#nested holarchy

[bsahely]

The Grammar of Emergence: Absence, Affordance, and the Adjacent Possible in Teleodynamic Life | ChatGPT4o

[Download Full Document (PDF)] Executive Summary Purpose This book develops and formalizes a triadic generative grammar — absence, affordance, adjacent possible — as the deep structure of transformation across life systems. It integrates insights from biological development, cognitive science, semiotics, and systems theory into a coherent model for understanding and designing emergent…

[flicknova]

Diaphragmatic Breathing Morphic Field - 16, 5.35 & 2.5Hz Isochronic Tones - Diaphragm Chakra Healing

For More Powerful and Exclusive Morphic Fields, You can join me on Patreon: -https://www.patreon.com/flicknova

To Purchase Image Morphic Fields (Energetically Programmed Image): -https://www.patreon.com/flicknova/shop

Note:- This Morphic Field is safe from all types of Food Intolerances and Allergies.

Note:- This Morphic Field can be played muted (Effect will be between 90% to 100%)

Morphic Fields:

A morphic field (a term introduced by Rupert Sheldrake, the major proponent of this concept, through his Hypothesis of Formative Causation) is described as consisting of patterns that govern the development of forms, structures and arrangements. The theory of morphic fields is not accepted by mainstream science.

Morphic fields are defined as the universal database for both organic (living) and abstract (mental) forms, while morphogenetic fields are defined by Sheldrake as the subset of morphic fields which influence, and are influenced by living things (the term morphogenetic fields was already in use in environmental biology in the 1920's, having been used in unrelated research of three biologists - Hans Spemann, Alexander Gurwitsch and Paul Weiss).

“The term [morphic field] is more general in its meaning than morphogenetic fields, and includes other kinds of organizing fields in addition to those of morphogenesis; the organizing fields of animal and human behaviour, of social and cultural systems, and of mental activity can all be regarded as morphic fields which contain an inherent memory.” - Sheldrake, The Presence of the Past (Chapter 6, page 112)

References:- Sheldrake, Rupert (1995). Nature As Alive: Morphic Resonance and Collective Memory. Source: [1] (Accessed: Thursday, 1 March 2007)

Morphic Fields Summary:

The hypothesized properties of morphic fields at all levels of complexity can be summarized as follows:

They are self-organizing wholes.

They have both a spatial and a temporal aspect, and organize spatio-temporal patterns of vibratory or rhythmic activity.

They attract the systems under their influence towards characteristic forms and patterns of activity, whose coming-into-being they organize and whose integrity they maintain. The ends or goals towards which morphic fields attract the systems under their influence are called attractors. The pathways by which systems usually reach these attractors are called chreodes.

They interrelate and co-ordinate the morphic units or holons that lie within them, which in turn are wholes organized by morphic fields. Morphic fields contain other morphic fields within them in a nested hierarchy or holarchy.

They are structures of probability, and their organizing activity is probabilistic.

They contain a built-in memory given by self-resonance with a morphic unit's own past and by morphic resonance with all previous similar systems. This memory is cumulative. The more often particular patterns of activity are repeated, the more habitual they tend to become.

Feel free to listen it on loop you can sleep with it playing on loop.

Do not listen to it while you are Driving or Operating Machinery, Only listen while you are ready for it.

LEGAL DISCAIMER Please be aware that the information provided to you is not evaluated or endorsed by the FDA, and it should not be used as a means of diagnosis or medical advice. The statements shared contain information that listeners can choose to use or disregard according to their own judgment. It is strongly recommended that you consult your primary care physician or a reputable hospital for any urgent medical treatment or advice. This program aims to offer general health benefits and falls under the category of class I. It is not intended to govern any medical or biological information as outlined by FDA guidelines. This channel solely serves as a source of information and does not provide diagnostic or treatment solutions for medical conditions.

[aliciadamsoncreativeecologies]

Transition Design: The Importance of Everyday Life and Lifestyles as a Leverage Point for Sustainability Transitions Terry Irwin (1), Cameron Tonkinwise (2) and Gideon Kossoff (3)

Every human affair is challenged by transition

The core transition that needs to be made in this current era is the transition to sustainability

Four mutually influencing areas (vision, theories of change, mindset and posture and new ways of designing).

