Clues to distinguishing "degrees of intensity"

Cognitive Implication of Globality via Temporal Inversion (Part #4)

The following clusters of distinctions are adapted from Cognitive implication in contrasting modalities (2018).

Degrees of learning: The sense of a learning cycle is fundamental to the piloting a helicopter in the articulation of Arthur M. Young (The Geometry of Meaning, 1976):

To know the position of a body in space, we need one instantaneous observation...
To know its velocity, which is computer from the difference in position of the body and the difference in time between the two observations, we need two such observations
To know its acceleration, we need three observations
To know that a body... is under control, and to distinguish it from one in which the controls are stuck, we need at least four observations...
To know the destination, provided the operator does not change his mind or try to fool us, we need five observations
To know the operator has changed his mind or is trying to fool us, we need six observations

Note that the fifth observation is to establish a position... and the sixth a change of position. Thus categories five and six repeat the cycle, the fifth falling into the position category and the sixth into the velocity category... the sufficiency of four categories is demonstrated. (p. 18)

Observer imbrication: A valuable interpretation of related distinctions is provided in the discussion of Cadell Last (Towards a Big Historical Understanding of the Symbolic-Imaginary, 2017):

externally observed objects are modelled with an observer's noumenal view and voice that is systematically excluded from the "objective" model of the world to create the effect that the '"true natural world" in-itself is looking and speaking at the subject [eg science]
observer's noumenal view and voice of externally observed objects is included in the model thus creatively relativizing thc observer's "objective" world model to the subjective locus producing it in order to study its effects in the ideational field structuring the motion of subject-object [eg deconstruction]
observer of externally observed objects reflectivcly incorporates its own and subjective-multiplicities as a (virtual, cxtimatc) object of analysis structured by an a priori framc of desire that unconsciously filters orientation, intervention, and understanding of subject-object entanglement [eg psychoanalysis]
observer reflectively incorporates noumenal view and voice modcl(s) structured by a priori frames of desire as capable of overdetcrmining the virtually narrated images of externally observed objects ("the world") through transcendental reflection and creation [eg historical subjectivity]
observer identifies the virtual ideational field composed of a multiplicity of self-relating and desiring world views and voice models as a universal agency ("semiosphere"') in-itself with asymmetrical and irreversible reflective and creative autonomy structuring the motion of subject-object entanglement [eg history itself]

Catastrophic distinctions and WH-questions? Comprehension of the set of 7 "elementary catastrophes" articulated by catastrophe theory merits exploration in terms of their increasing dimensionality (Clues from catastrophe theory, force dynamics and manoeuvering, 2002). Their potential relation to questions implying increasing dimensionality is also of potential relevance (Conformality of 7 WH-questions to 7 Elementary Catastrophes: an exploration of potential psychosocial implications, 2006). The relation of catastophe theory to contradictions is noted and helpfully illustrated by Martin Zwick (Dialectics and Catastrophe, 2009).

Feedback loops and cybernetic orders: Young relates the learning considerations he identifies to the necessity of feedback. The shift, through learning, from observing to "knowing one knows" suggests exploring those distinctions in terms of different orders of cybernetics, as discussed separately (Cybernetics of cybernetics: complex adaptive systems? 2007; Relevance to change, learning and creativity, 2014):

first order cybernetics: characterized by simple feedback loops
second order cybernetics: understood as the cybernetics of cybernetics
third order cybernetics: in which the observer is understood to be part of a coevolving system
fourth order cybernetics: as may be variously understood, possibly with how multiple realities are shaped by, and impinge upon, power relationships within society. As proposed, for example, by M. Zangeneh and E. Haydon (The Psycho-Structural Cybernetic Model, Feedback, and Problem Gambling: a new theoretical approach, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1, 2, 2004)

The distinction between the "orders" of cybernetics is currently a matter of controversy, most recently addressed by Maurice Yolles and Gerhard Fink (Generic Agency Theory, Cybernetic Orders and New Paradigms, 2014) in the light of their earlier reflections. These could be understood in terms of degrees of self-reference or self-reflexivity although, as such, these distinctions are not especially highlighted (Hilary Lawson, Reflexivity: the post-modern predicament, 1986; Douglas Hofstadter, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, 1979).

Dan ranking in martial art philosophy: Some martial arts attach great significance to the attitude required for the higher levels of competence, notably as denoted by -- "belts" and "dan ranking", especially in the elusive non-combative understanding of aikido through which the relationship with any "other" is reframed to an ever higher degree (Clues from the martial arts, 2002).

The question to be explored is whether the distinctions correspond in any way to insight into higher derivatives of time enabling higher orders of control in engagement with an "other" (as explored separately to some degree). Appropriately the game of go has made use of dan ratings, raising the interesting question as to whether levels of strategic thinking are now distinguished in programming algorithms for competitive play, as with AlphaGo.

