The Nature of Oalance - Part 4

is Perfect Balance (Oalance)


There is a question over the structure of the extant network. (Remember - the extant network is the overlap of balances with radiating proportionates away from the centre growing larger in size). A little bit of new terminology here - the plural of extants will be extance. All proportionates form the extance. Extance can be seen as existence or all physical reality.

Note: Please bear with me on the terminology! I know it can be odd coming to terms with new terms :-) All I can do is reiterate them and use them in their context.

There are two ways extance can be set up - spherically with oalance at the centre, or circularly also with oalance at the centre. Both work. An extance sphere is one point in time. All extants are represented in one time frame in space. A sphere is not an easy way to contemplate the universe. Very messy. We can't visualise patterns - with a sphere we can't visualise extance dynamics or the temporal nature of oalance.

If we include change, motion, movement and evolution through time which is after all what the universe is about, including proportionate expansion ( or, new term: 'deudaimotion' (proportionate contraction being 'eudaimotion')) then we get something like the following...

The black line is oalance - solid and unmoving through time. Either end is the beginning and end of time - perfect oalance. The blue space is all physical space. Deudaimotion and eudaimotion reveal a shape - a normal distribution.

A normal distribution constitutes derivatives. It's a mathematical term and is fractal in nature i.e. every normal distribution constitutes another normal distribution till infinity. An area of physics and social construction called 'cybernetics' (see Wikipedia) perhaps would benefit from the normal distribution.

Now, from left to right, lets imagine proportionates...

Every negative has its positive. And it's the universes way of using this point that determines how it's evolved. Evolution takes immediate advantageous circumstances then MINIMISES THE NEGATIVES which means eudaimotion toward oalance. In ecology this constitutes the logistic growth equation. Within EVERYTHING is oalance. It is present in everything - always has been. In this sense oalance is God.

The shape above is the UNIVERSAL extance. All things are contained within it in a similar pattern. We all have extance normal distributions. All life revolves around oalance. By eudaimoning and deudaimoning we live toward and away from oalance. There is so much more to explore here, but I've now finished outlining basic eudaimonic theory.

The Nature of Oalance - Part 3

We've ascertained balance can be symbolically represented.

This symbol combines two extremes at a central core. Arguably, this is as far as human society has got in terms of application of balance to daily life. Balances exist, but so do imbalances. Modern life is not always about balance - it's about survival. Just like eudaimonia, balance is often a luxury and one that does not have much meaning. Currently, it is definitely not a focus of BELIEF. It's also seen as a very fluid state and in terms of core centrality is not structured enough. It is not oalance yet.

Before pressing on I'd like to clear up some terminology. The positive/negative combo is called a proportionate. The opposite side of balance negative/positive combo is the proportionate reflection. The entire structure of balance in the centre and proportionate expansion either side is called an extant.

Oalance is the combination/aggregation of balances. Some balances are misconceived but most are relevant. What we get is...

N

This is an unlimited number of balances. Will the human race ever be able to categorise every individual balance? Extremely unlikely. This doesn't really matter, however. As long as we can understand nature works on a principle of balance and imbalance we don't need to know all of them.

From here I request a little imagination. I'm constrained by the blog facilities and can't accurately show my meaning - I can only explain. But I ask you to use my profile image as guidance. It is E8. For a full account of its meaning go to http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/sciencenews/3352140/Is-this-the-fabric-of-the-universe.html.

E8 is perfect symmetry in the complex physical world. It's structure is central to much of particle physics. It is widely regarded as a significant step toward a grand unified theory of everything.

My question is - what is the centre of E8?

My answer - oalance, where...

N = Oalance

Imagine vast quantities of balances. More, by rights, than we can imagine. Nevertheless, millions upon millions of balances we perceive as separate entities, floating in the chaotic, unpredictable universe. In reality, they are not. They are all one and the same. Overlap them all and incorporate the extant network. You should get oalance in the centre with proportionates expanding away very much in the same shape and pattern as E8.

The jigsaw pieces fit together and we get...




This symbol is oalance.

The Nature of Oalance - Part 2

Okay, let's set up the theory. The primary question is 'What is a balance?'. When I say the word 'balance' what do I mean?

Common sense tells us a balance is the mid-point between two extremes. The central balance point is the focus, or pivot point, equidistant from either end. The assumption is, in direct reference to this statement, and restricted linguistically, that the extremes are equally imbalanced. From this, I believe, one makes an assumption - that imbalance is bad. Through eudaimonics we will see how complicated this statement is, but the truth is it depends on our definition of 'good' and 'bad'. I will give, in time, some Environmental Ethics value theory corresponding to eudaimonics. I reveal there are two forms of good and bad.

So, an equidistant point between two extremes. Something like this...

I-------------- O --------------I

The balance has to be equidistant. If the extremes change then the balance point changes. Is it possible to fill this diagram in, to develop it further? Absolutely.

There must be a reason to be in imbalance. If there was no use then all things would be in balance. Things are not, so what is the reason. Well, imbalances, or extremes, have instrumental value. They are useful, potentially 'selfish' for want of a better word. They have characterisation and individuality. They have positive gain. We can put this in...

I++++++++ O ++++++++I

This is completely unsatisfactory. Balance is 'supposed' to be good. Perfect. Imbalances cannot be good as well. There is absolutely no distinction in this diagram. Why do we wish to be at balance? To avoid being bad, to avoid evil, injustice, selfishness, inconvenience, greed, hunger. There is negative loss away from balance. Well, lets add it...

I±±±±±±±±± O ±±±±±±±±±I

That works slightly better. However, there is a problem. Clearly, in this diagram, both extremes are the same. This cannot be. If you are over-eating, then you cannot be under-eating! There is no distinction here. Lets flip one extreme one side of balance...

O ±±±±±±±±±


Every action has an equal, opposite and corresponding action. We're not there yet though. Away from balance the extremes must have a heavier impact. A larger size. Currently, there is no distinction along the spectrum. These positive/negative correlations are equal in proportion to each other away from balance - they are proportionates...









Hopefully, one can now appreciate the natural progression - the nature of an individual balance. The central point is the overlap of proportionates, or simply...



So, at last, we have an indicative symbol of balance. Part 3 will explain how we can use similar methodology to uncover the true nature of oalance.

The Nature of Oalance - Part 1

Oalance. The perfect balance.

Every balance we perceive is one of singularity and individuality. So, when Buddha achieved enlightenment he attained his own perfect form of balance in separation from the form of balance any individual can attain in his or her lifetime. Balance acquisition is seen as a separate act of contemplation for individuals, and bears no significance to a wider state present in the natural world. Sometimes, it's seen as an elitist luxury based simply on the nature of the detachment from material things, never mind an object of belief.

Spiritually, balance is an ancient concept. We all know of taoism, buddhism, yin and yang, feng shui, paganism, positive and negative energy and even Ancient Egyptian and Greek godly representations of balance. As human beings we appear to be conscious of a 'greater balance' yet have chosen to interpret it in somewhat fanatical and misleading religious doctrine in order to provide authority on 'God's Earth' in times of great personal, political and social imbalance caused principally by the harsh and unyielding environment. Try telling anybody to believe in nature and they will understandably espouse the negativity of a world trammelled by disease, climate change, predators, food shortages and 'the survival of the fittest'.

More than understandable, but nevertheless misinformed. Science has uncovered delights and inspirations from the real world evolved through time. Infinitely complex and undoubtedly beautiful, nature is divine in its own right. And from nature arises perhaps the most contentious and debated concept of them all - the balance of nature.

There is enough here for countless blog posts so I will touch briefly but meaningfully on just how important the balance of nature is. It is extraordinarily practical. Ask any farmer and they will say long term sustained harvests and/or livestock farming constitutes not just the attainment of a balance in their own lives but applies readily to efficient management of natural systems. Habitats and ecosystems are self-sustaining and any human presence should slip harmlessly into that system. Ecologists argue vehemently about evolution and balance and say they both don't work in synchrony. There are simply too many imbalances. I will explore their disgruntlements in time, but for now lets accept the intuitions and evidence of countless spiritualists and scientists respectively - that there is a delicate balance of nature.

You only need to listen to politicians recently on the MP's expenses row, or community managers, or judges, or sportsmen and women, or even the Archbishop of Canterbury to hear countless uninhibited references to balance. It forms part of our culture, and seen as a true pragmatic solution to personal problems and public policy. Balance is intrinsic to society.

For now, believe that there is vast evidence for balance. You will find thousands of commentators on the internet on this subject. If you pile through government documentation you'll find frequent references. The world's new hope, Barack Obama, effectively is 'Mr Balance'. His autobiography is all the evidence you need. I feel strongly enough on the documentation of others that balance needs no proof of existence. My eudaimonics is strong enough to assert the range of balances present. In time, the evidence will avail itself systematically. I'd like to pursue the theoretical element.

What if every balance is the same. The word 'balance' is one of linguistic merit attributed equally to all states. It also has other connotations, most noticeably 'physical balance' like in riding a bike, or the measuring device used regularly for weighting. Oalance is the immoveable balance - the solid, objective and consistent presence through all time. Every balance we state is in direct reference to oalance. Through eudaimonics I will show you a visible method revealing God in all its natural, oalancentric glory.

Follow http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=75099299772 for my Facebook group, or follow me on Twitter!