...life can be translucent

Menu

XORing question

yick

visitor
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
hexagram 01

XOR (24) : How does this hexagram 'start', express 'beginning'? :: 44

BUT

"...For example, in hexagram 1, The Creative, the comments for the changing bottom line imply that, although having potential it is best to lie low for now. By applying the above system, the hexagram of influence is hexagram 9 - The Taming Power of the Small. This hexagram deals with the making of small gains. In this context what is being said is that in the beginning, (bottom position) if you do NOT put in enough energy (normal yang line) then only small gains can be made (changed yang to yin line).

What is implied here is that the hexagram of influence on a non-changing line is infact the opposite of that for a changing line. In the context of hexagram 1 we have hexagram 16 - Enthusiasm, which suggests the first step through hexagram 1 is enthusiasm and preparedness/foresight (a plan). "

and

"If you choose to fit into this context, then do nothing in that staying in the context will force 01 to change into 44. To stay on the path of working through the qualities of hexagram 01, in this particular situation you need to adopt the characteristics of hexagram 16 - at our current position we need to focus on enthusiastic planning/preparation for our future development and so do as the line comment suggest - lie low for now, plan "


Doesn't it mean that hexagram 01 start, express beginning through hexagram 16 ?

Or am I mixing two different things?
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
.....
Or am I mixing two different things?
Mixing three different things. Swapping trigrams perspecitive, XORing hexagrams, and a pattern covering what follows what.

The original swapping came out of noticing a pattern in meanings of changing lines as compared to XOR that cover properties of hexagrams (NOT changing lines but lines as aspects of the whole). The path focus (how do we get to X? by doing Y) comes out of reflection on the matrix of hexagrams covered in :

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

What all of this covers is the use of the I Ching as a language and so capable of describing anything - the important aspect to consider therefore is the CONTEXT.

The formal XOR material did not emerge until well after the swapping focus where the original XOR material was identified as a key focus, in that flipping the top and bottom lines of a hexagram seemed to give us its 'mud' nature as it did its 'refined' nature. See original work in the original site (started in 1995):

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond

FROM that developed the recognition of XOR-ing, the original page for that starting in 2000 and covered in http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/linemean.html - IDM was not formally defined until about the same time as the transfer from the ddiamond site through a prodigy site to the current iimetro site.

The path work came out of reflections on the REVERSE path through a matrix (the matrix derivation is from bottom right to top left, but the reading of paths is from top left to bottom right. There is a section in the original wings that covers issues of reading the IC forwards as to reading it backwards and so covering the past/future)

The issues with the I Ching is in the representations to cover BOTH categories of sequence as they can categories of structure. For example, the SEQUENCE nature of hexagrams is covered in the ability to represent five-phase cycles - see http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/icfive0.html

We can also derive the STRUCTURE of sequences in self-referencing yin/yang - to get into some of THAT see http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/icmatrix.html

There are THREE forms of interpretation of hexagrams - the asymmetric, the symmetric and the anti-symmetric.

A. Line CHANGES apply to the asymmetric.

B. Lines as representing TIME step apply to the antisymmetric (time is not reversible nor can there be more than one changing line - plum blossom method covers this but I have not done any work with that focus)

C. Lines as representing entanglements (symmetric bias) cover XOR.

The traditional focus is on line CHANGE and the TWO forms of such, either all lines are independent of each other but contribute to the whole in their behaviour (this is a non-nested hierarchy) OR all lines relate with each other in their positions etc (this is the nested hierarchy) OR some mix of both!

The history of analysis of the IC as IC+ moves from the 1995 pages to the 2007 pages with the most uptodate essays being in order on:

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/newindex2.html

With identification of XOR comes identification of getting the IC to describe itself. This is about hexagrams as combinations of lines, some actualised (yang), some not (yin) and covers the use of XOR to bring out the full spectrum of a hexagram, not the 'path' of change etc in that there is no "changing line" in this context. Thus the 24-ness of some hexagram covers the nature of 24 expressed through some hexagram by analogy to a third. There is nothing here about 'change' - we are focused on structure. Thus 24-ness of 01 is 44, infrastructure of 01 (27-ness) is 28 and so on. This all came out of the original 'sensing' about flipping the top and bottom lines of a hexagram.

Overall we have the IC as a language and context serves as the source of what the language represents.

What is implied here is we can use XOR patterns and the Emotional IC to give us information of context better than using the swapping trigrams since the swapping trigrams stemmed from an insight into trigram behaviour that led to noticing the flip of top and bottom lines that now give us 27-ness. As such XOR and Emotional IC is an improvement on earlier considerations in that we have identified the essence that was influencing the expression of swapping trigrams.

Chris.
 
Last edited:

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
Hi Yick,

I don't think XOR or another line by line (bitwise) operation can give accurate anwers to questions like 'how does A do B?'.
Bitwise operations are typically used if bits in different places have the same value or importance, i.e. if their contribution to the whole is the same.
But if you read a hexagram recursively that is not the case. The first line (bit) is more important than the second, the second is more important than the third, and so on. Interpreted as a number in binary notation (an interpretation that is compatible with recursion) the first line of a hexagram gets value 32, the second 16, etcetera.
Note that addition and multiplication of binary numbers (modulo 64) doesn't work bitwise. hex 23 + hex 23 = 000001 + 000001 = 000010 = hex 7. Adding the 1's in the 6 place gives a 'carry' that 'carries over' to the 5th place, so you get a 1 there. You cannot imitate this kind of behaviour with only bitwise operations.

What this comes down to, in fact, is that addition (mod 64) is at odds with bitwise operations. Same for multiplication. You are dealing with different mathematical structures that are incompatible.
There is no such thing as 'distribution', for example, to link XOR with addition or multiplication.
Ax(B+C)=(AxB)+(AxC) (distribution links + and x), but replace one of the operations by XOR and you will see that it doesn't work.

In short: XOR and other bitwise operations don't go well with the idea of recursion or the binary interpretation of hexagrams.
Better don't mix these two.



I'm not sure there is an easy answer to 'how does A do B?'. But perhaps it's somewhere in the dodecagram that you get by placing B on top of A. To keep the granularity down to 6 bits you could look at the 'inner' hexagrams of this 12 line monster. For example:

How does hex 37 do hex 48?

Put hex 48 on top of hex 37:
101011011010

Now look at the 5 'inner' hexes:

101011011010
x010110xxxxx = hex 47
xx101101xxxx = hex 30
xxx011011xxx = hex 57
xxxx110110xx = hex 58
xxxxx101101x = hex 30

5 steps, 5 phases? Does it tell a story?



Let's try another, how does 56 do 13?
How does a traveler make friends? (yes, I know, there are other interpretations)

001101101111

x011011xxxxx = hex 57
gentle penetration first, mix with people, slowly, you are at first hardly noticable.

xx110110xxxx = hex 58
now eat, drink, dance with them, be social and have fun. it's superfical perhaps but that's okay.

xxx101101xxx = hex 30
be alert, and cling a bit maybe to the ones you like, or be positive, radiant, shine, etcetera.

xxxx011011xx = hex 57 again
go deeper, slowly, don't forget to be gentle, take your time.

xxxxx110111x = hex 10
and watch out for 'tigers', keep distance from them and don't play with their tail, avoid power games, pecking order issues, etcetera.



Okay, how does our traveler find a lover then?

Hex 31 on top of hex 56 ..

I leave that to you, but its funny, hex 54 pops up and also hex 22. :)
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Hi Yick,

I don't think XOR or another line by line (bitwise) operation can give accurate anwers to questions like 'how does A do B?'.
)
you will have to forgive margie for her failure in understanding - she seems to be focused on XOR operator outside of what happens if XORing in the IC hexagrams and as such she is confusing you either intentionally or out of ignorance of what is going on (even though she has been exposed to the material for some time and claims to understand it - obviously with the above rubbish she does not.)

I shall try and summarise this for you working on one example, the most common most have worked with is 27-ness where flipping the top and bottom lines of ANY hexagram will give you a resulting hexagram that describes by analogy the 'mud' from which a hexagram has developed.

For example in hexagram 01 we flip 1 and 6 to give us 28. 28 covers IN GENERAL, in its GENERIC, form, excess, too much, and so the sense of the nature of hexagram 01 having an infrastructure of 'too much yang'.

Here is hex 27 in bit form: 100001
Here is hex 01 in bit form: 111111
Here is hex 28 in bit form: 011110

To get 28 we XOR 27 with 01.

Lets try another, hex 12.
If we flip the top and bottom lines we get hex 17.
hex 17 covers finding and following some belief/faith/idea/person
In its generic form, as infrastructure, the vague nature is about issues of 'establishing/following/asserting a belief' etc (the formal assertion is more in the hexagram that shares form with 17, 25).
Hex 12 covers neutralising and as such defends a belief system under attack. The IC does not like this since it smacks of refusal to change and so we find such labels as 'standstill' and 'stagnation' but it is not a negative hexagram it is also positive (ALL hexagrams contain both positive and negative depending on context)
I think you can see that XORing 27 with 12 giving 17 gives us a description of the foundations of 12, where it came from, its infrastructure etc.

