|
In the news I read that an 18 month baby in Britain had a "terminal condition" called "spinal muscular atrophy".
Looking at this concept:
"spinal muscular atrophy":
"atrophy" sounds like "a trophy" which brings to mind something you win after winning a race for example.
"Atrophy" means "wither away" if I recall right.
"Muscular" involves the idea of "expand and contract".
I can find common ground here between the concepts "atrophy" and "muscular" as the effort of running a race (prior to "winning a trophy" that is to reaching your destination) involves an expansion (making room to absorb the task of running) accompanied at the end by a contraction (letting off steam so to speak)(otherwise you would be "dead on time": you need something in reserve when running a race so as to survive afterwards and have room to "let off steam" as the race isn't everything as there is life after "the death" of that task).
Having found some perhaps tenuous-looking common ground between "muscular" and "atrophy":
how to separate these concepts so that "muscular" and "atrophy" are differentiated by at least one step?
The pattern of information I came up with is:
an arch. The structure known as an "arch" is "at its destination" as the whole thing hangs togther, supporting itself as a whole. Yet an arch has room to contract and expand. The blocks are braced against each other such that they push each other apart yet at the same time they pull each other together!
So I started with the concept "muscular" and "atrophy"; I looked for common ground among these concepts and I found that the concept "arch" allowed both these concepts to co-exist in harmony.
An archway IS "muscular", it pushes and it pulls! And it IS "a trophy"; it is a singular achievement. It is a static field, it isn't going anywhere, it hangs together, it just sits there, it atrophies?
The phrase I was looking at earlier on also included the word "spinal", as it read "spinal muscular atrophy". If you look at a spine it is a collection of vertabrae forming a series of small arches one on top of the other.
A spine is an integrated and differentiated support structure. A spine of a hill is going in one continuous direction up; but has two sides supporting the coming together of the hill at the ridgeline.
So I can find common ground between "spinal" and "muscular atrophy" as potential variations on a theme of "arch". (I think physicists call this "potential wells" or a "Poisson distribution").
Since I already have found common ground between "muscular" and "atrophy" in the concept "arch"; I need to differentiate this "arch" from the "arch" I found in "spine".
I wish to maintain maximum freedom in definition; so separating these two aspects on the idea "arch" (maintaining the ethic of "automony" i.e. to each his own room; and the ethic of freedom i.e. minimal mutual constraint which opens up the possibility of third-party interaction on a voluntary footing, that is solely by agreement i.e. a binding contract between the two parties is the only way a third party will get a look in (as in: get deeply involved; as in: mediate proceedings in the meeting of concept "A" and concept "B" (so, this meeting becomes "mechanical" only when: it is "quantizable"; i.e. "bracketed"; i.e. allows freedom to associate into groups))(M-theory in physics i.e. categories re-manufactured i.e. "though this be madness, yet there be method in it"- William Shakespeare)(Perhaps he knew something about probability amplitudes i.e. how to make something out of nothing by looking only at the differences i.e. by using the Calculus....)(when you try to be logical about calculus (by doing lots of physics experiments and trying to see how they all work together; space seems to be spoiled for choice (full of viable theories of everything); a kind of "either".................)
so as I was saying before, separating these two aspects of "arch" by the minimum necessary so as to allow maximum freedom for third party interaction:
I got "a 2-D arch".
What is a 2 dimensional arch?
A spiral!
So I started with the phrase "spinal muscular atrophy"; and came up with a space where each of these concepts can relate freely:
in the pattern called "spiral" as in like a spiral spring (the kind of spiral I have in mind is like the spiral spring binding used in keeping pages bound together).
A spiral spring i.e. a helix structure:
is an integrated and differentiated support structure i.e. like a spine:
it is always going the same way (constant tension) for example "upwards"; yet is differentiated in its support (has separate loops that cross over).
It is muscular (it expands and contracts): look directly down on it and it looks like a circle (so looks contracted); yet look at it side-on and it looks like a zig-zag back and forth, it looks like it it has been raised upwards (expanded upwards)(it stretches out as it goes up).
It atrophies:
it slowly dissipates into space; it is occupied with its own space you might conjecture.
Someone might claim this is not quite accurate; as the observer of these patterns is also occupied with the space of the helix pattern.
