...life can be translucent

Menu

infrastructure is described by

pakua

visitor
Joined
Aug 26, 1972
Messages
359
Reaction score
0
Hey Chris,

What exactly do you mean by this phrase? To me, infrastructure means the inner workings of something, or how something is built, or what holds something together.

What is the difference, for example, of the infrastructures of, hex 01 and hex 24?
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Hey Chris,

What exactly do you mean by this phrase? To me, infrastructure means the inner workings of something, or how something is built, or what holds something together.

What is the difference, for example, of the infrastructures of, hex 01 and hex 24?
------------------------------------
in·fra·struc·ture (nfr-strkchr)
n.
1. An underlying base or foundation especially for an organization or system.
2. The basic facilities, services, and installations needed for the functioning of a community or society, such as transportation and communications systems, water and power lines, and public institutions including schools, post offices, and prisons.
---------------------------------

The system/organisation can be an individual or organisation - we cover the skeletal form and the support systems etc. The focus in the I Ching Plus is on the infrastructure, the skeletal form, base, foundation, of a hexagram.

The hexagram that best fits this term is hexagram 27 (100001) with its focus on the skeletal form of something and concerns about the quality of materials we use to flesh out the skeleton.

From XORing we find that if you XOR 27 with ANY hexagram it will give you the description of that hexagram's infrastructure (skeletal form) by analogy to another hexagram. For example, infrastructure of 01:

111111 (01)
100001 (27)
-------- XOR
011110 (28) - too much yang. excess.

100000 (24)
100001 (27)
--------- XOR
000001 (23) - prune, cut back to repeat (next year etc)

See further comments in:

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/introXOR.html

There is a more formal coverage in:

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/properties.html

since the I Ching is derived from self-referencing we can get it to describe itself.

Chris.
 

pakua

visitor
Joined
Aug 26, 1972
Messages
359
Reaction score
0
But what is the foundation of a hex, and how does the foundation differ between hexes, for example 1 and 24? I don't want an analogy to another hex (I don't even know what that means), I just want a description of the foundation of those two hexes.

Are you saying the foundation of 24 is pruning?

And why did you choose 27 to be the best fit for infrastructure? Couldn't other hexes do just as well?
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
But what is the foundation of a hex, and how does the foundation differ between hexes, for example 1 and 24? I don't want an analogy to another hex (I don't even know what that means), I just want a description of the foundation of those two hexes.

Are you saying the foundation of 24 is pruning?
not precisely - the 27-ness of 24 describes the infrastructure through analogy to the VAGUE, or GENERIC, qualities of 23. In 23 the PARTICULAR focus on pruning covers the GENERAL focus on preparation of next year and so a generic sense of, focus upon, house-keeping and preparation - patterns of RETURN, a re-beginning, re-birth - the repetition, the cycles, of nature etc etc. Thus the SKELETAL form of 24 acts to support what we then flesh out 24 with - and so move form the general to the particular.

If you want the FOUNDATIONS of 24 then XOR with 48 where the focus is on setting done a well to serve as a source of nourishment for founding a society. There is also the building of such through making small gains (hex 09) etc etc

Thus the 48-ness of 24 is described by analogy to:

100000 (24)
011010 (48)
-------- XOR
111010 (05)

This gets into nourishment from networking whilst waiting for an opportunity (a beginning) - and so preparedness etc of 05.

with 09 we have:

100000 (24)
111011 (09)
-------- XOR
011011 (57)

thus 24 builds foundations by becoming increasingly influencial (like a rising wind - with/from cultivation comes becoming influencial). This gets into the nature of a CYCLE that starts low (no/low amplitude) and then increases to a peak before tapering off again.