If you go through all of the hexagrams and flip top and bottom you will get a description of their 'mud', their infrastructure into which we put content that 'fleshes out' the hexagram into its full blown form as 01 or 12 etc etc

Another one - hex 02. ITS infrastructure is represented by 27! How come the 27-ness of 02 is 27? Because it describes the infrastructure of 02 in that 02 is in need of filling, of content, of actualisation and the symbol for such is --- 27.

In fact if you XOR any hexagram with 02 you will get that hexagram. How come'? 02 as 02 covers all POTENTIALS, there is nothing actualised, no yang, but XORing a hexagram with 02 will bring out its actualisation as itself, as a discrete, unique, form amongst the pool containing all forms.

Given the above dynamics of XORing hexagrams with 27 we find the general dynamic of XORing ANY hexagram with ANY other will give you the EXPRESSION of the original hexagram THROUGH the second hexagram. Thus the orginal nature of 27, its focus on infrastruture, is taken literally and when XORed with any other we derive the instrastructure of that hexagram figuratively - as analogy.

What is going on? MANY have tried to use XORing on hexagrams before but failed in coming up with anything useful since they did not ask the right questions or come up with the right answers about what the resulting hexagam 'ment'.

My original work on the old ddimond site covers the realisation of what happens when you flip top and bottom lines and from THERE the formalisation in recognising that we were in fact XORing 27 with a hexagram where that will 'flip' top and bottom lines.

Given the formal recognition of XORing 27 so comes the generalisation of being able to do that for ANY hexagram and so derive, using that method, the spectrum of a hexagram where each hexagram is describable, its properties and its methods, from XORing with all of the other hexagrams. As such we can get the I Ching to describe each hexagram - we can get it to tell us about itself IN GENERAL and so give us fine details on the nature of universals.

As I have spelt out before, the GOAL material came about from consideration of the particular matrix of hexagrams within the context of reading things backwards to bring out meaning. The link with XOR is that the matrix lists the spectrum of hexagram 01 when read bottom right to to left (and so the forward direction). As such, the ordering of hexagrams covers the XOR descriptions for lines in hex 01 (and so as structure focus) but reading the order backwards as a sequence brings out a different set of meaning - i.e. the goal focus.

How did all of this come about? How is it that XOR works like this? It comes from self-referencing and deals with part-whole relationships or more so there are no parts, only aspects of a whole. What margi has done in the previous email does NOT take into consideration what is being represented and so what she has written is, in this particular context, wrong in that she excludes considerations of the whole, trying to give partial examples etc and that is incorrect.

The best analogy to give with regard to self-referencing here is that of the I Ching as a face or as a crystal - either form will present different facets - the face through emotional expression and the crystal through rotation to bring out facets.

Since we can map the basic emotions to yin/yang so we can represent the I Ching as a face on which each emotion is expressed but here represented as a hexagram.
For emotion to be expressed we have to use thousands of facial muscles, the same ones each time for all different emotional expressions. In other words to express emotion we use the WHOLE where each muscle contributes to the expression through being flexed or relaxed or some state inbetween. In other words each expression has all other expressions in support, they all line up behind the particular expression.

As such the hexagrams of the I Ching represent these expressions and we find through XOR that all expressions are linked. As such a hexagram is a facet of the whole that is the I Ching as a facial expression is a facet of the whole that is the face.

Neurologically (and it is the neurology that controls muscle expressions) the set of expressions is mapped to what comes out of self-referencing differentiate/integrate aka yang/yin aka fight/flight. We can convert all of this to bit representations (0/1) and use logic operators to bring things out but note with the self-referencing so each row of self-referencing is made up of facets. Thus for the I Ching hexagrams we have 64 facets and each will contribute to the expression of all others due to them all being facets of the whole. Margi in the above attempt to describe XOR misses all of this and so what she wrote is 'meaningless' in understanding XOR and the I Ching.

To extend the rows further, to jump from 64 facets to 4096 facets means to make finer distinctions WITHIN the bounds of the whole - but that also requires recognition of 4096 facets as does extending to 13+million - too much.

Hexagrams with changing lines cover 4096 facets of the whole and we can use XOR to bring out 4096 facets to each facet! The ESSENTIAL focus is on the whole - something Margi totally misses and so is obviously totally lost in understanding IC and XOR (and we also cover EQV - see the archives).