Visions for transition - theories of change - posture & mindset - new ways of designing

The socio technical transition theory focused on multiple disciplines and discourses. Complex systems theory, theories of governance and history

It is possible to learn from historical case studies of transition cycles to implement an idea of how a transition may play out in the future

Three socio technical transition concepts (the multiphase concept, the multi pattern concept, the multi-level concept).

The multi level concept - the higher the levels of scale the more systems in hold, natural forms are arranged in nested holarchies of whole/parts or holons. Each holon is its own whole but part of a greater whole, in this sense hierarchy does not denote control, there is just greater and lesser. This systems adopts three levels of scale micro, meso and macro at which different kinds of interactions occur between things

In a socio-technical context these levels of scale are niches, regimes and landscapes. The three levels represent networks of relationships between multiple factors that are more resistant to change

Transitions occur when these three things link up and reinforce each other

Practice theory suggest that social order and change emerge from recursive and mutually influencing relationships between social structures and systems

A practice can be defined as a constellation of interdependent and share elements

If any kind of product or service is to become a part of everyday life it requires a corresponding change and reintegration

In sociotechnical theory it is made of concepts such as attractors, holarchies, coevolution, self organization and sensitivity to initial conditions.

Imn social practice theory the presence of nonlinear dynamics/complexities is not quire as emphatic nor as through going but it is nevertheless a significant factor: practices are dynamically related.

Socio-technical and social practice theories advocates modest, reflexive and interactive interventions

MLP transition theory uses scalar thinking to coordinate different levels of society

How do practices unfold according to their levels of scale, what distinguishes and what connects practices at each level of scale: and above all, what are the possibilities for transitioning practices towards sustainability at each level of scale

Human experience is often categorized by certain things, it does not suggest that there can be cross overs or changes within how humans act - human life needs to once again become decompartmentalised. Sovoyies will become more integrated, more coherent, and more vital.

From a social practice theory perspective everyday life consists of a weave of mutually influencing and interdependent practices.-

Needs are becoming more extensive, there are more in which they are satisfied

Satisfiers and needs vary according to social, culture, ecological, location context

Domains of everyday life framework, if satisfiers are integrated multiple needs can be meet at the same time. Giving life a rich and vital structure

Complexity theory is the shared backdrop of Socio-Technical transitions anf the domains of everyday life framework

Most significantly, both frameworks use the concept of ‘nestedness’ which is central to systems/ complexity theory. The nesting of ‘niche’, regime’ and ‘landscape’ is primarily an analytical device: the levels of scale they represent do not correspond to actual levels of scale of hu- man experience, but more to the dynamics of change within socio-technical systems, and to the relationships between different aspects of these systems, and therefore the points at which successful transition interventions might be made. The Domains framework uses the concept of nestedness as a normative device through which to assess the ‘health’ of everyday life and lifestyles, and therefore its sustainability.

Social practice theory can help develop the Domains as a tool for understanding everyday life, and the Domains framework may help us understand and how practices can be scaled at different levels within everyday life: and in evaluating needs satisfaction.

The four areas of this framework –vision, theories of change, mindset and posture, and new ways of design- ing– are considered to be mutually influencing. Thus, if our account of the integration of socio-technical transitions theory, social practice theory and the Domains of Everyday Life framework (located within ‘theories of change’) is valid, we can begin to develop nar- ratives and scenarios of future sustainable societies in which everyday life is structured around nested and networked households, neighborhoods, cities and regions.

[biointernet]

Hourglass/Torus shape

Time, among all concepts in the world of physics, puts up the greatest resistance to being dethroned from ideal continuum to the world of the discrete, of information, of bits.... Of all obstacles to a thoroughly penetrating account of existence, none looms up more dismayingly than 'time.' Explain time? Not without explaining existence. Explain existence? Not without explaining time. To uncover the deep and hidden connection between time and existence ... is a task for the future. JOHN ARCHIBALD WHEELER, 1986

Hourglass/Torus shape

In geometry, a Torus is a surface of revolution generated by revolving a circle in three-dimensional space about an axis coplanar with the circle. If the axis of revolution does not touch the circle, the surface has a ring shape and is called a torus of revolution. More on Wiki. Hourglass - Torus shape Three-torus model of the universe The three-torus model is a cosmological model proposed in 1984 by Alexi Starobinski and Yakov B. Zeldovich at the Landau Institute in Moscow. The theory describes the shape of the universe (topology) as a three-dimensional torus. It is also informally known as the doughnut theory. A torus consists of a central axis with a vortex at both ends and a surrounding coherent field. Energy flows in one vortex, through the central axis, out the other vortex, and then wraps around itself to return to the first incoming vortex. The simplest description of its overall form is that of a donut, though it takes many different shapes, depending upon the medium in which it exists. For example, a smoke ring in air or a bubble ring in water are both very donut shaped. And yet an apple or an orange, which are both torus forms, are more overtly spherical.

