Dear Jan Lelie and fellow learners,
The recent posting with the heading 'no-subject' and given the heading of
'Preparing, a facet of any becoming' given to it by Rick (thanks Rick)
was prompted by a variety of both aimed and aimless thoughts. The one I was
most conscious of was that I wanted to learn a little more about Faraday's
work and life since At de Lange seemed to imply he was one of those people
who's difference made a difference for the world. I was completely ignorant
of him until a few weeks ago. I have had little time to research, but did
come upon interesting reference to him in a book by Capra. What I liked about
the Capra referencing was the ties with Eastern mysticism and disciplines and
recent sub atomic particle physics.
The whole language, including namings of particles is quite inspirational to
me a non scientist and general idiot. From 'bootstrapping theory' and 'meson
octets', 'anti octets' and 'bayron decuplets' together with 'nine
resonances'. My 'wonder state' was something like, - what connections might
there be between or among such terms and their meanings and their
applications, and of deep creativity, symmetry breakings, patterning as clue
(glue?;-) to connected meaning etc. and more esoteric philosophy (esp.
Shunryu Suzuki whom I am currently reading on the subject of the Sandokai),
and more especially, could I come upon other fruitful connections in these
meanderings with other, less consciously held ones?
By sheer coincidence I have just today come upon a note book from my studio
of over twenty four years ago in which I seem to have jotted this from a copy
of Leonardo magazine circa 1974 Vol 19. The article compares artistic and
scientific creativity methodology. I snip large chunks but this gives a
taste,
" To have a watchful mind. After allowing the mind total freedom for
subconscious and conscious thought and for evoking fantasies one must
begin to sort the fertile ideas from those that are barren. The jargon of
creativity describes the preparation of the mind for emergence of an
association of meaningful incongruities, for the creator, this process in
a sense is self deceptive, for it requires the formalisation of ideas
without any reason-self criticism or logic, the task of selecting useful
ideas from these disjointed images makes the creator at once hunter and
hunted. A new idea may also be recognised by the effect it has upon the
experts. A really good idea should be found by such experts to be
incoherent or inappropriate and all ideas that seem incoherent are not
necessarily good or new, but genuinely new ideas have always appeared
irreverent at first.'
I could not see from the distance of a quarter of a century of the author
had his 'tongue in his cheek' when he wrote the word 'expert'
To back-track for now to the present, then ;-)
A proto Michael Faraday.
<<The ancient caveman I reckon sought to 'trans/form' his shared human
'sur/face' experience of world 'through' (capture of/ perception) the 'song
of colour' in one tremendous moment of explosive creative insight/fullness,
the very 'breath of life' spat his matter (earth pigment) upon more matter
and it was 'charged' to 'pass through' to discover and call up, out of what
may be for now 'beyond' him.
Shielded.
A proto Michael Farraday?
Space like life, both virtual and real is like a 'reaching' (desire) toward
some greater distance, however far/close that might be. >>
Faraday was walking a 'prepared way' and his real/ization 'did not come
abruptly'.
One century had prepared the next.
Electricity and magnetic phenomena indescribable thr o o ugh the then
'mechanistic' terminology
^
'involved a new type of force.' Capra says it 'precisely' that way, 'involved
a new type of force'. But really, was the force new or the expression of it?
I am too 'stupid' to know. That can be a 'chosen' Buddhist name. No shame
then, just enlightenment, I asked him myself! Certain sure as certain sure
may be, fence/wise.
Michael, what are you doing for heavens sake?
I am moving this magnet nearer and nearer to this coil of copper wire.
Why?
Because I intuit that through this action I might for the first time in man's
history show how mechanical work can illicit electrical energy. In this way I
shall join what was unjoined and create a new turning point to science and
technology.
That is very beautiful. Mnr At de Lange calls that an 'emergence.'
Yes, and Prof. Capra will call it 'giving birth' - 'one one hand.'
You mean your idea of enacting via your handed digits might give rise to
something else, on the 'other hand'?
Well, we are hoping at this point in virtual time to, on the 'other hand',
bring forth a new theory upon which to 'spec(acle)ulate' > O^O, to wit :-
wait for it.........a complete theory of electromagnetism.