Temporal topology? There is a case for recognizing that the cybernetic "orders" above could be associated with distinct topological surfaces whether for representation, mapping or symbolic purposes:

first order cybernetics with the circle (as suggested by the interlocking loops depicted on systems diagrams)
second order with the sphere (as suggested by integrative global interlocking of great circles around a sphere)
third order with paradoxical forms (as with the Klein bottle)
fourth order with yet more complex forms. The relevance of Klein bottle geometry is notably argued by Steven M. Rosen (Topologies of the Flesh: a multidimensional exploration of the lifeworld, 2006; Dreams, Death, Rebirth: a topological odyssey into alchemy's hidden dimensions, 2014).

Of potential interest is the cognitive relevance of higher dimensional polytopes, otherwise known as polychora (Comprehending the shapes of time through four-dimensional uniform polychora; Four-dimensional requisite for a time-bound global civilization?; Five-fold ordering of strategic engagement with time). In this context, reflection on such forms of higher "dimensionality" frames the intriguing challenge as to how significance might be associated with complexes of "distance" and "time" (derivatives) in configurations of higher degrees of symmetry.

As a challenge to comprehension, the objective clarity by which time and distance are conventionally defined ise then called into question, as is implied by the "extra dimensions" of string theory and the very high order of symmetry/dimensionality of the so-called monster group (Potential Psychosocial Significance of Monstrous Moonshine: an exceptional form of symmetry as a Rosetta stone for cognitive frameworks, 2007; Itzhak Bars and John Terning, Extra Dimensions in Space and Time, 2010). In particular, consideration has also been given to multiple time dimensions.

"Geometry of meaning"? The implications of geometry for thinking were the primary focus of R Buckminster Fuller (Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking, 1975 and 1979), as discussed separately (Geometry of Thinking for Sustainable Global Governance: cognitive implication of synergetics, 2009).

The approach has been explored otherwise by Arthur Young (The Geometry of Meaning, 1976). His 12-phase learning / action cycles. can be variously adapted (Typology of 12 complementary strategies essential to sustainable development, Typology of 12 complementary dialogue modes essential to sustainable dialogue). In this adaptation, the focus is on distinguishing 12 distinct "mixes" of past, present and future as they are experienced (Varieties of experience of past-present-future complexes, 2001). Each mix offers a different quality of experience.

Tabular adaptation of the Rosetta Stone of meaning of Arthur Young
		Acts Abstract Schematic	States Motivated Considered	Relationships Application Follow-through Commitment
	Symbol	M⁰L	ML	ML²
Non-duration Timeless awareness	T⁰	L "Specious present" Observation; act of considering; position determination; reactive learning based on immediate registration of phenomena; assessment of distance; "sizing up"	ML "Matters of moment" Recognition of moment(-ousness), relevance (as related to leverage), significance ; weight of facts; bringing matters into focus	ML² "Identification" Faith in paradigm of the moment; unexamined or habitual commitment to a process projection or understanding, irrespective of inconsistent disturbing factors. Moment of inertia.
Conscious adaptive response Awareness Calendar time Linear time Arrow-of-time	T^-1	L/T "Calendar time" Adaptive change; reaction; passive adaptation or change of position in response to changing circumstances "Projections"	ML/T "Impulse" Recognition of the momentum (of an issue) resulting from a change, namely the consequential transformation of awareness or perspective	ML²/T "Decision" to act or initiate a process determining the future. "Angular momentum"
Comparison with norms or memory of previous experience Self-awareness Initiating time	T^-2	L/T² "Change of pace" Spontaneous initiation of transformative action; commitment to a new course of action	ML/T² "Forcefulness" Engendered, experienced or embodied as a result of transformative action; constructive (or disruptive) action potential; enhanced sense of being	ML²/T² "Work / Energy" Achievement of a desired result by application of understanding (and adjustment of implicit beliefs) in response to external factors; working action on reality. "Torque"
Comparison with previous comparisons Patterns Awareness of self-awareness Transendental discontinuity Cyclic time / Feedback	T^-3	L/T³ "Feedback" Control of transformative action. Cybernetics / Systems *["Jerk"]*	ML/T³ "Discipline" Establishment of disciplined pattern of response; consolidated or harmonious control of action potential; holding forces in check	ML²/T³ "Power" of acquired knowledge; know-how; integrated or embodied experience; capacity (including that of not acting); non-action

The table above, especially in Young's original format, is a reflection of conventional thinking in Newtonian terms. Higher derivatives (as suggested by the following extension) are necessarily a challenge to what can be unambiguously named, explained and experienced. With respect to the rate of change of acceleration, Young notes:

But what name and what meaning can we give to this? The name given by aeronautical engineers is jerk, probably because when acceleration is changed by automatic control, it does so in an all-or-nothing fashion which results in a jerk. But in the general case, as in human control, it need not be a jerk... a change in acceleration is what we mean by control... (pp. 15-16) [emphasis added]

Even with respect to ML/T³ in the last row above, Young notes that: Until recently there has been no conventional word for the third derivative of momentun, It is now recognized, however, and used in aeronautical engineering, where it is called power control. I would prefer to call it mass control (material extent of control) (p. 33). This confusion is evident in the discussion below with respect jolt, jerk, jounce and snap. Thus some authors treat jolt, jerk and jounce as synonymous, and corresponding to L/T³. Jounce may more commonly be understood as the rate of change of jerk (L/T⁴). Crackle is assertively recognized as the fifth derivative (L/T⁵), with pop a the sixth derivative (L/T⁶).

The lack of clarity is especially relevant to the confusion in any psychosocial systemic analogue. Young's insight that, under human control, a jerk need not be a jerk, is fundamental to the argument which follows -- as with the implications in jargon usage of the term.

Jargon terms for the higher derivatives of time
?	T^-4	L/T⁴ --- [Jounce]	ML/T⁴	ML²/T⁴
?	T^-5	L/T⁵ --- [Snap?]	ML/T⁵	ML²/T⁵
?	T^-6	L/T⁶ --- [Crackle?]	ML/T⁶	ML²/T⁶
?	T^-7	L/T⁷ --- [Pop?]	ML/T⁷	ML²/T⁷
?	T^-8	L/T⁸ --- [Lock?]	ML/T⁸	ML²/T⁸
?	T^-9	L/T⁹ --- [Drop?]	ML/T⁹	ML²/T⁹

The degree of confusion is compounded by how these distinctions may be experienced in relation to subtler interpretation of M and L, and with respect to whatever the "higher derivatives of time" are related, especially when termed "negative powers of time". The table as extended above therefore corresponds to a higher degree of subjectivity, with whatever degree of objectivity its elements may be recognized. Of particular relevance is the greater ease with which disruptive forms may be experienced, rather than the "higher" forms of control which constrain their manifestation -- as recognized by Young with respect to jerk..

In that spirit, the framework adopted by Arthur Young is especially relevant through his preoccupation with cycles of learning -- and the cyclic framework he develops. His inspiration derived from the innovative insight he acquired in developing the original Bell helicopter with its unusual piloting challenges -- subsequently generalized by him in philosophical terms to include the speculative possibility of designing a "psychopter" (The Bell Notes: a journey from physics to metaphysics, 1979). For Young, the fourth derivative is unnecessary -- an understanding which may however have undermined his exploration of the operation of a psychopter in relation to gravity, otherwise understood. He argues with respect to control as the third derivative:

What causes us to turn the automobile, or to start it in the first place, or finally to sop it? The answer is "the destination". The destination is a place, or position. Thus the fifth step, the fourth derivative of position, that which determines control, is the same as the first step. This position is not the same position we started with but has the same category of measure (distance or length... (p.17).

This sense that there may be learning processes which could offer a new kind of overview (or integrative perspective) justifies a degree of speculation in that regard (Engendering a Psychopter through Biomimicry and Technomimicry: insights from the process of helicopter development, 2011; Intuited complementarity: environmental cycles and learning cycles? 2018).

Dimensional compactification: There is a degree of metaphorical irony to any progression down the rows of Young's table to the extent that this is paralleled by a form of compactification of dimensionality when represented (as argued with respect to string theory in fundamental physics). The uppermost row (in "substantive" text form) is typically verbose in encompassing one or more themes (as with this text). The second is more experiential and with greater dimensionality, as with "one image is worth a thousand words" -- or "skimming a text to gain an impression". In characterizing the third row in terms of an idea or conceptualization. however multifaceted, this tends to be even more compact, however held or grasped. The excitement characteristic of the fourth row is even more experientially succinct -- whatever the potential it embodies.

There is a further irony to the progression in relation to what might be termed the "trilemma of compactification":

greater succinctness potentially facilitates comprehension -- but may preclude it -- whilst increasing the probability of incommunicability
greater (verbose) articulation potentially enables greater comprehension (especially of any part), but may well increase incomprehension and alienation (and especially from the whole)
greater emphasis on communicability of the whole may inhibit comprehension of its subtlety and complexity

With respect to compactification, Young's tabular presentation highlights a progression in temporal reciprocation (or inversion) which features in an appropriately titled subsequent study (Nested Time, 2004). Thus the first row, as production capacity, is effectively timeless as a product of 1/T⁰, the second identifies change over time as a product of 1/T¹ (or T^-1), the third identifies rate of change as a product of 1/T² (or T^-2), whilst the fourth is a measure of control as a product of 1/T³ (or T^--3).