Chris.
 

luz

visitor
Joined
Jan 31, 1970
Messages
778
Reaction score
0
Chris,

Why do you insist on calling Martin "Margi" and pretending he's a girl?

First Ithought you might be being childish, but that can't be.. I mean you are almost a senior citizen, being childish is definitely NOT CUTE anymore.

But maybe then the reason is that you are attracted to him?
If that is the case, I suggest you skip the psychologist. I don't think it works... if you're gay you're gay you were born that way.. So maybe just come out of the closet then. And find the right forum to make such advances to other men, this is not a gay forum.
 

yick

visitor
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
thanks,
I felt that something was wrong with my question, but it was out of frustration. Some time ago I used to read your material a lot and I thought I understand it. But few days ago I tried to change my perspective from browsing your pages saying to myself I like this, I like that, interesting, to a perspective of a writer of multiple changing line comments, and realised that I have not much to say, which is not a big surprise, but what is worse, I don´t even have a sense of direccion, how to study to be able one day create something with it, not necessarily an oracle but anything wise :) So I hope this perspective will at least help me to ask better questions.



"What is implied here is we can use XOR patterns and the Emotional IC to give us information of context better than using the swapping trigrams since the swapping trigrams stemmed from an insight into trigram behaviour that led to noticing the flip of top and bottom lines that now give us 27-ness. As such XOR and Emotional IC is an improvement on earlier considerations in that we have identified the essence that was influencing the expression of swapping trigrams."

So what is a status of swapping trigrams now?
It is used in 'context as push' and I thought it is your basic method for deciphering line comments of IC
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Chris,

Why do you insist on calling Martin "Margi" and pretending he's a girl?
how do you know that "Martin" is NOT Marg, Margi is in fact pretending to be a boy?

If you want to play the Martin game - fine - then HE has got it wrong in focusing on XORing with the IC. What was presented was distortion based on ignorance or intent on causing confusion.

The XOR focus in the IC covers the full set of hexagrams OR trigrams OR dodecagrams - depending on what row of the recursion you are dealing with. The issues with rows less than the 6th is of resolution power. For any row the relationships cover the full set of '
bits' per hexagram, not partials. That said we can interpret by halfs such that the dodecagram is 12 bits, interpreted as two sets of 6 and so hexagram 'over' hexagram - but in doing so the XOR has to be the same format, two sets of 6.

Thus as the 27-ness of 01 is:

111111 01
100001 27
=========
011110 28

so the 27-ness of 01.1 is

111111-011111 01-44
100001-100001 27-27
==================
011110-111110 28-43

The FULL set of bits is required in that we are dealing with facets of the whole where the recursion makes finer distinctions of the whole and so brings out more facets.

Chris.
 

sparhawk

One of those your mother warned you about...
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 17, 1971
Messages
5,068
Reaction score
5
I have to say, if we go by their pictures, from my perspective, kissing Martin would be as bad as kissing Chris. Hey! Don't look at me; I'm glad I cannot French-kiss myself... :D

L
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
....
So what is a status of swapping trigrams now?
It is used in 'context as push' and I thought it is your basic method for deciphering line comments of IC
It was and we are still focused on context as push but the development of swapping into identifying XOR brings out the spectrum of a hexagram and so more details on a hexagram and that includes lines. In other words swapping has led to XOR and so finer details than what swapping offers. The TRADITIONAL line comments cover 'change' but the XOR does not, it focuses on the structure of a hexagram where within that structure is change represented as the development of the hexagram (your genetic history and your social history serve as context and so will push. Where it pushes to is part of the dynamic that YOU can change as a singular person - you can go with it, fight it, or move on.)

Thus XOR does not interpret line 'change' material. What it does do is identify the aspects of hexagram-hexagram that comes out of line 'change' material but it is not covering the change, it is covering the meaning of the hexagram-hexagram structure (and so the dodecagram).

Given a hexagram as description of a state so included in that is its development mapped to XOR and that includes movement - and so we can identify the history of a state and so validate the situation through history.

Thus the traditional line change comments of 1.1 relates to the change of 01 into 44 but the 24-ness of hexagram 01 describes how 01 expresses 'return', what 01 keeps coming back to. The focus on 01 is 'in your face' seducation/persuasion. charismatic, challenging but also uses play. The pair of 28,44 share space with the pair 31,33 as enticement, as these pairs do with 45,12 and 47,06.