But supposing that one was imagining an objective situation (more than one observer so room to negotiate space i.e. room for a mirror-kill i.e. room to not have to see oneself reflected in the helix pattern due to being open to others seeing what you can see i.e. a telepathic space i.e. a space where the path is telling...
got a bit lost there for a moment but;
suppose one takes as read the idea that "spinal muscular atrophy" finds harmony in the pattern of a spiral spring or helix:
how would this pattern (which baby MB reportedly and allegedly has...?)
become optional?
One could argue that it is already optional; but how to make it easy for baby MB to re-arrange this (and potentially/ possibly recover)?
Why not give baby MB freedom of expression; a spring board; a baby rattle? I was going to say let baby MB bounce at will on a springy mattress but that may not be pracical at present.
When you shake a baby rattle, your muscles make the rattle move, but the loose material inside the rattle is shunted by the wall and hits the other side slightly later than you stop, then it gets shunted the other way.
Continuous operation of the rattle creates a self-absorbing differentiated and integrated pattern of loose material inside the rattle: i.e. the operation of a baby rattle provides a "natural healing space" (so long as it is operated freely without coercion) for baby MB's reported/ alleged/ whatever "spinal muscular atrophy".
Recently a spiral nebula was discovered near the center of the Milky Way galaxy. About 80 million light years long this spiral extended; I think they said.
It was thought that it had something to do with a black hole and electro magnetic fields wrapped around.
If you count "oranges"; you have so-many oranges. This number of oranges is "anywhere within limits" of the definition of what an orange is. It is an "event horizon"; any event involving oranges has a horizon at the limit of what an orange is defined to be.
The on-going shaking of a baby rattle creates a limit on how the loose material inside can distribute itself. This limit is intertwined with the muscular forces applied by the person doing the shaking.
"Electro-magnetism" I call:
generalisation-specification. Two sets represented by circles, that overlap: the overlap is what I call "specification". A single circle representing a set (e.g. the set of "fish") I call "a generalisation".
In common English usage you might say "the atmosphere in the stadium as electric" and this does seem to give the idea of "overlaps" i.e. the outcome of the game is not decided yet.
But if "overlaps" is specification is magnetic...
well "atmosphere" is already about the buzz in the crowd so already magnetic. Magnetic agan would generate "electricity" (incipient generalisations).
A mountain may be said to have "a magnetic attraction" to climbers; e.g. an unclimbed sheer wall. Its attraction is that it is general; lacking definition; yet also defined as a challenge.
In this very moment (called "the magnetic moment" in physics! ..I think...) there is an overlap: climber and mountain. A mono-pole i.e. a singularity (a dovetailing of awareness; a oneness between climber and summit; an eternal question: can I make this particular climb? )
Got a bit carried away there for a moment...
Above I wrote:
"The on-going shaking of a baby rattle creates a limit on how the loose material inside can distribute itself. This limit is intertwined with the muscular forces applied by the person doing the shaking."
The action of shaking the rattle involves generalising (the material inside is free to move around) as a result of specifying (placing limits i.e. shaking from side to side); and specifying (bundling the material into temporal groups (time-dependent groups) due to generalising (due to going over the same path again and again). In physics-speak: the Feynman path integral is dependent on the time-independent Shrodinger's equation.
That is: the operation of a baby's rattle creates a pattern of information that is over a fixed path that is shared (integrated) via every way the items in the group can come together and fall apart (i.e. can happen locally); and this integrated path is dependent on the fixed wave-equation namely the waving of the rattle by the baby (who determines the harmony or swappability factors of the wave)(the quantum mechanics of the wave)(the mechanics of meeting of the wave)(the wave action)(the pilot wave: a wave as determined by the baby piloting the rattle's movements through space).
In the operation of the baby's rattle; electricity (generalisation) can be converted into magnetism (specification); and magnetism(specification) can be converted into electricity (generalisation).
This tends to create a double-helix of loose material inside the rattle.
As the baby controls this; so the baby's body is part of this information exchange: it gives the baby room to mediate the pattern of "spinal muscular atrophy"; one could suggest.
They say of baby MB "he cannot breathe, he cannot swallow, he cannot chew".
A helix is always swallowing (swallows itself; it containerises (quantises)space say).
It is always chewing (it goes over the same ground by crossing over itself! say).
It is always near (going in and out)(breathing)(it expands up as it swings in).
-Alan
|
