessarily going to know the outcome of what the act of disentanglement will bring for you.The speed and size of what the change is, is not discernable. Now that is spooky !!!

Mike

 

[bradford]

Strange also that you use the word spooky.....now where did that come from?

It's actually a "technical" term in quantum physics, related to quantum entanglement,
particularly for its implications in "acausal" relationships, instant correlations in remote
systems and FTL communication.
It was coined by Einstein and used derogatorily, but it was taken up by others. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spooky_action_at_a_distance

 

[my_key]

Thanks for the link - Now here's the bit I really like
Einstein famously derided entanglement as "spukhafte Fernwirkung" or "spooky action at a distance". It was his belief that future mathematicians would discover that quantum entanglement entailed nothing more or less than an error in their calculations. As he once wrote: "I find the idea quite intolerable that an electron exposed to radiation should choose of its own free will, not only its moment to jump off, but also its direction. In that case, I would rather be a cobbler, or even an employee in a gaming house, than a physicist".

Mike

 

[meng]

Meng I like your input here. There is certainly a lot of fun to be had playing with these comparisons of the old and new sciences.



So once you have observed the behaviour (seen it for what it really is) then you can disentangle yourself from it. However, you are not necessarily going to know the outcome of what the act of disentanglement will bring for you.The speed and size of what the change is, is not discernable. Now that is spooky !!!

Mike

We're really out of both of our depths here, but no harm in swimming around, lol.

From "Tales of Power" ..

The average man seeks certainty in the eyes of the onlooker and calls that self-confidence. The warrior seeks impeccability in his own eyes and calls that humbleness. The average man is hooked to his fellow men, while the warrior is hooked only to himself. You're after the self-confidence of the average man, when you should be after the humbleness of a warrior. The difference between the two is remarkable. Self-confidence entails knowing something for sure; humbleness entails being impeccable in one's actions and feelings.

Seeing must be direct, for a warrior can't use his time to unravel what he himself is seeing . Seeing is seeing because it cuts through all that nonsense. In the beginning seeing is confusing and it's easy to get lost in it. As the warrior gets tighter, however, his seeing becomes what it should be, a direct knowing. A warrior asks a question, and through his seeing he gets an answer, but the answer is simple.

So it's not as though observing is something to be avoided, if it is also seeing. Same with attachments. Both are conditions of the gift of life. Or, we could call them entrapments, and that wouldn't be wrong either. Maya has conditions: if ya wanna play, ya gotta pay. But her biggest condition is that this life lives upon life. Seeing is all that too. Seeing is knowing the vanity, and doing it anyway, because it's what you do. If you're gonna pay, ya might as well play!

dagnabbit, I just burned my spaghetti!

 

[my_key]

We're really out of both of our depths here, but no harm in swimming around, lol.

I couldn't agree with you more............... just as i was going under along comes a life boat named Paulo Coelho

The warrior of light unwittingly takes a false step and plunges into the abyss.
Ghosts frighten him and solitude torments him. His aim had been to fight the Good Fight, and he never imagined that this would happen to him, but it did. Shrouded in darkness he makes contact with his master.
" Master, I have fallen into the abyss" he says. "the waters are deep and dark"
" Remember one thing " replies the master. " You do not drown simply by plunging into water, you only drown if you stay beneath the surface."
And the warrior uses all his strength to escape from his predicament.

dagnabbit, I just burned my spaghetti!

Carlos has been called to answer for a lot of things, but surely you are not going to lay a plate of burnt spaghetti at his door. The price of vanity is a burnt plate of spaghetti.........now how profound is that

 

[meng]

So once you have observed the behaviour (seen it for what it really is) then you can disentangle yourself from it. However, you are not necessarily going to know the outcome of what the act of disentanglement will bring for you.The speed and size of what the change is, is not discernable. Now that is spooky !!!

Back to this a moment to say the point of my statement, that matter behaves differently when observed, was mentioned not as something to do or to avoid doing but as a quantum mechanical theory.

Einstein always objected to quantum mechanics because his metaphysical realism recoiled from the idea that observation would create a different kind of reality than what existed independently. At first Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle could be interpreted as meaning that the act of observation would physically disturb a system in an ordinary and realistic way, but then it soon became evident that strange things were allowed to happen in the wave function that not only could not be observed but could not even be conceived in ordinary and realistic ways. Reality existed in a different way while under observation than it did in itself.

Entanglement theory is different again.

Quantum entanglement, also called the quantum non-local connection, is a property of a quantum mechanical state of a system of two or more objects in which the quantum states of the constituting objects are linked together so that one object can no longer be adequately described without full mention of its counterpart—even if the individual objects are spatially separated in a spacelike manner.