Thus the 'trait' of 24-ness of 01 covers a nature for beginning/re-beginning by 01. If we then focus on traditional line change we have 01-to-44 but XOR interprets as a dodecagram of 01-44 (as 44 is trigrams of wind-heaven)

With the emotional IC material we can identify the context as push using the general questions. That method appears to be more consistant with the emotional experience of the method rather than the mechanistic form of swapping.

The issue now is to come up with line comments based on dodecagrams (which is what hexagrams with moving lines actually represent - the change is an illusion).

Since each hexagram represents 64 dodecagrams there is a lot to do!

Thus as the traditional covers 6 line comments per hexagram as compared to 64 X-ness states per hexagram. Since we can map five-phase into this so we can map process as well as structure. E.g. line position 01 is controlled by hex 24 and expresses five-phase state of WOOD (production) since that is the phase out of which 24 comes.

IF you go through the steps in the Emotional IC there is nothing about change - what there IS a method to describe the context that is pushing your buttons and getting you to ask the questions you do. The point is that the EIC asks YOU questions, not you asking it questions. It gives you a GENERAL reply in the form of a hexagram. XOR details of that hexagram then give fine details for YOU to then decide on what you want to do - go with the flow, fight it, or move on.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
Margie, Margi, Martin, lol, how confused can you get? :D

A hint for you, Christopher: the word 'margi' that you apparently got from one of my email addresses and mistook for a name of a person means something.
It is sanskrit!

Now if you stop that XORing for a while and Google a bit you may find out what it means.
There are several meanings, so you will have to guess ..
Good luck! :)
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
There is no confusion here, but we disagree about certain things.
And you don't like that, obviously ... :mischief:

I don't believe that XOR means what you say it means. For several reasons. Apart from what I already mentioned, I don't like it that XOR commutes, which means that you get the same hex for 'how does A do B?' and 'how does B do A?'.
These are essentially different questions and if the underlying math maps them to the same hex, then the math is too crude, IMO.

So I look for alternatives and I proposed something else. If that works remains to be seen. It's at least funny to play with. :)

But to represent 'change' I wouldn't put one hex on top of the other. I would replace every line (4 possibilities, yin or yang, change or not) by two lines. That seems more logical.

Disagree? :)
 

yick

visitor
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
"The issue now is to come up with line comments based on dodecagrams (which is what hexagrams with moving lines actually represent - the change is an illusion)."

I still don´t get it. Is traditional 01.1 comment basically OK or you mean that comment based on dodecagram would be more about 44? Can you give some examples or is somebody already working on it?

Traditional 01.1 comment is advising 16 and not 44 because 01 isn´t actually changing into 44 but is in a context that pushes it in this way and if 01 want to act like 01 it must 16. This is how I understand pages about swapping and context. Is this system out of your interest for the future and you want to refine only XOR? It helped you to find your way to XORing in times when all you had were traditional line comments, but now it is obsolete? Do I have it right? Or are they parallel systems that can complement each other?
thanks
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
M - The use of self-referencing of a dichotomy will introduce symmetry. Given that your comments above are invalid and any 'crudeness' is only in the generality, the universal nature of hexagrams that then need colouring by local context.

It is like the differences between whole numbers (simple to use by anyone, generalist) and the use of octonions (hard to use, specialist, local context focus).

The symmetry of XOR is such that, for example, the 27-ness of 01 is 28, and the 28-ness of 01 is 27. But note that 27-ness is about infrastructure and so derives a hexagram describing by analogy the 'mud' from which the completed hexagram has arisen.

On the other hand, 28-ness is about excess to the point of going beyond what is required and so we cover how is THIS expressed by 01? This going beyond the norm, going the extra distance is covered by 27 with its focus on establising infrastructure, the new, and adding content. 01 includes in its nature the actions of the creative, the innovative, and so new ideas. To get to this innovative form of thinking requires one go the extra distance, to put in the energy and this is manifest in 01 through creation of infrastructures, building the 'new'.

So - how is 28 expressed through/by 01 and it is through a perspective described by 27.
I see no problems here with interpretations.

Lets try another, say 37.
How does 37 express 28-ness? This is described by analogy to 38
How does 37 express 27-ness? This is described by analogy to 39

the nature of 37 covers tension release through rigid structure; the focus is on the use of the rigid structure (as compared to 40 that relaxes/releases structure). In the focus on infrastructure, and so 27-ness, we find a hexagram that serves to describe in generic form something standing up against the mindless flow - 39 Obsticles, Obstruction (this title is often taken as negative when it fact it covers both negative and positive). That generic form of 39 serves to describe the infrastructure of 37 as does the generic form of 37 serve to describe the infrastructure of 39 (rigid structure).