Hourglass - Torus form Plants and trees all display the same energy flow process, yet exhibit a wide variety of shapes and sizes. Hurricanes, tornadoes, magnetic fields around planets and stars, and whole galaxies themselves are all toroidal energy systems. Extending this observation of the consistent presence of this flow form into the quantum realm, we can postulate that atomic structures and systems are also made of the same dynamic form. Torus is synonymous with electromagnetic field, Light body, Merkaba, Wei Qi field, energy bubble, or aura that makes oneness with God possible. Space and time are the framework within which the mind is constrained to construct its experience of reality. Immanuel Kant Philosophy of space and time is the branch of philosophy concerned with the issues surrounding the ontology, epistemology, and character of space and time. While such ideas have been central to philosophy from its inception, the philosophy of space and time was both an inspiration for and a central aspect of early analytic philosophy. DADA Time today

You are infinite Consciousness

A Torus energy field

Time symbolism

What is the symbol of time? 

Symbol of Time is The Hourglass

Time symbolism – What is the symbol of time? My Hourglass Collection – Time and Hourglass History and Symbolism. Welcome to MHC Virtual Museum! See also Time Philosophy and The Full History of Time https://www.myhourglasscollection.com/hourglass-torus-form/ The features of healthy living systems that Sahtouris identified are: 1. Self-creation (autopoiesis) 2. Complexity (diversity of parts) 3. Embeddedness in larger holons and dependence on them (holarchy) 4. Self-reflexivity (autognosis/self-knowledge) 5. Self-regulation/maintenance (autonomics) 6. Response-ability to internal and external stress or other change 7. Input/output exchange of matter/energy/information with other holons 8. Transformation of matter/energy/information 9. Empowerment/employment of all component parts 10. Communications among all parts 11. Coordination of parts and functions 12. Balance of Interests negotiated among parts, whole, and embedding holarchy 13. Reciprocity of parts in mutual contribution and assistance 14. Efficiency balanced by Resilience 15. Conservation of what works well 16. Creative change of what does not work well More

Human Energy Field

The human energy field forms a torus around the central energy channel. The central channel runs from the perineum to the inner most top crown of the head, just in front of the spine. The circumference of the central channel matches the circumference of the circle that is created when the tip of the thumb touches the tip of the index finger on the same hand.

Hourglass - Torus form Within the human being, each chakra, each acupuncture point, every energy center, is, in itself, a toroidal flow. It flows within itself, in both directions. Each atom, each cell, each organ, each organ system has its own toroidal field and energy flow, and each nests within the other, to create a larger, human torus. Human Energy Field (HEF) – conception about Energy Fields around Human Body. Esoteric name of HEF – Aura. The human torus connects to larger tori in the same way that the torus of a human cell or molecule connects to the larger human torus. It is part of the torus of the individual’s soul, and of the Earth, and these tori connect to the universal torus. All tori are connected to Source, which is all inclusive and all encompassing.

Hourglass/Torus shape

The shoulder is the outer waterfall, below Source and above the equator. The outer aspect is the outer most part of the field, just above and below the equator. The bowl is the lower outer aspect, between the equator and Source below. The intramatrix consists of all the layers and ‘filling’ between the central channel and the outer most aspect of the torus. The inside part of the torus. The term intermatrix applies to group fields or nested fields. It refers to the space between the individual tori of a larger toroidal system. More