Does this relate to h25? Not in the same sense as the title of this thread suggests, because entanglement, in the quantum sense, involves connections to things such as intuition and premonition. It provides a thought platform for a great many daily occurrences, for which we have no Newtonian explanations. Mere swimmers need to be careful in confusing quantum names with our prior associations with the word.

I was going for andante, but lost my attachment to it, and instead became attached to this thread, created by you. So it's really your fault.

 

[meng]

Does this relate to h25? Not in the same sense as the title of this thread suggests, because entanglement, in the quantum sense, involves connections to things such as intuition and premonition.

Going to backpedal a little to the above comment. It could involve quantum entanglement, but with no moral/ethical point; not something to be done, just something to be seen. See without looking at it, because looking at it changes how it is to itself.

 

[my_key]

Meng
Any idea where this dance is going?. I've stopped to have a look at it and it feels kinda different now.
My prior association with entanglement was the word 'co-dependancy'- what tint of glass were you looking at it through?

And as for the title of the thread.............it now seems very ambiguously worded
"Hex 25 - Without embroiling quantum physics" does this confirm what Bradford and yourself have said, that the 2 are not linked. Or have we by looking at Hex 25 together with quantum physics changed how it is to itself ?

And of course the real big question "Dis-entanglement is it easier with burnt or andante spaghetti?"

Mike

 

[meng]

Mike,

Codependency, or any attachment to or association with religious or moral ideas are independent of quantum theories. That's all I'm saying. Not that it's wrong to draw such analogies and connections, necessarily, but they are not contained within quantum theoretic ideas themselves. Of course it's possible to see quantum theory or mechanics as a great and holy creation, but is that really seeing it as it is, or yet another infamous human projection? I don't know and won't assume. I think that's central to 25. I'm in continual awe of it, I'll say that much.

 

[my_key]

Hi Bruce
I've been off on other pursuits, but wanted to come back to you. The break, which has brought a few new perspectives.
Some interesting thoughts here. All you are saying is great and wonderful.
What is central for me in 25 is the essence of letting go of that which ties you down. The "infamous human projection" could be the things that we send out that we "hope" will continue to ensnare us. Which with the flick of a wrist can either entangle us or become loos and free. I imagine around hex 25 is a huge web of many strands, the more knots that we create in the strands, through our knowing and fixed /entrenched patterns of behaviour the harder it is for the flick of the wrist to un-mesh the strands.
Co-dependancy creates a huge huge huge knot and other attachments or firmly held beliefs can be equally as restricting. If it's not easy to loosen the strands with a flick of the wrist then we are faced with sitting down and painstakingly unravelling each gossamer thread from the knot. (a bit like childhood memories of unravelling mother's ball of knitting wool)

I'm asking myself why I made this connection of Hex 25 and "quantum physics" entanglement in the first place. First, as a thought provoking challenge for the existance of deep connections between deep science and the deeply esoteric and secondly to see how the Universe would answer my challenge.

I agree with you once you think you know, or assume anything then you have started to tie the knots that slow down your abilities to disentangle yourself. The flick of the wrist, or perhaps as Genesis sang in " The trick of the tail"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPl11lh1wBk

And so we set out with the beast and his horns
And his crazy description of home.
After many days journey we came to a peak
Where the beast gazed abroad and cried out.
We followed his gaze and we thought maybe we saw
A spire of gold - no, a trick of the eye that's all,
But the beast was gone and a voice was heard:

They've got no horns and they've got no tail
They don't even know of our existence
Am I wrong to believe in a city of gold
That lies in the deep distance, he cried

Who knows what lies in the deep distance?

And of course, disentanglement is much much easier with spaghetti hoops.

Mike

 

[my_key]

You'll find the connection here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh8uZUzuRhk
Dr Quantum - takes the confusion out of the quantum physics formulas.

 

[fkegan]

Hi Mike,

This thread began with the assumption that every use of the word "entanglement" could be considered related, therefore some use of entanglement in some commentary upon hex 25 meant that hexagram must be related to any discussion also using the word--such as in quantum theory using. Then the element of becoming entangled in strands of spaghetti or entangled in something else so the spaghetti burned were added as an expression of discussion synchronicity.

However, associating "entanglement" to hex 25 is hardly universal or essential. The notion that everything returned by a keyword search must be relevant is also a specialized belief. In most commentary, the hexagram is associated with negation of entanglement and any application of entanglement is seen as a difficulty.

Although the field of quantum physics grew out of Einstein's breakthrough insights and papers of the first decade of the 20th century, he spent the rest of his life fighting unsuccessfully for traditional notions of determinism and other principles of his 19th century education.