If we now focus on 28-ness, how does 37 express the nature of going beyond the norm, of excess? It does so through an expression described by analogy to the generic characteristics of 38 - Opposition. This is another hexagram often taken as negative whereas it covers both and in particular the nature of mirroring, of being a copy of, of being 'like us' - looking the same as a group but maintaining individuality 'behind' the mirror where the mirroring defuses the 'opposition' - the overall focus is on sameness.
What is implied here for 28 is an exaggerated expression of sameness and so of family/clan/fanclub etc. Relief from tension is therefore in entering the family where all is in the 'correct' places - father as father, second daughter and second daughter etc etc etc. What ensures that release is the rigid structure.

I see no problems with the XOR interpretations given above. I think what you fail to identify is the facet nature of what we are dealing with where all is connected in reflecting the whole that is the IC. This entanglement is a property of symmetry and so will appear in all self-referencing dynamics (and that includes quantum mechanics as it does mathematics etc etc)

martin said:
But to represent 'change' I wouldn't put one hex on top of the other. I would replace every line (4 possibilities, yin or yang, change or not) by two lines. That seems more logical.

Disagree? :)
As you should be aware due to my bring up the compression model of hexagrams, the focus is on both approaches - the issue then is on the consistancy of meaning.
The compression approach is covered in the clarity archives and the reference to:

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/64dodecagrams.html

BUT the use of trigram over trigram and so reading "with/from X comes Y" implies the use of the same method for hexagrams and so again reading "with/from X comes Y" but now X/Y are hexagrams.

Now the WHOLE that is Y as text operating in a context of X comes with a name - the name of the dodecagram.

Since there are 64 dodecagrams per hexagram (one for each possible line combinations) the issue then is on mapping such to what you call 'changing lines'.

So - is 01.1 stretched into 011111111111 or to 101111111111?

What do these dodecagrams mean? If we try to interpret as hex-hex then we have:

011111-111111 and so 44-01 (from non compression) OR
101111-111111 13-01 (from compression)

The WAVE perspective allows for 'stacking' of lines:
http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/WaveInterpret.html

The compression model brings out wave interference from indeterminacy:
http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/WaveStructure.html (here given is compression of hexagrams but the principle is the same for compression of dodecagrams)

So -- this work is still up for review but the 'with/from X comes y' works for me at the moment for representing trigram in trigram or hexagram in hexagram. The issue come in using XOR on these hex-hex perspectives in that the 27-ness of hex-hex is XORing both hexes with 27-27. On the other hand, at the dodecagram level is the qualities of 27 mapped to 100000000001 or 100001100001 or 110000000011?

Working with dodecagrams takes us to a different level of meaning generation/representation so at the moment I stick to hex-hex and tri-tri in that since tri-tri works for hexagrams so hex-hex works for dodecagrams but I think you can see from the above the need for clear identification of all of the dodecagrams to bring out the XOR patterns of meaning derivation.

Chris.
 
Last edited:
L

lightofreason

Guest
This is how I understand pages about swapping and context. Is this system out of your interest for the future and you want to refine only XOR? It helped you to find your way to XORing in times when all you had were traditional line comments, but now it is obsolete?
Yes - to me it appears to be obsolete or more so a 'vague' method out of which emerged the crisp XOR material and the Emotional IC questioning.

It is out of my interest? no - I think at some time I will go back and check it out but with 'new' eyes ;-)

If we review the 01.1 example. The identification was on swapping trigrams of the resulting hexagram (and so 01.1 becomes 44 and swap gives 09 as context) where this indicates the context 'pushing' the change and so the unchanging nature of 01.1 lies in a context represented by 16 ( and so to use THAT context to fight the change).

So - 01 in a context of 09 will have its first line 'tingled' and the expression will be 44.

However, using EIC questions there is no change as such, only the questioner's uncertainty where THAT elicits a 'changing line' . The switch here is on the IC asking questions of YOU not you of it. It is asking about context to see what is pushing your buttons whereas the traditional methods (and so the swap focus) is on you asking a question. Thus the EIC moves to the general and focuses on feelings over your particular question sourced in your singular consciousness (a consciousness that can censor things).

Thus to get 01.1 in EIC we would say "the situation WAS about facts but now I am not sure" - which implies it is 'changing' into being about values and all of the other questions asked would get a 'yang' form of reply.

This would end up describing the *context* as moving from 01 to 44 OR as a complex form of 44 in 01. By this I mean that the movement is reflected in the questioner's uncertainty about fact/values which means either they intuitively sense the change of the context (01 to 44) OR they sense the complexity of the context (and so more 01 context but a 44 text operating in that context).