Hourglass - Torus shape

Torus equation

Definition Take a hollow cylinder (a tube), bend it to a ring, connect the two open ends and you get a torus: Another construction is to revolve a circle in three dimensional space about an axis coplanar with the circle (Wikipedia). The torus is in a standard, canonical position if the circle is perpendicular to the x/y-plane and is rotated about the z-axis. Implicit Equation The implicit equation of the canonical torus with inner radius r and revolving radius R is: ( R - √ x2 + y2 ) 2 + z2 = r2 (1) This formula is derived in the figures below. Parametric Equation Torus is a 2-dimensional surface and hence can be parametrized by 2 independent variables which are obviously the 2 angles: α = angle in the x/y-plane, around the z-axis, 0° ≤ α The vector c from the origin O to the inner center C of the torus is:c(α) = (R cos α, R sin α, 0)T (2) The vector d from the inner center C of the torus to the point A on the torus surface can be written as the sum of its orthogonal components:d = cos β c1 + sin β z1 (3a) c1 = (cos α, sin α, 0)T (3b) z1 = (0, 0, 1)T (3c) The vector a = (x, y, z)T from the origin to an arbitrary point A(x, y, z) on the torus surface is:a = c + d (4) By substituting (2) and (3) into (4) we get the parametric equations of the torus: x(α, β) = (R + r cos β) cos α (5a) y(α, β) = (R + r cos β) sin α (5b) x(α, β) = z(α, β) = r sin β (5c) The parameters α, β are usually denoted by u, v, respectively. More about Torus equation: https://www.nosco.ch/mathematics/en/torus.php, http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Torus.html

Hourglass/Torus shape. Time-Space.

Hourglass/Torus shape

Three-torus model of the universe The "three-torus model of the universe", or informally "doughnut theory of the universe", is a proposed model describing the shape of the universe as a three-dimensional torus. The name comes from the shape of a doughnut, whose surface has the topology of a two-dimensional torus. Alexi Starobinski and Yakov B. Zeldovich proposed the model in 1984 from the Landau Institute in Moscow; however, the basis for his theory began much earlier than 1984. The foundation for any knowledge of the shape of the universe began in the mid-1960s with the discovery of cosmic microwave background by Bell Labs. Greater understanding of the universe's CMB provided greater understanding of the universe's topology; therefore, in a quest for cosmic understanding, NASA supported two explorer satellites, the Cosmic Background Explorer in 1989 and the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe in 2001, which have gathered more information on CMB. Hourglass/Torus shape The Cosmic Background Explorer was an explorer satellite launched in 1989 by NASA that used a Far Infrared Absolute Spectrometer to measure the radiation of the universe. Led by researchers John C. Mather and George Smoot, COBE was able to obtain precise readings of radiation frequencies across the universe. With data on the universe’s radiation distribution, Mather and Smoot discovered small discrepancies in temperature fluctuation known as anisotropies throughout the universe. The finding of anisotropies led Mather and Smoot to conclude the universe consists of regions of varying densities. In the early stages of the universe, these denser regions of the cosmos were responsible for attracting the matter that ultimately became galaxies and solar systems. In “Microwave Background Anisotropy in a Toroidal Universe” by Daniel Stevens, Douglas Scott, and Joseph Silk of University of California Berkeley, the cosmologists proposed the isotropic universe suggests a complicated geometric structure. The researchers argued the density fluctuations reported by COBE proved “multiply connected universes are possible, the simplest is the three-dimensional torus.” Additionally, the journal concludes a torus shaped universe is compatible with COBE data if the diameter of the torus' tube is at least 80% greater than the torus’ horizontal diameter. Thus, COBE provided researchers with the first concrete evidence for a torus-shaped universe. COBE was eventually decommissioned by NASA on December 23, 1993. Hourglass/Torus shape Read the full article

[nasreenmohamedi-blog]

“ The Film Holarchy: The `Pond Ripple’ Model – (Velikovsky 2012) – A feature film begins when a writer finds a producer for their film script (the story of which, is a meme) and – the meme can then spread out through these nested Domains: the Group (film cast & crew); the Film Field (the industry `gatekeepers’ – such as Film Distributors); into the Domain of Film; out into Culture; out into Society (when people see it in cinemas); out to a Nation; and beyond nations to: the World. (Note that: not all feature films manage to do this! i.e. 7 in 10 films lose money, and 98% of screenplays go unmade!)”

[sandoirs]

Morphic Fields: A Summary

The hypothesized properties of morphic fields at all levels of complexity can be summarized as follows:

1. ​They are self-organizing wholes.

2. ​They have both a spatial and a temporal aspect, and organize spatio-temporal patterns of vibratory or rhythmic activity.