Arghh! That is alloneword! And may I becoming/being now somewhat conFUSED ask
you where that might lead?
We earnestly HOPE it will lead us to FORCEFIELD!
Arghh! You've done it again, you have made up another new word from two. This
is painful and confusing.
Andrew, good learning takes place in confusion.
Prove it then please, but not by means of human biology, but if you can join
your newfangled subject line with that of human learning and if needs be a
pretty metaphor to enlighten if you are not entirely able to validly
demonstrate the theory of your practice by virtual paper means.
'I accept your interesting challenge, but you may get lost -- even so here
goes --
Instead of interpreting the interaction between a 'positive' and 'negative'
charge by 'simply saying' they attract each other like any other two masses
in a Newtonian paradigm, my colleague Mr. Maxwell and I find it more
appropriate to say that each charge creates, (CREATES) a disturbance or a
condition in the space around it such that the other charge, when it is
present ---you are still there aren't you Andrew? -- feels a force. (FEELS A
FORCE).This condition in space which has the strange surrealistic potential
of producing a force is called a field.'
Absolutely! Fundamentality is fascinating. What a joyful expression of
something that was hitherto at one remove and so seemingly unknown to me, and
then at another closer remove opaque that is now so much closer my dear Mr.
Faraday it seems quite beyond the luminous and becoming numinous. I thank you.
Andrew, I thank you. But now I ask a question -- what is your inter/est?
I wished just to learn in the hope of discovering something that I did not
know before so that I might be able to explain it in other ways and other
places, a sort of 'one to many mapping' in learning.
Ah! I sense some anxiety. I will extend your learning by one further step,
then I really do have to go back to the laboratory, ' This condition I have
spoken of it may interest you to learn is created by a single charge and it
exists whether or not another charge is brought in to feel it's effect.'
Thank you very much Mr. Faraday, your remark is both loving and compassionate.
As I left the room my gaze softened somewhat and I thought for all the world
I really could see wave upon tingling wave, cascading differing colours so
called light and X-rays and radio waves and understood that what I had see
and understood was the tiniest thing, perhaps even no/thing at all. Perhaps
it is all 'nothing but' -- a dream upon ether.
Georgia O'Keefe the great American painter wrote this, ' In school I was
taught to paint things as I saw them. But it seemed so stupid! If one could
only reproduce nature, and always with less beauty than the original, why
paint at all? -- I decided to give it up. I put away my paints and my
brushes. Years later at the University of Virginia I was told that art
consisted in putting the right thing in the right place. It gave me new
inspiration -- I was then constantly experimenting but it was not until later
that I made up my mind to forget all that I had been taught, and to paint
exactly as I felt.'
That is as good as Zen gets without being Zen
David Bohm speaks a lot about aesthetics, art 'fitting' and patterns.
Emerson wrote that a work of art is an abstract or epitome of the world, and
said that every appearance in nature corresponds to some state of mind.
I share these thoughts and feelings and keep them close for warmth.
When this technology enables us to offer the possibility to paint and present
our visions in differing forms then I think we shall all be enlightened.
>No, i cannot. Whichout
Jan, I am truly sorry you 'cannot' hear them singing in the void.
You write 'can/not'.
You doo k/not write 'will not'
O O
~
A string of 'nots' for the learned from the un-list-ening then,
Sekito: 'What are you doing here?'
Yukasan: ' I'm not doing anything at all.'
Sekito: 'In that case, you are sitting idly.'
Yakusan: ' If I were sitting idly, then I would be doing something.'
Sekito: ' You say you are not doing anything. What is this "not doing?"'
Yukasan: ' Not even the ten thousand sages know.'
--first discontinuity--then continuity--then complementarity.
Respectfully and complementarily,
Andrew Campbell
PS. In one of the last pages of the notebook I jotted this from Leibniz
--"Whatever is complex must be composed of simple parts; what is simple
cannot be extended; therefore everything is composed of parts having no
extension. But what is not extended is not matter. Therefore the ultimate
constituent of things are not material, and if not material then mental.
Consequently a table is really a colony of souls."
I agree, I am mental!!!! A table? Give me more time to think upon it.
--Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.