We can see 24 from the inside (47-ness) or the outside (22-ness). We can see its purpose (completion 63-ness) and so on. Using XOR we get the full spectrum of as hexagram described by analogy to all of the other hexagrams.

pukua said:
And why did you choose 27 to be the best fit for infrastructure? Couldn't other hexes do just as well?
It came from noticing a pattern of meaning that comes out when we flip the top and bottom lines of a hexagram (covered in the ddiamond website as an observation). I then recognised that this flipping of 1 and 6 was the equivalent of XORing 27 with a hexagram and the qualities of 27 focus on this aspect of 'hungering' for filling-in the skeletal form with 'meat and muscle'.

I then went on to test this by using XORing of all hexagrams and so discovered the 'entanglement' nature of XORing - as covered in the links I supplied previously - and so the ability to get the I Ching to describe the GENERAL characteristics of a hexagram through analogies with all of the rest.

Chris.
 

pakua

visitor
Joined
Aug 26, 1972
Messages
359
Reaction score
0
the 27-ness of 24 describes the infrastructure through analogy to the VAGUE, or GENERIC, qualities of 23. In 23 the PARTICULAR focus on pruning covers the GENERAL focus on preparation of next year and so a generic sense of, focus upon, house-keeping and preparation - patterns of RETURN, a re-beginning, re-birth - the repetition, the cycles, of nature etc etc. Thus the SKELETAL form of 24 acts to support what we then flesh out 24 with - and so move form the general to the particular.
Ok, so you're saying "the infrastructure of 24 has to do with the GENERAL focus on preparation of next year and so a generic sense of, focus upon, house-keeping and preparation"? I don't really see the connection. Just because you return to a particular way doesn't necessarily imply house-keeping, does it?
 

pakua

visitor
Joined
Aug 26, 1972
Messages
359
Reaction score
0
Also, it seems confusing to read, "the 27-ness of 24 describes the infrastructure".

If you consider the term "infrastructure" as relating to the whole hex, yet the 27-ness described above only relates to 1/64th of the infrastructure of th hex, then each of the other hexes describe an additional 1/64th of that hex. But you're only using it with regard to 27.

In case that wasn't clear, couldn't you say the 48-ness of 24 also describes the infrastructure of 24, in a manner of speaking. Infrastructure is infrastructure. I don't see how your 27 example is any different than your 48 example.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Ok, so you're saying "the infrastructure of 24 has to do with the GENERAL focus on preparation of next year and so a generic sense of, focus upon, house-keeping and preparation"? I don't really see the connection. Just because you return to a particular way doesn't necessarily imply house-keeping, does it?
infrastructure covers what is built at the skeletal level to support the main focus. The main focus of 24 covers returning, re-beginning, a start of a fresh cycle even if it is the first cycle and so a beginning rather than re-beginning. The trigrams read "with enlightenment (thunder in lower) comes devotion to another/others (i.e. the 'one true path')".

Each hexagram has a range of qualities covering its expression. Thus for 23 its basic, generic, focus is on 'housekeeping' where we do such to prevent things getting messy, beyond management, later. The 'average' focus is on pruning where we are a touch more proactive - we dont just fluff the pillows and dust, we dry clean the pillows, hoover the floor, cut back the excess in preparation for the future. The 'hard core', high intensity focus is of a high priest/priestness proactively, high energy, removing all the fluff from the faith to bring out the core basics. (this gets into the focus on a bed as we strip the layers etc in that a bed is what we rest upon, and so we rest upon our beliefs - the stripping of the bed represents the stripping of acquired beliefs to get back to the core, the basics. The final true 'structure' amongst all of the 'chaos' - the nitty gritty as such.

So -- the description of the infrastructure of 24 as 23 relates to the GENERIC properties of 23, these expressed in VAGUE terms. The sense of 24 is refined in ITS expression with a more concerted more precise focus on returning, re-beginning, repetition of a cycle etc (and inherant in that is the belief of all beginnings being eventually cyclic)

The 27-ness relationship is symmetric in that the generic characteristics of 24 describe the infrastructure of 23 where ITS focus is on the generic 'cyclic behaviour' that is then more formally expressed as flowering(seeding)/pruning etc

23 shares space as the side of a coin who has the opposite side of 43 - seeding, spreading the word etc. Thus seeding/pruning brings out an overall cyclic focus. The cycle itself, without reference to the core dichotomy of seed/prune, is covered in 24 as its focus on return, what a hexagram comes back to and so begins, starts to repeat the cycle.

