Requisite controversy engendered and encoded by a counter-coil pattern?

Visualization in 3D of Dynamics of Toroidal Helical Coils (Part #10)

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]

---

It has long been claimed that There is nothing new under the Sun. Curiously however the creativity of a knowledge-based civilization is characterized by multiple initiatives to "rediscover the wheel", accompanied by desperate efforts to patent the originality of the discovery, to franchise its use, and to associate it possessively with the name of the discoverer. Not the slightest humility is associated with naming features of the universe (stars, mountains, rovers, species) after those who claim to have discovered them.

Controversy: The Rodin coil offers one remarkable case study of the nature of the controversy engendered by unconventional patterns and their discoverers. The "thought police" have adjudicated definitively on the pattern from a conventional perspective -- to the point of describing their presentation (anonymously) as the best example of the worst of the TED talks (The Ugly Side of TED talks, Physicis Central, 1 June 2012).

The process is characteristic of most innovation calling into question the patterns of traditional conventional ("mainstream") thinking, as has also been even more remarkably demonstrated by the extensive controversy about the arguments of Ruper Sheldrake (The Science Delusion, 2012) [The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk, TED; Rupert Sheldrake, The TED Controversy]. These acquired fame through the editor of an eminent science journal framing their original presentation as "a book fit for burning". Groups, claiming the role of gatekeepers, effectively define themselves as assemblies of the righteous -- indistinguishable as such from those they disparage.

As illustrated by the 2016 US presidential campaign, there is currently virtually no perspective from which assertion and counter-assertion can be fruitfully explored, as a means of transcending the mutual demonisation characteristic of the least civilized cultures of the past. The problematic dynamic is of course also characteristic of relations between (and within): political ideologies, disciplines, religions, cultures, and languages, as remarkably clarified by Nicholas Rescher:

For centuries, most philosophers who have reflected on the matter have been intimidated by the strife of systems. But the time has come to put this behind us -- not the strife, that is, which is ineliminable, but the felt need to somehow end it rather than simply accept it and take it in stride (The Strife of Systems: an essay on the grounds and implications of philosophical diversity, 1985)

The knee-jerk reaction associated with such "strife" (justified with greater or lesser sophistication) is to frame the abnormal as debased (gross), pathological (mad), evil, heroic, inspired (aesthetically or spiritually), or a form of genius. Individually, or in combination, they may all be experienced as constituting a (radical) threat.

Neglect: The effort to address this dynamic as a systemic process is virtually undetectable. Those claiming skills to do so are readily perceived as part of the problem by others advocating alternatives. What has been said of psychotherapy could also be said of conflict resolution (James Hillman and Michael Ventura, We've Had a Hundred Years of Psychotherapy - And the World's Getting Worse, 1993).

The challenge is to frame a space (with an inherent dynamic) in which the dynamic between contrasting views of right and wrong can coexist as competing senses of self-appreciation. Despite the qualities for which it is otherwise much appreciated, it is evident that the TED process has neither the capacity nor the motivation to do so. There is clearly a problematic paradox to being positioned at any "leading edge" (Seeking the "Cutting Edge" of Sustainable Community, 1997).

To employ the divisive language of the thought police, the challenge is to frame a space to include the mindset usefully caricatured by the urban myth that some scientists had engaged in proving that bumble bees could not fly (in defiance of the laws of physics), or by the experiential reality scathingly framed by Pablo Triana and Nassim Nicholas Taleb (Lecturing Birds on Flying: Can Mathematical Theories Destroy the Financial Markets? 2009). These propensities are addressed separately in a more systematic manner (Knowledge Processes Neglected by Science: insights from the crisis of science and belief, 2012).

Such "neglect" is remarkably evident in the scientific displacement of focus from the problematic dynamics of life on Earth into a massive investment in the quest for alien "life" and "intelligence" elsewhere in the universe -- with the most questionable justifications (Challenges More Difficult for Science than Going to Mars -- or exploring the origins of the Universe or of Life on Earth, 2014). This is matched by highly limited capacity to comprehend life and intelligence considered "alien" on Earth -- other than to eradicate it -- as admirably demonstrated by the case of the world view of radical Islamic jihadism, framed as totally alien (Eradication as the Strategic Final Solution of the 21st Century? 2014). This inadequacy implies a fundamental incapacity to engage with "alien life" as it might manifest in reality (Self-reflective Embodiment of Transdisciplinary Integration (SETI): the universal criterion of species maturity? 2008).

More interesting however is the sense in which the media lynch-mob piling righteously onto Donald Trump somehow engenders a fulfilling charge in the participants -- as the victim is torn apart. This is only too evident in any form of feeding frenzy and the dynamics of crowd psychology. Irrespective of the denigration of Rodin's "vortex mathematics", self-reflexive exploration of a counter-coil might offer clues to a tragic feature of a supposedly mature knowledge-based civilization indulging in uncritical liking ("likes") or disliking ("dislikes").

In systemic terms, what is the role of the "thought police" of particular belief systems, whether it be the Catholic Inquisition (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), the Islamic Mutaween (Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice), peer review systems of different disciplines, linguistic authorities, or other guardians of the orthodox?

Critical distinction: Given the articulation by Marko Rodin, the concern here is to dissociate the geometry of the pattern from the claims as to their significance by him (and variously promoted by his supporters) -- and variously denigrated by his critics. The pattern is interesting in its own right, notably in relation to the argument presented above.

Whilst the pattern may indeed invite "buy in" from speculative enthusiasts, such engagement is quite another matter. However it is also a matter of interest how a complex pattern may both function as a strange attractor and evoke controversy and opposition -- especially if the discoverer identifies possessively with it. The Rodin coil is potentially of further interest in that the counter-coiling it embodies could be considered as modelling to some degree the complex controversies of governance, religions, and belief systems in general -- controversies which may well lead to violence of one form or another.

Description: A number of descriptions of the Rodin coil are available (Marko Rodin, The Rodin Solution Project, Rodin Aerodynamics, 2001; Russ Blake, Analysis of the Rodin Coil and it's Applications, SERI-Worldwide; Marko Rodin and Greg Volk, The Rodin Number Map and Rodin Coil, Proceedings of the NPA, 2010). Numerous images of variants of the coil are available on websites, notably those preoccupied with the controversial possibility of "free energy".

Rodin toroidal counter-coiling	Experimental counter-coiling of nuclear fusion reactor

The interest here follows from the question Are there any 3D simulations of a Rodin coil's magnetic field? (Yahoo Answers) of which the following was considered there as the "best answer":

Marko Rodin has discovered a series of regularities in the decimal number system. From these he derives his "Vortex mathematics". Vortex mathematics explain all mathematical operations, the genes, and non-decaying energy. These regularities are inherent to the system because of its base. You can find similar regularities in systems other than the decimal...

The Rodin Coil consists of a pair of wires wrapped around a doughnut-shaped core in a star pattern. Rodin claims this particular design, deduced from his number theory, yields different electromagnetic properties than any other coil -- enabling it to create perpetual energy, and thus breaking fundamental laws of physics. Rodin admits not being able to build those coils himself -- as he is "not an electrical engineer" [see video]. In absence of any scientific proof, it remains therefore highly questionable, to say the least, whether the Rodin coil has any special physical properties.

According to Rodin, the coil represents the underpinning geometry of the universe, which draws its non-decaying energy from the vortex, the zero.

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]