3. ​They attract the systems under their influence towards characteristic forms and patterns of activity, whose coming-into-being they organize and whose integrity they maintain. The ends or goals towards which morphic fields attract the systems under their influence are called attractors. The pathways by which systems usually reach these attractors are called chreodes.

4. ​They interrelate and co-ordinate the morphic units or holons that lie within them, which in turn are wholes organized by morphic fields. Morphic fields contain other morphic fields within them in a nested hierarchy or holarchy.

5. ​They are structures of probability, and their organizing activity is probabilistic.

6. They contain a built-in memory given by self-resonance with a morphic unit's own past and by morphic resonance with all previous similar systems. This memory is cumulative. The more often particular patterns of activity are repeated, the more habitual they tend to become.

[audiopedia2016]

What is GEOPHYSIOLOGY? What does GEOPHYSIOLOGY mean? GEOPHYSIOLOGY meaning - GEOPHYSIOLOGY pronunciation - GEOPHYSIOLOGY definition - GEOPHYSIOLOGY explanation - How to pronounce GEOPHYSIOLOGY? Source: Wikipedia.org article, adapted under http://ift.tt/yjiNZw license. Geophysiology (Geo, earth + physiology, the study of living bodies) is the study of interaction among living organisms on the Earth operating under the hypothesis that the Earth itself acts as a single living organism. The term "geophysiology" was popularized by James Lovelock in his writings on the Gaia hypothesis. The term was in fact foreshadowed by many others. James Hutton (1726-1797), the "Father of Geology" in 1789, in a lecture presented on his behalf by Dr. Black, wrote "I consider the Earth to be a super-organism and that its proper study should be by physiology." This view that the Earth in some ways could be viewed as a superorganism was widely held in the early 19th century, and was supported even by such early biologists as Huxley (1825-1895), but is disputed today. An analogous alternative geophysiology which views the Earth as a single cell was developed by Lewis Thomas in his The Lives of a Cell: Notes of a Biology Watcher (1974). Vladimir Vernadsky (1863-1945), founder of biogeochemistry suggested that geophysiological processes were responsible for the development of the Earth through a succession of phases in which the geosphere (of inanimate matter) develops into the biosphere (of biological life). Vernadsky's thinking significantly influenced the development of ecology in Russia, culminating in the "Russian Paradigm" (a term first coined by Georgii A. Zavarzin in 1995). The basic tenets of this approach are i) that life can only exist in the form of interconnected nutrient cycles (i.e. the ecosystem); ii) that ecosystem assembly is an organized process as opposed a haphazard one; iii) that the emergence of life on earth was congruent with respect to the appearance of primordial nutrient cycles; iv) that in addition to the evolution of species there exists a separate process of ecological evolution the direction of which is predetermined by community composition and dynamics (Lekevičius, 2006). Frederic Clements (1874-1945) of the Carnegie Institute of Washington, who popularized the idea of vegetation climax also introduced the idea of physiology to ecology, considering the interlocking natures of plants and animals as metabolic processes within a single superorganism. The British biologist, Arthur Tansey (1871-1955), who introduced the term ecosystem, also considered the possibility that plant communities could be considered to be boundary-less quasi-organisms, although he never extended his ideas to a planetary scale. G. Evelyn Hutchison, studied the way logistic growth, biological feedback systems and self-regulation tended to explain many of the features of ecological systems, and Raymond Lindeman has further extended the way energy flows between various trophic levels in his "trophic-dynamic" model, further developed by Mark McMenamin and Dianna McMenamin's thesis of "Hypersea", which looks at the rate of water flow through the Gaian biological environment. Tyler Volk, has also looked at the trophic cycling of various elements upon which life depends, and argues that this is central to an understanding of geophysiology. Toby Tyrrell has however argued that neither the Gaia hypothesis nor the idea that the Earth is (in any meaningful way) a superorganism are supported by the available scientific evidence. Eugene Odum believed that homeostasis and stability in ecosystems was a result of evolutionary processes, and Howard Odum (his brother) extended this work to include thermodynamic effects in producing ecological "steady states". Howard Odum also extended the nature of the scale of ecosystems from that of a single pond upwards, showing that a "nested hierarchy", "heterarchy" or "holarchy" existed in which systems could be considered as elements of larger systems (leaf to tree to glade to forest to bioregion to biotic realm or biomes). On the basis of this, Gaia theory and geophysiology represent the ultimate extension of these principles.