Hexagram 25 is about initial conditions and the results that follow from the interaction with reality which can be seen in quantum mechanics and cooking mishaps as well. Also in discussion threads and their development. It is a hexagram of abstract process (four Yang lines) with its specific meaning controlled by the two open Yin spaces (local structure or organization and personal passion) which are only in the background allowing the overall process to be fluid.

Everything fluid depends upon its context or container and its results contain whatever got dissolved into the process.

Frank

 

[my_key]

Hi Frank

However, associating "entanglement" to hex 25 is hardly universal or essential. The notion that everything returned by a keyword search must be relevant is also a specialized belief. In most commentary, the hexagram is associated with negation of entanglement and any application of entanglement is seen as a difficulty.

Yes I agree.
AlsoI like your comments

Hexagram 25 is about initial conditions and the results that follow from the interaction with reality which can be seen in quantum mechanics and cooking mishaps as well. Also in discussion threads and their development. It is a hexagram of abstract process (four Yang lines) with its specific meaning controlled by the two open Yin spaces (local structure or organization and personal passion) which are only in the background allowing the overall process to be fluid.

This seems to be about Interaction with reality in an authentic way, doing the right things for the right reasons at the right time. When you say the yin lines are "only in the background", for me this underplays their role. In many ways true authentic ways come from the inner world of lines 2 and 3. And yes I do see authenticity as being fluid to it's context, in a way being wholeheartedly sincere to what is before us.
What happens externally in reality can easily put a spin on what we feel inside and conversely if we approach a situation with a certain feeling or set of thoughts about it then that is what we see.

Just expanding some of my thoughts here. Perhaps a real sense of "as within, so without" has a part to play here and thereby the link to Dr Quantum.
The trick perhaps with Hex 25 is to avoid this type of false spin ( the spin ofthe spin doctors) and being true to yourself creating the spin from within rather than reacting to the spin from without.

Mike

 

[elvis]

Have a look at 25s spectrum - for example the skeletal form of 25, that which is then fleshed-out, is described by analogy to the generic characteristics of hexagram 45. IOW the grounding is in a communal context of some 'celebration of faith/belief' etc where that communal nature is 'upset' by someone standing to assert their point of view regardless of the consequences or not even aware of consequences - the latter covering Wilhelm's association with 'innocence' etc.

The act of rising to 'say your piece' covers the act of disentanglement from the communal point of view as compared to the act of increased entanglement in 25s opposite, 46.

The purpose/outcome of 25 is described by analogy to the generic characteristics of hexagram 56 with ITS focus on being loyal to some belief regardless of where you are. IOW the standing up to assert one's point of view regardless of consequences is an act of loyalty to that point of view despite any 'negative' vibes one might sense from that act.

The beginning of the 25 process is described by analogy to the generic characteristics of hexagram 12 and ITS focus on defending one's perspective in a context of possible attacks on that perspective.; thus what sets us off is the need to neutralise different perspectives and in doing so re-affirm our own - as such there is a hidden element of entanglement in remaining entangled to one's point of view by disentangling from the communal point of view.

* In the traditional sequence 25 pairs with 26.

This pairing focuses on holding to one's convictions, be it by asserting them regardless of the consequences (25) or on a general sense of 'holding firm' to traditional perspectives (26). As such 25 is more 'personal', 26 more 'social'.

HOLDING FIRM:

25 : holding firm - through expressing personal beliefs, disentangle; 25 disentangling comes from a context described by hexagram 45 - congregating, celebrating

26 : holding firm - through staying with traditional beliefs; 26 hold firm comes out of a context described by hexagram 46 - entangling, pushing upwards

The full spectrum of 25 is covered in the table in:

http://www.emotionaliching.com/lofting/bx111001.html

 

[meng]

what sets us off is the need to neutralise different perspectives and in doing so re-affirm our own - as such there is a hidden element of entanglement in remaining entangled to one's point of view by disentangling from the communal point of view.

I enjoyed reasoning through this whole post, Chris, but the above struck my funny bone.

 

[Trojina]

and mine

 

[meng]

Nooo!!! The Chong-cat was IT! Pass the pipe.

Elvis took it when he left the building.

 

[my_key]

IOW the grounding is in a communal context of some 'celebration of faith/belief' etc where that communal nature is 'upset' by someone standing to assert their point of view regardless of the consequences or not even aware of consequences - the latter covering Wilhelm's association with 'innocence' etc.

Maybe something like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJqVneZP6tA

 

[meng]

good one, Mikey.

Something I'd brought up awhile ago was the question of distinction between lines 1 and 6. They're both innocent, but while line 1 proceeds along that line, line 6 presumes upon it. Line 6 can be a lit-tle to sure of itself, and naive at the same time. Underestimating the canyon's ledge to fall. But line 1 has the right idea. So does h26.