As 24 has a sense of beginning so 23 has a sense of ending and preparing for the next 'beginning' etc.

Thus we can derive the 24-ness of hexagram, what it keeps coming back to, begins with, as we can the 23-ness, 43-ness, 01-ness, 45-ness etc.

What is not covered in the traditional material is the formal identification of the qualities of a hexagram covering raw to refined - it is hidden amongst the notion of bottom up development. This focus is covered in line change dynamics that cover movement 'up' a hexagram to eventually express its opposite (e.g. in 23 the opposite is 43, in 43 23 but these serve as sources of analogy in describing change etc. and cover the cycle of yin-into-yang, yang-into-yin etc - it reflects the focus on PAIRS where working through one element of a pair, once exhausted, leaves only the other element where IT too must be worked through to cover the WHOLE that the pair represent - self-referencing is all about PAIRS as a minimum ;-))

Chris.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Also, it seems confusing to read, "the 27-ness of 24 describes the infrastructure".

If you consider the term "infrastructure" as relating to the whole hex, yet the 27-ness described above only relates to 1/64th of the infrastructure of th hex, then each of the other hexes describe an additional 1/64th of that hex. But you're only using it with regard to 27.
Each hexagram contributes UNIQUE aspects to the expression of the whole. As covered before, each hexagram has a range of expressions from 'dampened' to 'amplified' expressions. Thus 23 covers issues of pruning/housekeeping/the-last-bastion-of-order-faith!

The infrastructure 'seed' is 27 and it can blossom into a huge, high maintenance form or a simple basic form. Context will select that.

The repetition 'seed' is 24 and it too covers the range of expressions for 'repetitions'.
The pruning 'seed' is 23, and so on. This is the realm of 64 unique forms. The ASPECTS of each of those requires XORing and more self-referencing.

Thus, using XOR at the general level of 64 hexagrams, we can map out the infrastructure bias or pruning bias or repetition bias or completion bias (63-ness) of a hexagram.

These are all UNIQUE contributors of expressions to a whole. Self-referencing does this, it breaks the whole into its spectrum.

if you want more detail then you need more self-referencing and so need to apply 27 to itself and get 64 hexagrams 'on top of' 27 - a sequence of 64 dodecagrams covering the range of the finer qualities of 27 that you are focused upon (and so the 64 harmonics of the core quality of 27, where these can then form into core qaulities of their own) - these are your 1/64ths of 'infrastructure':

100001-000000
100001-000001
100001-000010
100001-000011
..
..
100001-111111

These too can be XORed! so a LOT of detail is present, usually too much at these levels but you can treat the above as we do trigrams in hexagrams. Thus 100001-000000 covers an aspect of infrastructure of "with/from hungering comes absolute trust in another" - and so the sense of an infrastructure eliciting this bias to absolute trust another as it can absolute trust in self (100001-111111) etc.

At the level of 64 hexagrams, all of the dodecagram information us enfolded, curled-up in the hexagram (each hexagram has 64 dodecagrams 'in' it. Each dodecagram has 4096 dodecagrams 'in' it and so on!).

The Language of the Vague communicates through CLASSES, classifiers, not instances - the spectrum gives you the UNIQUE and from there we can have many instances of each class etc. Due to the self-referencing so the deeper we go we find all classes of level X repeated in each class developed further down.

If we apply this to the MBTI then the position of hex 27 in the dimension of classes covers the CLASS of persona that is focused on dealing with infrastructures (is attracted to such) or the more generic sense of binding (sharing of time etc in that with binding we can dismantle a structure without any cost, in bonding that is difficult in that bonding comes with residue when unbonded) in which is operating quality control (the bond aspect, the glue that keeps the bind tight)

Chris.
 

pakua

visitor
Joined
Aug 26, 1972
Messages
359
Reaction score
0
Ok, I got it,... you're using infrastructure to describe an aspect of each specific hex, whereas I had thought you meant the general infrastructure of all hexes.


