as fixed as a book

19 08 2010

The good thing about a book is that it is. It is a thing. It gets finished. It becomes completed, and gets dated. Of course, then people have to end up writing revisions, and then if enough ideas shift, another book. Whereas the benefit of a blog, as someone wiser than me pointed out, is that there is no need to revise since it is always in a state of revision.

But I do hanker for some location which means I can just fix an idea. Like wikipedia. Of course this can be done already, you can create a wiki for yourself, or for your community. Take p2p foundation as a good example of this. However, I know all of this is going to become obsolete at some point pretty soon, within a decade is my guess. A massively distributed system, personal and collective, where everyone one does, writes or reads or watches, is personally flavoured. In terms of knowledge, a thing like wikipedia but where every page, section even word is personally tagged. A version of wikipedia per person.

But until this time, I have thoughts in books, google docs, old blog posts, web-pages, and the like. It would be nice if I could have a system which could refer to them all in their disparate forms. The first extreme version of confluence model, point2, might enable this, funnily enough.

Anyway, I had a thought while talking with Leon. Or rather, it was Leon’s. He asked about “no brainstorming” rule in the action cycle and I explained it was to do with genuinely responding to new perspectives and thoughts. It was about filling the space between people, or making use of the differential between us. Like ingredients to make a dish, there are two ways of doing it (metaphorically for our purposes that is:). First, you can ask people to declare the vegetables they have, and you end up with a bunch of people with their vegetable. The second way is to invite someone to declare they have an aubergine, another then says they have a courgette, and a third person excitedly suggests they can use their pepper to make ratatouie. We are interested in this latter methodology. We can’t be too firm about asking people to declare their hopeful objective for the following week because then they will be deaf to others; we would like to be open-minded as we present our idea so that new ideas form.

Anyhoo, Leon asked what the mathematical application of this might be. I turned the question back to him, and he intuitively suggested it was to do with irrational numbers. By way of explanation, he suggested a square as a thought, the diagonal is invisibly inferred, and suggested of a new square whose side is root 2. Fair enough. His intuition sparked an alternative explanation in me, after he showed me a Cantor set of rational numbers. Participation in a normal meeting is like thinking in whole numbers, the number of people there indicate the number of whole numbers, seven say. Whereas, in an action cycle, one accepts one is fractional, a seventh of the whole that may emerge if everyone plays their cards right  (literally :). And irrational numbers are those ideals which have the greatest potential depth, continuance, etc.

And, for some reason, after the conversation, I started to think about ping. I wanted to ping the idea. Sally used this phraseology, to ping an idea my way. And I relate this to kernels of thoughts before jaxing. Instead of writing an idea up, like the one above, one just marks it with a phrase, and then when one gets down to jax, one recalls the kernels and extemporises live the idea. And this allows everyone the freedom and space to explore their own thinking, without this solidifying into books, etc. It is merely a verbalisation, an interesting one perhaps, but as vacuous and wonderous as any breath of wind.

And I wanted to just write this idea of ping as a kernel somewhere, and I’d love to have a place I know I can store it for some future reference which is entirely future-proof. This blog isn’t it, I am afraid.

Anyhoo, I wanted to relate the ping idea to the feedback loop from the universe. A book has a ping value of a few years. A blog post a few days perhaps, maybe weeks. Depends on how connected the person is, how deep it is in the mindstream. And a conversation is close to real time, a few hours, a few minutes even. And, then there’s the ping that happens in seconds, within a second, the micro of one’s thoughts and body, or even quantuum levels of self that the buddhists delve into.

As ping tends to zero, the non-self-reflected state. The state of engagement, of continuity, non-separation, direct experience. Stimulated by Jeddah Mali.

Actually, this makes me think that I’d like to reach that state I had before. I promised I would only reach it with others. I wonder if anyone wants to get there with me? Could I do another evening where I invite people to share this? HOw about bank holiday monday? Or the sunday, after Hannahs voice class?




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: