July 26th, 2007

the-gi het-gi gi-het(heat) get-hi hit-eg

Learning From History

At my disposal are some books, ancient literature, information from the past, and as this current understanding of the cosmos stems from so many absorbtions of information over the course of 32 years, its necessary to provide you all with the means to absorb some of these details. Otherwise you will remain lost in a dismissive state, ignorant of ignorance.

First a book nearly 100 years old..

H.W. Fowler (1858–1933). The King’s English, 2nd ed. 1908.
Chapter I. Vocabulary

ANY one who wishes to become a good writer(or comprehend language logic) should endeavour, before he allows himself to be tempted by the more showy qualities, to be direct, simple, brief, vigorous, and lucid.

This general principle may be translated into practical rules in the domain of vocabulary as follows:—

Prefer the familiar word to the far-fetched.
Prefer the concrete word to the abstract.
Prefer the single word to the circumlocution.
Prefer the short word to the long.
Prefer the Saxon word to the Romance.

These rules are given roughly in order of merit; the last is also the least. It is true that it is often given alone, as a sort of compendium of all the others. In some sense it is that: the writer whose percentage of Saxon words is high will generally be found to have fewer words that are out of the way, long, or abstract, and fewer periphrases, than another; and conversely. But if, instead of his Saxon percentage's being the natural and undesigned consequence of his brevity (and the rest), those other qualities have been attained by his consciously restricting himself to Saxon, his pains will have been worse than wasted; the taint of preciosity will be over all he has written. Observing that translate is derived from Latin, and learning that the Elizabethans had another word for it, he will pull us up by englishing his quotations; he will puzzle the general reader by introducing his book with a foreword. Such freaks should be left to the Germans, who have by this time succeeded in expelling as aliens a great many words that were good enough for Goethe. And they, indeed, are very likely right, because their language is a thoroughbred one; ours is not, and can now never be, anything but a hybrid; foreword is (or may be) Saxon; we can find out in the dictionary whether it is or not; but preface is English, dictionary or no dictionary; and we want to write English, not Saxon. Add to this that, even if the Saxon criterion were a safe one, more knowledge than most of us have is needed to apply it. Few who were not deep in philology would be prepared to state that no word in the following list (extracted from the preface to the Oxford Dictionary) is English:—battle, beast, beauty, beef, bill, blue, bonnet, border, boss, bound, bowl, brace, brave, bribe, bruise, brush, butt, button. Dr. Murray observes that these 'are now no less "native", and no less important constituents of our vocabulary, than the Teutonic words'.

There are, moreover, innumerable pairs of synonyms about which the Saxon principle gives us no help. The first to hand are ere and before (both Saxon), save and except (both Romance), anent and about (both Saxon again). Here, if the 'Saxon' rule has nothing to say, the 'familiar' rule leaves no doubt. The intelligent reader whom our writer has to consider will possibly not know the linguistic facts; indeed he more likely than not takes save for a Saxon word. But he does know the reflections that the words, if he happens to be reading leisurely enough for reflection, excite in him. As he comes to save, he wonders, Why not except? At sight of ere he is irresistibly reminded of that sad spectacle, a mechanic wearing his Sunday clothes on a weekday. And anent, to continue the simile, is nothing less than a masquerade costume. The Oxford Dictionary says drily of the last word: 'Common in Scotch law phraseology, and affected by many English writers'; it might have gone further, and said '"affected" in any English writer'; such things are antiquarian rubbish, Wardour-Street English. Why not (as our imagined intelligent reader asked)—why not before, except, and about? Bread is the staff of life, and words like these, which are common and are not vulgar, which are good enough for the highest and not too good for the lowest, are the staple of literature. The first thing a writer must learn is, that he is not to reject them unless he can show good cause. Before and except, it must be clearly understood, have such a prescriptive right that to use other words instead is not merely not to choose these, it is to reject them. It may be done in poetry, and in the sort of prose that is half poetry: to do it elsewhere is to insult before, to injure ere (which is a delicate flower that will lose its quality if much handled), and to make one's sentence both pretentious and frigid.