Your description of the relationships between the hexes with xor'ing sounds reasonable, but how do you know it's not just another method of making patterns fit your ideas? There are many of those already, and we can rationalize any of them so they sound good.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Ok, I got it,... you're using infrastructure to describe an aspect of each specific hex, whereas I had thought you meant the general infrastructure of all hexes.
of EACH. Each hexagram is a unique expression due to the self-referencing that does not repeat. BUT the self-referencing also defines the language to be used to describe 'all there is', thus each hexagram is (a) a source of unique identity and (b) a source of repeated identity through the use of analogy.

Thus hexagram 27 is unique as it covers skeletal forms in need of filling in (add meat and muscle etc) and the associated quallity control of such. But it is also a source of analogy in describing 27-ness as expressed in other hexagrams.

Due to the self-referencing all of the categories are aspects of the whole and can work through constructive and destructive interferences to create an expression of the whole that fits some context (or more so serves as a class of contexts through which we customise the expression)

pakua said:
Your description of the relationships between the hexes with xor'ing sounds reasonable, but how do you know it's not just another method of making patterns fit your ideas? There are many of those already, and we can rationalize any of them so they sound good.
The IDM materlal has stemmed from a thorough analysis of neuroscience, psychology etc research data covering the generation and manipulation of meaning. Thus the template of meaning derived by that work is not about the I Ching, it is about self-referencing.

By establishing the isomorphism of the I Ching with the IDM template, as well MBTI categories with the template - and mathematics, and categories of emotion etc etc so we can use fleshed-out aspects of one to fill in details of another/others.

The application of XORing to the I Ching came out of observations of the I C as well as patterns in paradox processing and the use of XOR to encrypt/decrypt data - to compress details into a complex form and extract such (as done in paradox).

IOW noticing the 'flipping' of 1 & 6 in the I Ching and what that brought out, made the association to what the brain does with wholes and parts. And so I applied XOR to hexagrams and came up with the ability to extract a hexagram's spectrum through analogy to other hexagrams - and so we can identify th contributions of the whole to the parts, the parts to the whole. Furthermore, due to the self-referencing so each part can be interpreted as if a whole as well and so a hexagram's spectrum is possible as is a spectrum of the I Ching in the form of hexagram sequences.

This ability is thus inherant in all self-referencing systems - the other one I have worked on is the MBTI where we can extract the spectrum of a persona - something the traditional MBTI has not been able to do since the originators knew nothing of the properties that come with self-referencing (it also applies to emotions, types of numbers in mathematics, categories of socio-economic systems etc etc etc

See a more formal focus in:

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/properties.html

fundamentally, due to self-referencing we can get the IC to describe itself but from the position of CLASSES of meaning.

Chris.
 

pakua

visitor
Joined
Aug 26, 1972
Messages
359
Reaction score
0
Sure, I understand there's a lot of work, reason and effort put into it, and it makes a lot of sense, but it doesn't really answer my question.

The way it seems to me is, the way you see the world, and how the brain works within that world, is how you made your system. It's one and the same, isn't it?

IOW, if the brain worked differently, the system would work differently. So it's a loop, and you can't really get out of it to prove it.

Not that I'm saying it's wrong, since I have no idea, but it doesn't seem any more provable than the magical/mystical method. But it reminds me of those old books where they compare modern physics with Buddhist philosophy, and they're both saying the same thing, using different words.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Sure, I understand there's a lot of work, reason and effort put into it, and it makes a lot of sense, but it doesn't really answer my question.

The way it seems to me is, the way you see the world, and how the brain works within that world, is how you made your system. It's one and the same, isn't it?

IOW, if the brain worked differently, the system would work differently.
The focus on neuroscience research covers the way we all see the world as species-members. The neurology dynamics is consistant over millions of years and so represents a stable system for information processing.

