Mixing different things ... creates complexity ... er, chaos

Mathematicians measure complexity by the size of the algorithm needed to generate it. On that scale the clockwork orange fractal gears are way way on the simplicity side of the spectrum ... static, or chaos, is way on the complexity side of that same spectrum. Certainly we can recognize, or even predict, at various degrees of complexity with combinatorials. The logic of Barbara Cubed can even be used on the extreme simplicity end of spectrum.

I think chaos already is the cold mother, Cosmos ... "ooze" or not

It can be calculated, that unique occurrences explode into untold possibilities ... er, by their very nature. Life itself struggles against that explosion sustaining its existence and cohering its own unique simplicities. Humans and then their culture are the pinnacle and leading edge of that change. Am i talking about a spectrum from Lucifer to Ahriman? ... i don't know ... those mystical symbols get all confused for me. But in any case adding the third pole, Christ if you will, in that struggle works for me ... pissing on neither complexity nor order ... yet transcending both

credit to meme binge

usually chaos feels bad to us

...................................................................................................................

alternatively how about a bit of regulated complexity ...

...................................................................................................................

then too we have another kind of order made from *combining*

fruit salad

yum

....................................................................................................................

er not to mention ... *combining* functions

works great

....................................................................................................................

and then there's this

Comments

Seth says

Einai 2014-04-17 08:02:51 17299

seth 2014-04-17 07:59:03 17299

seth 2014-04-17 07:47:25 17299

Einai 2014-04-17 07:43:28 17299

Mixing different things creates & IS a munge.

perhaps ... but it IS also how we create new things.

... more like stirring a pot of soup

well can you think of something that you created or even anything that you know of that was created by anybody that was not in some way a combination of things?

Seth says

source: mark
A combination of things is usually in your mind. The thing itself when analyzed gets broken up but is unity to start. I begat a turd yesterday, which of itself was a turd. You could analyze it and call it a combination of chemicals, foods, bodily juices, other entities like bacteria etc. but as a creation it was just a turd. I usually create a new one every day. Is a human being just a creation of a sperm & an egg? Where do you draw a synthetic line around what's new & what isn't?

... well yes certainly combinations of things are very frequently in a mind. that is kind of what minds do ... combine and associate things in myriad ways. sometimes those combinations do get manifested in the reality external to that mind. we call that creating new things.

a turd in the context of a person taking a shit is not really a new thing ... er, been there ... done that ... er, a lot. that a turd got combined in the intestines of a lot of different ingredients is kind of a change of topic because no human intention is involved.

Seth says

Einai 2014-04-17 09:04:36 17299

seth 2014-04-17 08:59:48 17299

source: mark
I assure you when I beget a turd, I intend to ! Each one is unique & not the same as another.

... oh really

. Not me ... not my conception of intention ... when i take a shit, it is because i have to ... i must ... no real choice or creative urge involved whatsoever. But then in that sense we can quibble about what intention means to you vs what it means to me. I think that is irrelevant to my thought here. When you create something *new* ... something that was not known to exist in that context ... then you do it by *combining* things that usually already exist in the context. That is why thinking that combining things should be always be thought of a munge is not a practical thought ... imho.

I just begat another one, intentionally! Anyway I think GW inspired by some RS tapes once drew a strong analogy between thinking being a process very similar to the excretory function; like the spiritual-soul function creating something like lemon yellow crystals in the brain during the thinking process. One could best ponder creating out of nothing & some of our discussions on such.

well ok i suppose one could look at creation that way. in that case it is kind of the same thing i am saying ... things get *combined* in the mind, then the mind shits it out as a turd

!

... still and all we have that pesky *combination* going on ... no? Take away the function of *combination* and you will never get anything new ... er, ever ... no?

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-04-17 09:32:35 17299

source: mark
ART, while using the substances in this World does yield something new for this world, although probably eternal from the Spiritual World, eh?

... yes, certainly so

Art functions by *combining* things. Can you show me any piece of art that did not combine things? The only one i know of is Elaine's recent ... er, opus ... here. But then she didn't even sign it

You missed the creative in Art - sigh!

I like your fractal - though - nothing special though - just a bunch of math equations & numbers.

Seth says

Einai 2014-04-21 07:35:27 17299

LOL
This item is about
intentional chaos & is it's own shining example of such

well if there is here anything related to intentionality, me thinks this item would be about intentional simplicity ... rather than intentional chaos. i even indicated that i think intentional chaos would be evil. kind of strange that you flash immediately that it was about intentional chaos, whereas if i related it to intentionality at all, i related it to intentional simplicity. apparently we were listening for different things. so now if we want to munge/combine this with a good/bad spectrum we could come up with something like this ... no?

intentional	simple	complex
individual	good	bad
group	good	bad

......... or would you do it differently?

Mark de LA says

Einai 2014-04-20 14:38:31 17299

seth 2014-04-20 14:32:48 17299

Einai 2014-04-20 14:15:54 17299

Can your mathematics generate a number for the complexity of turds?

turds are very complex. towards the chaos end of the spectrum.

don't confuse subjective interest for complexity ... turds are boring, so is static. we humans point our lives ... er, well most of us ... at the order and simplifying end of things.

that's a birdie for you ... I find complexity interesting especially when it yields to consciousness & the mind - enjoy yours

P.S. I find even boredom interesting - I gave one of my subordinates the job of explaining & defining boredom once or quit ... must have been to big a task for him ... he eventually quit & we got someone could do the job afterwards.

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-04-20 15:21:50 17299

Einai 2014-04-20 14:40:22 17299

Einai 2014-04-20 14:38:31 17299

seth 2014-04-20 14:32:48 17299

Einai 2014-04-20 14:15:54 17299

Can your mathematics generate a number for the complexity of turds?

turds are very complex. towards the chaos end of the spectrum.

don't confuse subjective interest for complexity ... turds are boring, so is static. we humans point our lives ... er, well most of us ... at the order and simplifying end of things.

that's a birdie for you ... I find complexity interesting especially when it yields to consciousness & the mind - enjoy yours

no birdie for me ... i put in the excape clause making my sentence true for all commers, "er, well most of us". incidentally an interest in complexity does not point you twards chaos ... there is this peaky human drive to simplify and that includes boredom and complexity. pointing yourself twards chaos, me thinks, takes intentional acts of evil which actually move the universe in that direction ... such people do exist, or so they tell me.

The birdie is still yours as you spoke for we humans. The rest is a munge of your own.

Seth says

Einai 2014-04-17 09:11:13 17299

As regards to intentionality maybe this will make a light shine for you

well yes, to say that the balance of cultural intention with (and/or against) individual intention is ticklish would be understatement. habits are the same ... cultural habits vs individual habits are tickelish. combining that topic with a simplicity/complexity spectrum may well be one of your munges ... i don't know. might be interesting to delve into it though ... perhaps difficult for us to be objective on that one, eh? The combinatioraila tabel itself give me no gestalt ... what does it do for you?

intention	simple	complex
individual
group

Mark de LA says

yep it belongs on the funnypages.

Mark de LA says

Einai 2014-04-20 16:09:56 17299

Einai 2014-04-20 15:52:04 17299

Einai 2014-04-20 15:50:21 17299

Chaos from the point of view of the word itself:

source: ...
chaos (n.)late 14c., "gaping void," from Old French chaos (14c.) or directly from Latin chaos, from Greek khaos "abyss, that which gapes wide open, is vast and empty," from *khnwos, from PIE root *gheu- "to gape, yawn" (cognates: Greek khaino "I yawn," Old English ginian, Old Norse ginnunga-gap; see yawn (v.)).

Meaning "utter confusion" (c.1600) is extended from theological use of chaos for "the void at the beginning of creation" in Vulgate version of Genesis (1530s in English). The Greek for "disorder" was tarakhe, however the use of chaos here was rooted in Hesiod ("Theogony"), who describes khaos as the primeval emptiness of the Universe, begetter of Erebus and Nyx ("Night"), and in Ovid ("Metamorphoses"), who opposes Khaos to Kosmos, "the ordered Universe." Meaning "orderless confusion" in human affairs is from c.1600. Chaos theory in the modern mathematical sense is attested from c.1977.

... recent inventions referred to above Wikipedia

i.e. IMHO the chaos is in the mind of the people who view it as deterministic yet utter confusion

& I like this quote from Liber Legis (II,32) which describes all those factors the so-called scientists leave out of their theories while trying to prove they are right see: tagroom global

Also reason is a lie; for there is a factor infinite & unknown; & all their words are skew-wise.

Mixing different things ... creates complexity ... er, chaos

Tags

Comments

See Also