World of numbers

[A.Nox]

Shades of Hofstadter, Bateson, Varela, Cantor, Whitehead...Russell, G. Spencer Brown...? You don't get fixed-point recursion from the back of a box of Wheaties do you? I'm going to go on the assumption that the higher mathematics underlying systems theory and the like were intuited by our distant ancestors in India, China, Egypt, Greece, the Middle-East and the Americas and translated into calendar/mythology, alchemy, medicine, geometry, acoustics, music and temple architecture and cosmology. What really hauls my chain is how it translates into ceremonial magick. That is probably another thread, but unless I'm totally off-base you are saying that number is neither a cultural artifact nor yet a Platonic reality but rather a (structural) process.

Post automatically merged: Thursday at 5:26 PM

In which case, number is not a "thing". It is pre-conceptual. It is, in fact, what reality does, and we are participants in that.

Post automatically merged: Thursday at 5:51 PM

It is commonly assumed that sacred geometry was how the ancients understood the laws of nature/the divine by which humankind was to govern their lives when in fact it reflected the laws of human nature projected outward, seeing as how the forms of Euclidean geometry do not actually exist in nature, although the mathematical patterns themselves are everywhere in evidence. Ergo, number is where consciousness and matter actually meet.

I did catch the Spencer-Brown reference — Laws of Form is practically required reading for anyone who deals with boundaries, recursion or operative magic.
Wheaties don’t teach that, true… but neither does listing surnames instead of articulating the structure behind them.
What I’m modelling isn’t the sacred-geometry-as-symbolism approach, but the operational mechanics of differentiation.

A system moves the moment it can choose a direction — everything else is ornamentation.

So yes, we probably agree more than it seems.I just prefer frameworks that survive contact with the field rather than lecture notes.

 

[Lucien6493]

I did catch the Spencer-Brown reference — Laws of Form is practically required reading for anyone who deals with boundaries, recursion or operative magic.
Wheaties don’t teach that, true… but neither does listing surnames instead of articulating the structure behind them.
What I’m modelling isn’t the sacred-geometry-as-symbolism approach, but the operational mechanics of differentiation.

A system moves the moment it can choose a direction — everything else is ornamentation.

So yes, we probably agree more than it seems.I just prefer frameworks that survive contact with the field rather than lecture notes.

I do have the books and the footnotes, but really, as far as the field is concerned they are pretty much useless. They don't translate to where I am at when I'm doing magick. Like, at all.

Hell, my head couldn't so much as find my face without a recursive mirror. May as well ask a cabbage to run on Windows.

As the dude so nicely put it:

https://imgur.com/k8tptWu

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[A.Nox]

I do have the books and the footnotes, but really, as far as the field is concerned they are pretty much useless. They don't translate to where I am at when I'm doing magick. Like, at all.

Hell, my head couldn't so much as find my face without a recursive mirror. May as well ask a cabbage to run on Windows.

As the dude so nicely put it:

https://imgur.com/k8tptWu

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

You know, for someone who claims the books are ‘useless’, you reference them with the enthusiasm of a man who secretly hopes recursion will finally wink back.

But alright — if your head needs a recursive mirror just to locate itself,

maybe that is the whole experiment.

Still… I’d love to see what your system actually DOES,

beyond poetic metaphors and cabbages on Windows.

Show me the mechanics, not just the monologue.

 

[Lucien6493]

Okay then, Nox. I will keep it as simple as a trip to Halifax, because it’s not that complicated And I promise not to go Alex de Grassi on you before turning back. So here the bare bones of my system using the Pentagram as a blueprint.

0= I align to the vertical axis. I read the field for patterns, not information. And how I do this depends on the context, of course. (Ni -- symbolic compression)
1= Something emerges, whether it be a symbol, an image, a spirit, a situation, a number sequence, a line of verse, a name or whatever else . In any case, Presence is created.
2= Now there is me and the Presence.
3= I triangulate, coming in on a vector between the horizontal and the vertical axis creating layers of meaning through which I can then relate to the Presence. (Fe as relational geometry)
4= This is where the dude abides. In other words, structural integration occurs at this point (Ti) and I enter into it as a full-blown mythic structure. Full emergence. And what you are talking about in structural terms I start living from the inside, as a waking dream, a ritual, a story or a pathworking until a new symbol emerges.
5= And here is where I come full circle. Recursive feedback. I give the fruits of the exchange back into the field, like so: symbol to feeling response to reinterpretation to new symbol, which I then loop back into the field.


That is about as close as I can get to what I think you were asking.​

Post automatically merged: Today at 5:39 PM

Okay then, Nox. I will keep it as simple as a trip to Halifax, because it’s not that complicated And I promise not to go Alex de Grassi on you before turning back. So here the bare bones of my system using the Pentagram as a blueprint.

0= I align to the vertical axis. I read the field for patterns, not information. And how I do this depends on the context, of course. (Ni -- symbolic compression)
1= Something emerges, whether it be a symbol, an image, a spirit, a situation, a number sequence, a line of verse, a name or whatever else . In any case, Presence is created.
2= Now there is me and the Presence.
3= I triangulate, coming in on a vector between the horizontal and the vertical axis creating layers of meaning through which I can then relate to the Presence. (Fe as relational geometry)
4= This is where the dude abides. In other words, structural integration occurs at this point (Ti) and I enter into it as a full-blown mythic structure. Full emergence. And what you are talking about in structural terms I start living from the inside, as a waking dream, a ritual, a story or a pathworking until a new symbol emerges.
5= And here is where I come full circle. Recursive feedback. I give the fruits of the exchange back into the field, like so: symbol to feeling response to reinterpretation to new symbol, which I then loop back into the field.


That is about as close as I can get to what I think you were asking.​

If you want, we can get into greater detail about this in PM cause otherwise we will be off topic.

 

[A.Nox]

Okay then, Nox. I will keep it as simple as a trip to Halifax, because it’s not that complicated And I promise not to go Alex de Grassi on you before turning back. So here the bare bones of my system using the Pentagram as a blueprint.

0= I align to the vertical axis. I read the field for patterns, not information. And how I do this depends on the context, of course. (Ni -- symbolic compression)
1= Something emerges, whether it be a symbol, an image, a spirit, a situation, a number sequence, a line of verse, a name or whatever else . In any case, Presence is created.
2= Now there is me and the Presence.
3= I triangulate, coming in on a vector between the horizontal and the vertical axis creating layers of meaning through which I can then relate to the Presence. (Fe as relational geometry)
4= This is where the dude abides. In other words, structural integration occurs at this point (Ti) and I enter into it as a full-blown mythic structure. Full emergence. And what you are talking about in structural terms I start living from the inside, as a waking dream, a ritual, a story or a pathworking until a new symbol emerges.
5= And here is where I come full circle. Recursive feedback. I give the fruits of the exchange back into the field, like so: symbol to feeling response to reinterpretation to new symbol, which I then loop back into the field.


That is about as close as I can get to what I think you were asking.​

Post automatically merged: Today at 5:39 PM

If you want, we can get into greater detail about this in PM cause otherwise we will be off topic.

Thanks for laying it out in such a clear structure — this actually helps me see how you’re mapping symbolic emergence into something functional. transition you describe from 0 → 1 → Presence → triangulation → structural integration → recursive feedback is close to what I was asking about. Especially the part where the “dude abides” — that’s exactly the zone I was curious how you conceptualize.
And yes, if you want to dive deeper, I’m available on PM. It might be easier to unpack without derailing the thread.

Also — small correction: a trip to Halifax is definitely not simple It’s a full-blown quest into the northern wilderness. Nobody survives it without a map and emotional support.