The EIC method is successful in identifying context from questioning you rather than responding to your particular question, and the EIC needs to retain that generality to bring out the context better than swapping trigrams in response to some particular question that may not represent the context - as such swapping could give a false image since the asked question was not fitting the context or more so the random/miraculous methodology did not derive the 'best fit' hexagram that would give us the context hexagram. The EIC method does very well in bringing up the context without reference to any question of yours and so without dependency on such.

the only issue with it is the current form allows one to 'see things coming' and so change an answer along the way. This gets into trust in oneself and one's emotions and realising that the EIC can come up with a representation that has been censored by consciousness and so could be disturbing (or easily delt with in that consciousness can detect subtle differences not picked up by emotion (or more so requiring high resolution power) and so a seemingly negative is neutralised or shown to be positive)

GIVEN a context hexagram, the XOR material lists all the properties/methods of such, how things will develop if one lets it flow. Then comes the choices of going with it, fighting it (asserting one's own context and that includes neutralising the current), or moving on.

(another option for context assessment is to get someone else to do the EIC for the same context and see where the differences/samenesses are between you and them in assessing the situation)

I keep the different web pages for historical reasons and it allows for one to 'follow in my footsteps' in seeing the development of perspectives. My CURRENT focus is on the use of XOR and the EIC as the 'preferred' form of understanding. I will, over time, bring out the full spectrums of hexagrams in finer details then now - but there are 4096 comments to write for the 64 hexagrams (64 traits per hex) and then comes the dodecagram work! (4096 squared = 13+ million so I dont think I can go that far, just assert the algorithm and let people figure it out ad-hoc) ... and on top of that I have work for a living and so not focused on this 24/7!

Chris.
 

yick

visitor
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
"GIVEN a context hexagram, the XOR material lists all the properties/methods of such, how things will develop if one lets it flow."

does this refer to the quality matrix? Can the first half of quality matrix be read as history of situation and the second half shows how things will develop?
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
I see no problems with the XOR interpretations given above.
Yes, it all sounds plausible. But as you have pointed out many times: our consciousness can make nearly everything seem to fit.
That applies here, it also applies to the 5 hex example that I worked out in my post. We both see what we believe.

But we have gone through similar exercises before (about the interpretation of certain trigrams and hexagrams) and I can't convince you, neither can you convince me. So I suggest that we agree to disagree for now.
Can you do that? :)

Meanhile I will keep looking for alternatives and if I find the Holy Grail (maybe I already found it?) I'll tell you.
No, I don't expect you to believe that it indeed IS the Grail then ..
 
Last edited:

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
So -- this work is still up for review but the 'with/from X comes y' works for me at the moment for representing trigram in trigram or hexagram in hexagram. The issue come in using XOR on these hex-hex perspectives in that the 27-ness of hex-hex is XORing both hexes with 27-27. On the other hand, at the dodecagram level is the qualities of 27 mapped to 100000000001 or 100001100001 or 110000000011?
Yes, I understand the problem. A related question (moving from hexagrams down to trigrams instead of up to dodecagrams): I suppose that what you do with XOR on the hexagram level is for you also valid on the trigram level, but I never saw you XORing trigrams. Perhaps I overlooked it?
If you XOR trigrams how do you interpret the answers?

I played around with it a bit and got stuck in odd sentences with the B's, 'expansive' and 'contractive' in it.
It's too much for my '7 plus or minus 2'. :D
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
"GIVEN a context hexagram, the XOR material lists all the properties/methods of such, how things will develop if one lets it flow."

does this refer to the quality matrix? Can the first half of quality matrix be read as history of situation and the second half shows how things will develop?
Not exactly but a very good call in that you are picking up the qualitative differences of a hexagram's expression. See if this helps in understanding:

The quality matrix (as covered in http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/icmatrix.html ) is a matrix of hexagrams used to describe the qualitative differences in expression of some hexagram. The example I most commonly use is hex 23. In its 'basic', under-rated, under-expressed quality it covers a sense of 'housekeeping'. That it. Simple. down to earth, basic stuff.

As we focus on amplifying the meaning of 23 so we move to the focus on pruning, we dont just fluff up the pillows and make the bed, we remove the weeds and prune the flowers etc to prepare for the next season. As such there is more effort, more energy, involved than if just 'housekeeping'.