It is now perhaps clear that the Saxon oracle is not infallible; it will sometimes be dumb, and sometimes lie. Nevertheless, it is not without its uses as a test. The words to be chosen are those that the probable reader is sure to understand without waste of time and thought; a good proportion of them will in fact be Saxon, but mainly because it happens that most abstract words—which are by our second rule to be avoided—are Romance. The truth is that all five rules would be often found to give the same answer about the same word or set of words. Scores of illustrations might be produced; let one suffice: In the contemplated eventuality (a phrase no worse than what any one can pick for himself out of his paper's leading article for the day) is at once the far-fetched, the abstract, the periphrastic, the long, and the Romance, for if so. It does not very greatly matter by which of the five roads the natural is reached instead of the monstrosity, so long as it is reached. The five are indicated because (1) they differ in directness, and (2) in any given case only one of them may be possible.


This and the following posts are meant to precurse the fractality theory, it is necessary to show a few relativities of fractality before the general theory description is formulated, thus allowing the readers to -make sense- of the concepts involved. The theory will be a two step process, first outlining the fractality of language, then applying that concept to -human- -life-

So, due to desire to keep individual posts relatively short, there will be a boo, an exerpt and a link to the online copy in each of the following posts. These are reccomended readings, both before understanding these theories and once again afterwards, for once the theories are comprehended, apprehended, understood, the information within these books will connect with the attained knowledge in a new manner, at another level, and -make more sense-
the-gi het-gi gi-het(heat) get-hi hit-eg

Learning From History Part2

The Future Evolution of Man
P. B. SAINT-HILAIRE Sri Aurobindo Ashram
Pondicherry, India August 15, 1962

Summery Exerpts
Chapter (1): The Human Aspiration

Man's highest aspiration - his seeking for perfection, his longing for freedom and mastery, his search after pure truth and unmixed delight - is in flagrant contradiction with his present existence and normal experience.
Such contradiction is part of Nature's general method; it is a sign that she is working towards a greater harmony. The reconciliation is achieved by an evolutionary progress.

Life evolves out of Matter, Mind out of Life, because they are already involved there: Matter is a form of veiled Life, Life a form of veiled Mind. May not Mind be a form and veil of a higher power, the Spirit, which would be supramental in its nature? Man's highest aspiration would then only indicate the gradual unveiling of the Spirit within, the preparation of a higher life upon earth.


Chapter (2): The Place of Man in Evolution

An evolution of consciousness is the central motive of terrestrial existence. The evolutionary working of Nature has a double process: an evolution of forms, an evolution of the soul.
Man occupies the crest of the evolutionary wave. With him occurs the passage from an unconscious to a conscious evolution. At each step one receives an intimation of what the following step will be. The nature of the next step is indicated by the deep aspirations awakening in the human race.

A change of consciousness is the major fact of the next evolutionary transformation, and the consciousness itself, by its own mutation, will impose and effect any necessary mutation of the body. There is no reason to suppose that this transformation is impossible on earth. In fact, it would give the truest meaning to earthly existence.

Man's urge towards spirituality is an undeniable indication of the inner drive of the Spirit within towards emergence, its insistence towards the next step of its manifestation.


Chapter (3): The Present Evolutionary Crisis

It is often claimed that reason is the highest faculty of man and that it has enabled him to master himself and to master Nature. Has reason really succeeded? When reason applies itself to life and action it becomes partial and passionate and the servant of other forces than the pure truth.
Why does man have faith in reason? Because reason has a legitimate function to fulfil, for which it is perfectly adpated; and this is to justify and illumine for man his various experiences and to give him faith and conviction in holding on to the enlarging of his consciousness.

But reason cannot arrive at any final truth because it can neither get to the root of things nor embrace their totality. It deals with the finite, the separate and has no measure for the all and the infinite.

The limitations of reason become very strikingly apparent when it is confronted with the religious life. What is religion really and essentially and why is it outside the realm of reason? Can religion then be the guide of human life? It is a fact that in ancient times society gave a pre-eminent place to religion.

But, on the other hand, humanity - and in particular that portion of humanity which was the standard-bearer of progress - has revolted against the predominance of religion. Very often the accredited religions have opposed progress and sided with the forces of obscurity and oppression. And it has needed a denial, a revolt of the oppressed human mind and heart to correct these errors and set religion right. This would not have been so if religion were the true and sufficient guide of the whole of human life.