The brain is what we work with, the patterns derived from differentiating/integrating as the core dichotomy that is self-referenced. Anything OUTSIDE of that will be interpreted from WITHIN it and appear as paradox.

The neurology works the same across all neuron-dependent life forms. Local customisations introduce local differences but the general is constant. Thus all neuron-dependent life forms will categorise the same way - the tiny zebra fish makes the same distinctions of known/unknown as we do but it lacks the neural complexity that we have to enable us to do what we do a compared to what it can do.

pakua said:
Not that I'm saying it's wrong, since I have no idea, but it doesn't seem any more provable than the magical/mystical method.
Science is about repetition and so history. It covers cause-effect. The universe demonstrates cause-effect. The issues with magical/random methods is the belief systems involved that act to make the methods 'competitive' and so issues of religious/spiritual vs secular perspectives. The IDM focus is on a 'third way' that comes out of the middle of the magical/random where consideration of methodology of the brain brings out the questions method of dealing with/applying the IC. What that method clearly demonstrates is the isomorphism of emotional categories with IC categories with IDM categories and so the ONE method seeds all - the method of the containment of noise eliciting order through self-referencing. IOW there is no need for magical/random methods.

What this 'third way' does is present results that appear to be more consistant than the magical/random methods. Consistancy means realiability in assessment and prediction of situations. Furthermore, through working in this manner we identify general purpose in groups as we do the ability to get a hexagram spectrum etc.

The methodology represents the universe as such FOR US and so aids in our living in the universe. Thus the ability of the Emotional I Ching work to derive meaning for all who use it stems from the shared nature of our brains. THEN comes specialisation in the form of singular experiences, customisation of classes, experiences of an instance of a class etc where truely novel experienences can appear 'classless' but differentiation of existing classes can create new ones (more refined ones) that fit the instance. If there is no fit, if the instance oscillates across all classes, then we are dealing with something outside of our scope and eliciting paradox.

pakua said:
But it reminds me of those old books where they compare modern physics with Buddhist philosophy, and they're both saying the same thing, using different words.
Which is what IDM is about. ;-) the SAMENESS across perceived DIFFERENCES. Understanding the sameness allows us to quickly understand differences in the form of specialisations where they serve as metaphors for representing the categories of sameness in different contexts.

Thus understanding the set of classes we use, and their properties/methods, allows us to understand the general perspectives of Buddhism or Physics in that the underlying patterns are the same (universals), what is expressed is difference (local context). the 'old books' you speak of often did not cover the sameness at the neurological level that sets down a template of meaning for any specialisations - thus the works we comparative of general concepts at the labels end of things rather than at the essences level of meaning in general.

In understanding reality. if we learn the classes first then it becomes easier to deal with change since the classes are constants, essences, with the changes being the different expressions given unique contexts.

So - the IDM focus is on a 'species 101' course covering the derivation of (through the chaos game) and detailed consideration of the properties/methods of the classes. THEN we move into specialisations where the classes are relabelled and instances identified.

Included in that is a property of self-referencing - entanglement. This is NOT something limited to Quantum Mechanics, it is a property of the method we use to derive meaning and so is identifiable at all levels of meaning/being.

Chris.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Of interest in the magical/random realm is what is possible from high levels of correlation (purity etc) where the correlation allows for the sharing of different spaces by the one form. What THAT does is allow for a change in one causing a change in the other regardless of seperation distance. This can then appear as a 'random' or 'miraculous' event in that there is no noticable, local, cause-effect identifiable. See work on identical twins or old radio crystals or QM etc re correlations. The issue here is on consistancy, repeatability etc and so a lack in reliability unless properly managed - which we dont do since this area needs more work to clearly identify or negate the effect (I call it the Continuum Effect and it still covers 'cause-effect' but from an 'instantaneous' perspective). The point with IDM and so its IC expression as IC+ is the consistancy in the methods.

Chris.
 

Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom

Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).

Top