If we amplify the meaning of 23 some more, we move to the high energy expression of a high priest/priestess removing all of the 'crap' to bring out the one true 'faith' etc. and so all of the hoopla that can go with that covering spreading the word high and low about this 'true' faith (and so a hexagram meaning OVER-amplified cannot go any further in amplification other than to 'flip' to its opposite/complement)

All hexagrams have this range of qualitative expressions. Play down 02 to give gentle 'devotion', implicit if you like, that when amplified goes through the basic clear devotion to someone/something in a matter-of-fact way to some extreme devotional exercise (self mutilation or intense expression, competitive etc etc) to emphasise the intense devotion to someone/something.

With XORing we are not dealing with any amplification, the nature of a hexagram is its expressed nature (that can cover a range of qualities as described above and so amplification) but the *aspects* of it are always not 'it', but aspects and so qualitatively 'inferior' or more 'generic'. We can see this in the 27-ness areas of infrastructure - the skeleton is close to the thing but is not the thing - and so the meaning, the description, of the infrastructure by analogy to some other hexagram is dampened.

As such there IS a link to the quality matrix focus in that, for example, the 23-ness of some hexagram will be expressed by an analogy to the under-rated qualities of a hexagram (equivalent to 'housekeeping')

So, for example - the 23-ness of 37, how does 37 express the 23-ness trait, the act of pruning etc, is described by analogy to the generic and so under-rated, under-expressed, characteristics of hex 63.

Thus housekeeping, 23-ness, is manifest in 37 through a generic focus on getting things in order, correct sequence, completions (63) - no hype, no details since we are dealing with analogy across universals.

That said, it is possible to use the amplification element on this to bring out some exaggeration of emotional intensity for some local event if you wanted to but to bring out the basics there is no need to - in other words such an amplification is done within the local context not the definition of universals where the least energy level is the baseline for expressions.

Does this all start to make sense? there is a LOT of material here so we need to differentiate clearly what is going on but your pick up on quality issues was right where the basic qualities described in the quality matrix map to the XOR processes where the analogies are generic and so map to the under-rated, dampened descriptions of hexagrams (and so the base level qualities of the quality matrix).

Chris.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Yes, it all sounds plausible. But as you have pointed out many times: our consciousness can make nearly everything seem to fit.
.. but not with the XOR material, it is too consistant, too close to be my consciousness making the connections - and those who use the EIC seem to come up with the same meanings as XOR does.

martin said:
That applies here, it also applies to the 5 hex example that I worked out in my post. We both see what we believe.
No. Your hex example was wrong in not covering wholes.

The self-referencing of yin/yang or any other dichotomy will QUALITATIVELY shift as we make more distinctions such that levels 1 to 5 lack resolution power to bring out the fine relationships. ANY use of XOR at levels less than 5/6 will be too chunky in size and so it is difficult to bring out the links - this is a property of complexity/chaos dynamics and reflects, for example, the making of rich associative memory from mindless rote learning, it takes a lot of 'dots' to then link them into patterns of meaning.

The focus of XOR from here on needs to be at the dodecagram levels and so bring out the 4096 dodecagrams and each of their 4096 aspects! (although easier to just give the algorithm since mapping 13+million descriptions is not a task I think I can manage!)

Chris.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Yes, I understand the problem. A related question (moving from hexagrams down to trigrams instead of up to dodecagrams): I suppose that what you do with XOR on the hexagram level is for you also valid on the trigram level, but I never saw you XORing trigrams. Perhaps I overlooked it?
If you XOR trigrams how do you interpret the answers?
does not work due to lack of resolution power. You CAN have trigrams with changing lines where each trigram represents eight hexagrams (see the end of the page on wave structure - http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/WaveStructure.html ) and so work that way but XORing trigrams is too limited.

Recall the analogy of resolution - trigrams are like naked eye observations of the stars, hexagrams are binoculars, dodecagrams are the Hubble telescope.

Another example relates to the property of symmetry - entanglement. This will not come out until 5 or 6 levels of differentiation have been done and is akin to the EPR experiments where the first lots of data look 'randomly' distributed on the photographic plate but slowly, with enough accumulation of data and so of resolution power, the patterns of connections come out (e.g. as 'wave interferences' etc) - THIS is not just a property of quantum mechanics, it is a property of symmetry brought out in any experiment focused on self-referencing (Which is what all of the QM experiments have in common and as such reflect how our brains work in processing YES/NO to eventually give us a rich associative memory)

Chris.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
Well, THAT (QM) is another subject that we disagree about. :)
But I understand what you mean, too low resolution. So it's not a chunking disability on my side.
Thank you, I was starting to worry ...
 

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