If religion has failed, it is because it has confused the essential with the adventitious. True religion is spiritual religion, it is a seeking after God, the opening of the deepest life of the soul to the indwelling Godhead, the eternal Omnipresence. Dogmas, cults, moral codes are aids and props; they may be offered to man but not imposed on him.

Moreover, religion often considers spiritual life as made up of renunciation and mortification. Religion thus becomes a force that discourages life and it cannot, therefore, be a true law and guide for life.

In spirituality then, restored to its true sense, we must seek for the directing light and the harmonizing law. On the other hand, modern man has not solved the problem of the relation of the individual to the society. What are their respective roles in the spiritual progress of mankind?

It is wrong to demand that the individual subordinate himself to the collectivity or merge in it, because it is by its most advanced individuals that the collectivity progresses and they can really advance only if they are free. But it is true that as the individual advances spiritually, he finds himself more and more united with the collectivity and the All.

The present evolutionary crisis comes from a disparity between the limited faculties of man - mental, ethical and spiritual - and the technical and economical means at his disposal. Without an inner change man can no longer cope with the gigantic development of the outer life. The exaltation of the collectivity, of the State, only substitutes the collective ego for the individual ego. If humanity is to survive, a radical transformation of human nature is indispensable.


Chapter (4): Standards of Conduct and Spiritual Freedom

Since perfection is progressive, good and evil are shifting quantities and change from time to time their meaning and value. Four main principles successively govern human conduct. The first two are personal need and the good of the collectivity. A conflict is born of the opposition of the two instinctive tendencies which govern human action: the individualist and the gregarious. In order to settle this conflict, a new principle comes in, other and higher than the two conflicting instincts, and aiming both to override and to reconcile them. This third principle is the ethical ideal.
But conflicts do not subside; they seem rather to multiply. Moral laws are arbitrary and rigid; when applied to life, they are obliged to come to terms with it and end in compromises which deprive them of all power.

Behind the ethical law, which is a false image, a greater truth of a vast consciousness without fetters unveils itself, the supreme law of our divine nature. It determines perfectly our relations with each being and with the totality of the universe, and it also reveals the exact rhythm of the direct expression of the Divine in us. It is the fourth and supreme principle of action, which is at the same time imperative law and absolute freedom.


Chapter (5): The Development of the Spiritual Man

Spirituality is something else than intellectuality; its appearance is the sign that a Power greater than mind is striving to emerge in its turn. Spirituality is a progressive awakening to the inner reality of our being, to a spirit, self, soul which is other than our mind, life and body. It is an inner aspiration to know, to enter into contact and union with the greater Reality beyond, which also pervades the universe and dwells in us, and, as a result of that aspiration, that contact and that union, a turning, a conversion, a birth into a new being.
In her attempt to open up the inner being, Nature has followed four main lines - religion, occultism, spiritual thought and an inner spiritual realization and experience. Only spiritual realization and experience can achieve the change of the mental being into a spiritual being.

Mysticism and spirituality have been criticized from two points of view. These criticisms should be examined before proceeding further:

I...... The mystic turns away from life.
II..... Mystical knowledge is purely subjective.


Chapter (6): The Triple Transformation

If the final goal of terrestrial evolution were only to awaken man to the supreme Reality and to release him from ignorance and bondage, so that the liberated soul could find elsewhere a higher state of being or merge into this supreme Reality, the task would be accomplished with the advent of the spiritual man. But there is also in us an aspiration for the mastery of Nature and her transformation, for a greater perfection in the earthly existence itself.
To be established permanently, this new order of existence demands a radical change of the entire human nature. In this transformation, there are three phases. The first phase of this transformation can be called psychic: the soul, or psychic being, has to come forward and take the lead of the whole being.

In the course of evolution, the soul, in order to emerge successfully and turn the being towards the supreme Reality, uses three dynamic images of this supreme Reality: Truth, Beauty and Good. Three ways thus open before the seeker.

1) The way of the intellect or of knowledge.
2) The way of the heart or of emotion.
3) The way of the will or of action.

