Distinguishing coherent patterns of strategic N-foldness -- from 8-fold to 80-fold

Cognitive Engagement with Spike Dynamics of a Polyhedral Coronavirus (Part #9)

[Parts: First | Prev | Last | All] [Gallery] [Links: To-K | Refs ]

The argument development here was partly inspired by the polyhedral form of many viruses. The variety is usefully illustrated by the following image in which they asre distinguished in terms of a triangulation number ("T-number").. The T-number is representative of the size and complexity of viral capsids (List of geodesic polyhedra and Goldberg polyhedra, Wikipedia).

Spherical capsids of various sizes are composed of 12 pentamers (represented as darkened pentagons) and a variable number of hexamers.

Ranjan V. Mannige and Charles L. Brooks III / CC BY

The mysterious question, as yet to be clarified, is why sets of strategies are constituted by authorities and experts (without comment or justification) by particular numbers of elements, exemplified by the UN's 8 Millennium Development Goals and the 16(+1) Sustainable Development Goals. The issue can be explored more generally (Patterns of N-foldness: comparison of integrated multi-set concept schemes as forms of presentation, 1980). The clearest approach to an explanation, itself controversial, is that of cognitive psychologist George Lakoff (Where Mathematics Comes From: how the embodied mind brings mathematics into being, 2001).

The organization of viruses, as noted above, focuses on triangulation to which consideration is given separately (Triangulation of Incommensurable Concepts for Global Configuration, 2011). An exercise of interest here focuses on the 8-fold pattern as evident in both the UN's sets of goals (8 and 2x8) and in the more complex traditional configurations above (8x8 and 9x8). In the case of the Sustainable Development Goals, these are defined as having 169 "targets", with various numbers of targets per goals (see checklist), together with an associated set of some 230 indicators.

Polyhedral forms potentially valuable to comprehension of "factor-8" preferences and memorability of N-fold global strategies (animations in preparation)
8	16	24	32	40

Is it a mere coincidence that 169 is 13x13 or is there some unexplored systemic significance to that? Some commentary is evident in the Final list of proposed Sustainable Development Goal indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)) as developed by the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs) noting that the list is composed of distinct 230 indicators. In the absence of clarification of this "to do" list, is the cognitive challenge of recogntion of this range from 169 to 230 to be compared to Dunbar's number. This is a suggested cognitive limit to the number of people with whom a person can maintain stable social relationships. Proponents assert that numbers larger than this generally require more restrictive rules, laws, and enforced norms to maintain a stable, cohesive group. It has been proposed to lie between 100 and 250, with a commonly used value of 150 (Comprehension of Numbers Challenging Global Civilization: number games people play for survival, 2014)

[Parts: First | Prev | Last | All] [Gallery] [Links: To-K | Refs ]