These three ways, combined and followed concurrently, have a most powerful effect.
A shifting of the consciousness, a withdrawal within, become imperative at this stage, in order to reach the central being, the true Soul, and to allow it to become the guide and sovereign of the nature.

Two principal results follow this emergence: first an effective guidance and mastery which unmask and reject all that is false and obscure or all that opposes the divine realization; then, a spontaneous influx of spiritual experiences of all kinds.

The second phase of the transformation may be called spiritual; it is an opening to an Infinity above us, an eternal Presence, a boundless Self, an infinite Existence, an infinity of Consciousness, an infinity of Bliss, an All-Power.

The spiritual change culminates in a permanent ascension from the lower consciousness to the higher consciousness, followed by an effective permanent descent of the higher nature into the lower.

A new consciousness begins to form with new forces of thought and sight, and a power of direct spiritual realization which is more than thought or sight.

To make this new creation permanent and perfect, the very foundation of our nature of ignorance must be transfigured and a greater power, a supramental Force must intervene to accomplish that transfiguration. This is the third phase: the supramental transformation.


Chapter (7): The Ascent Towards Supermind

It is difficult to conceive intellectually what the Supermind is; and to describe it, another language would be needed than the poor abstract counters of the mind.

The transition from mind to Supermind is a passage from Nature into Supernature. For that every reason it cannot be achieved by a mere effort of our mind or our unaided aspiration. Overmind and Supermind are involved and hidden in the earth-nature; but, in order that they may emerge in us, there is needed a pressure of the same powers already formulated in their full natural force on their own superconscient planes. The powers of the Superconscience must descend into us and uplift us and transform our being.

What should be the preparation for the supramental transformation? First, an increasing control of the individual over his own nature and a more and more conscious participation in the action of the Supernature. A second condition consists in a conscious obedience, a surrender of our whole being, to the light, the truth and force from above.

A third condition is the unification of the whole being around the true self and the opening of the individual to the cosmic consciousness.

Four steps of ascent lead from the human intelligence to the Supermind; these are:

1) Higher Mind.
2) Illumined Mind.
3) Intuitive Mind.
4) Overmind.


Chapter (8): The Gnostic Being

The difficulty in understanding and describing the supramental nature comes from the fact that in its very essence, it is consciousness and power of the Infinite. One can, however, describe in a general way the passage from the Overmind to the Supermind and form an idea of the supramental existence in its initial step.

The supramental or gnostic being will be the perfect consummation of the spiritual man. The law of the Supermind is unity fulfilled in diversity; unity does not imply uniformity. The supramental being will realize the harmony of his individual self with the cosmic Self, of his individual will and action with the cosmic Will and Action.

The transcendence aspect of the spiritual life is indispensable for the freedom of the Spirit; but it will harmonize with the manifested existence and give it an unshakable foundation. For the gnostic being, to act in the world does not signify a lapse from unity.

The gnostic consciousness will proceed towards an integral knowledge. And that will not be a revelation or a delivery of light out of darkness, but of light out of light.

The joy of an intimate self-revealing diversity of the One, the multitudinous union and happy interaction within the One, will give a fully perfected sense to the gnostic life.

Matter will reveal itself as an instrument of the manifestation of Spirit; a new liberated and sovereign acceptance of material Nature will then be possible.

The body will become a faithful and capable instrument, perfectly responsive to the Spirit.

Health, strength, duration, bodily happiness and ease, liberation from suffering, are a part of the physical perfection which the gnostic evolution is called upon to realize.

A vast calm and a deep delight of the gnostic existence rise together in a growing intensity and culminate in an eternal ecstasy. In the universal phenomenon is revealed the eternal Bliss, Ananda.

Two questions remain to be examind, which are important for the human conception of life.

I. What is the place of personality in the gnostic being? In the gnostic consciousness personality and imper- sonality are not opposing principles; they are insepar- able aspects of one and the same reality. What will be the nature of the gnostic person?

II. If there is a gnostic personality and if it is in some way responsible for its acts, what is the place of the ethical element in the gnostic nature, what is its perfection and its fulfilment?

The gnostic life will reconcile freedom and order. There will be an entire accord between the free expression of the individual and his obedience to the inherent law of the supreme and universal Truth of things.
All mental standards would disappear because their necessity would cease; the authentic law of identity with the Divine Self would have replaced them.


Chapter (9): The Divine Life Upon Earth

To be wholly and integrally conscious of oneself and of all the truth of one's being is what is implied by the perfect emergence of the indivudal conscoiusness, and it is that towards which evolution tends. All being is one, and to be fully conscious means to be integrated with the consciousness of all, with the universal self and force and action.

The plenitude of this consciousness can only be attained by realizing the identity of the individual self with the transcendent Self, the supreme Reality. This realization demands a turning of the consciousness inward. The ordinary human consciousness is turned outward and sees the surface of things only. It recoils from entering the inner depths which appear dark and where it is afraid of losing itself. Yet the entry into this obscurity, this void, this silence is only the passage to a greater existence.

Indeed, this inward-turning movement is not an imprisonment in the personal self; it is the first step towards a true universality. The law of the divine life is universality in action, organized by an all-seeing Will, with the sense of the true oneness of all.

New powers of consciousness and new faculties will develop in the gnostic being who will use them in a natural, normal and spontaneous way both for knowledge and for action. The life of gnostic beings might fitly be characterized as a superhuman or divine life. But it must not be confused with past and present ideas of supermanhood.

It would be a misconception to think that a life in the full light of Knowledge would lose its charm and become an insipid monotony. The gnostic manifestation of life would be more full and fruitful and its interest more vivid than the creative interest offered to us by the world of Ignorance.
the-gi het-gi gi-het(heat) get-hi hit-eg

Fractality - Knowledge of.

In colloquial usage, a fractal is "a rough or fragmented geometric shape that can be subdivided in parts, each of which is (at least approximately) a reduced-size copy of the whole".

Mandelbrot (1975) introduced the term 'fractal' (from the latin fractus, meaning 'broken') to characterize spatial or temporal phenomena that are continuous but not differentiable. Unlike more familiar Euclidean constructs, every attempt to split a fractal into smaller pieces results in the resolution of more structure. Fractal objects and processes are therefore said to display 'self-invariant' (self-similar or self-affine) properties (Hastings and Sugihara 1993). Self-similar objects are isotropic upon rescaling, whereas rescaling of self-affine objects is direction-dependent (anisotropic). Thus the trace of particulate Brownian motion in two-dimensional space is self-similar, whereas a plot of the x-coordinate of the particle as a function of time is self-affine (Brown 1995).

Fractal properties include scale independence, self-similarity, complexity, and infinite length or detail. Fractal structures do not have a single length scale, while fractal processes (time series) cannot be characterized by a single time scale (West and Goldberger 1987). Nonetheless, the necessary and sufficient conditions for an object (or process) to possess fractal properties have not been formally defined. Indeed, fractal geometry has been described as "a collection of examples, linked by a common point of view, not an organized theory" (Lorimer et al. 1994).

Fractal theory offers methods for describing the inherent irregularity of natural objects. In fractal analysis, the Euclidean concept of 'length' is viewed as a process. This process is characterized by a constant parameter D known as the fractal (or fractional) dimension. The fractal dimension can be viewed as a relative measure of complexity, or as an index of the scale-dependency of a pattern. Excellent summaries of basic concepts of fractal geometry can be found in Mandelbrot (1982), Frontier (1987), Schroeder (1991), Turcotte (1992), Hastings and Sugihara (1993), Lam and De Cola (1993) and in many of the references cited below.

The fractal dimension is a summary statistic measuring overall 'complexity'. Like many summary statistics (e.g. mean), it is obtained by 'averaging' variation in data structure (Normant and Tricot 1993). In doing so, information is necessarily lost. The estimated fractal dimension of a lakeshore, for example, tells us nothing about the actual size or overall shape of the lake, nor can we reproduce a map of the lake from D alone. However, the fractal dimension does tell us a great deal about the relative complexity of the lakeshore, and as such is an important descriptor when used in conjunction with other measures.

frac·tal(frktl) n.
A geometric pattern that is repeated at ever smaller scales to produce irregular shapes and surfaces that cannot be represented by classical geometry. Fractals are used especially in computer modeling of irregular patterns and structures in nature.
[French, from Latin fractus, past participle of frangere, to break; see fraction.]

Noun 1. fractal - (mathematics) a geometric pattern that is repeated at every scale and so cannot be represented by classical geometry
pattern, form, shape - a perceptual structure; "the composition presents problems for students of musical form"; "a visual pattern must include not only objects but the spaces between them"
math, mathematics, maths - a science (or group of related sciences) dealing with the logic of quantity and shape and arrangement

1. A surface capable of reflecting sufficient undiffused light to form an image of an object placed in front of it. Also called looking glass.
2. Something that faithfully reflects or gives a true picture of something else.
3. Something worthy of imitation.
tr.v. mir·rored, mir·ror·ing, mir·rors
To reflect in or as if in a mirror: "The city mirrors many of the greatest moments of Western culture" Olivier Bernier.

[Middle English mirour, from Old French mireor, from mirer, to look at, from Latin mrr, to wonder at, from mrus, wonderful; see smei- in Indo-European roots.]
the-gi het-gi gi-het(heat) get-hi hit-eg

Fractality of Language

In order to lose its ignorance of logic we must proove the fractality of language and to do so we will show of the current logic trend by creating a functional definition tree stemming from the word EQUAL.

Currently ignorant paradigms exist and impress of the truth in logic, simply by dismissing the definitiveness of EQUAL all over its mathematics, logic and law, to illustrate we chain together non synonyms similar but not.logic?.

[Middle English, from Latin aequalis, from aequus, even, level.]
(all other words definers are illogical synonyms or cumulative concept chains, multi word descriptor which when devided do no individually suggest anything of the stem.)

Now we hop to defining the definers..

So based on assumption substance of PSUEDO-logical substance statement substance..

Equal = Same = Identical
Or Exactly identical.

Words are symbols as are numbers but numbers have other substances in them which allow the implicative in word math to fit into number math substances linked to all other substances on impression throughout. Fractal. Mulit tiered programs creating themselves. Whatever majority says becomes norm. more impressions means more impressed. Until we decide to deconstruct substance in order to ride the fractal chain back up to some sort of sourdce you find we create it in both directions, which is which is up to us.

Do you accept the above statement.. if you do, follow logic logically. The SYMBOL representing EQUALITY(The state or quality of being equal.) forces us into an absolutely inflexable predefined substantial sphere (confinement we are attached, leashed) which states that for equality to be logical, definite exact identical sameness is LAW.

Equal CANNOT(due to law) = Same
Same CANNOT(due to law) = Identical

For there is another synonym for the concept of equal and that is the word BE. Before showing the logic,lets examine the illogic circular non-equal method used to define be as something other than be.

Thus to know what BE means we must know what EXIST means..
EXIST - BE (and also PRESENT, substituted for PRESENCE)

Now, does any of this help us understand EQUAL, EXIST, BE, PRESENCE or any other individual word.. Mostly it shows us the outward projected interpretation of inward absorbed sensation. Our concept of equality is relative and so we have been impressed with equations such as..


when logic clearly states that
1+1=1+1 and cannot rvr EQUAL anything other than 1+1. The Equality symbol is sideways, one on one, above below, 11 or ll are side by side. Which is equal?

Thus the definition based on the concept of definition as pertaining to an attempt to explain a words equality to a concept forces us to accept literality.


EQUAL is EQUAL to EQUAL. EQUAL=EQUAL. 1=1. 1+1=1+1.

Now to explain the mathematic psuedoligoc terminology(termination ology) of equational equality we must stepaside from the term equal and instead view the term equivelant which means (virtually) equal to. Therin a combonation of three words allows mathematical equation to function outside the rule of definite EQUAL. That is the virtuality of equality is not firm equality but psuedo equality and the additional word (TO) is a forward pointer rather than a back pointer implying that one thing equates to another but is not indeed an equal another.

This leads us to question why we label this symbol =, EQUAL instead of EQUIVELANT, yes shows us that we have many layers of impression reverberating through us, we conform to the norm which based on the ideas and synonym ideas surrounding the base functionality of the rule of rules, fractality reponds to impression.