The Golden Process

Well I think fractals are amazing. Scale, time, infinity, limitation, deadlines, reflecting sunlight off a bin lid: but everything is a process hon, everything. So to say that is to say nothing, or everything.


But it equates to the same thing.


Are those fractal flowers in your DP? Not all flowers exhibit the Fibonacci “process”, which you probably know. A lot do however. With varying success. Depending on how we define success. Traditionally, I argue, life death and suffering are the marker stones.


I think math is amazing. But I am less certain it is ‘the’ language more than it is ‘a’ language than I was. And that loss of safety comes through in that piece I think. Still, my toaster works. ❤


Plus there was a personal element involved. Last time I was happy sacred geometry played a role in my life, but I wasn’t applying analysis the same way I do now. I would have (well I did get around to it.).


But I am tired of being lied to. I am tired of being the only one looking at all sides. Seems like it could easily be a default to me. I’m tired of every topic hitting like a drop of rain to a puddle: but only me rippling.


I research in all directions always. For me; you always begin with interest, exposure or inspiration then counterpoint, then reexamination. By the time I have taken the day or 3 days, 3 weeks, 3 books, what have you. Had a reasonable look at the affirmative, negative and in between and return to discuss and explore things further: I find the same people peddling the same lines.


And all too often not only have they not explored the counter point, they rarely know a great deal about their own side either. Not discussing, not sharing: just making noise, looking for hugs and social status (another pet topic of mine =D).


And what’s more, taking great offense if you don’t just applaud whatever bark happens to woof out of their face. The barnyard bleat of the week.


Tell someone you are a climate change “denier” (tell me that didn’t come out of a think tank) and then ask inquisitively if they could just share the points that finally convinced them, or were they born with innate climate mathematical models and “just knew”; like those gendered individuals “know” their body is the wrong one (what ever the heck that even can mean), despite there being cultures with 3, 5, spectrum or no gender in our species. And then the need to change what they are to become the thing the already were? Surface level thinking and a need to belong dominates this place.


I am not immune, I’m resistant of a sort perhaps, but that would be a group in itself did I not spend all my time on my own. And maybe that is still a group.


But no judgement. These are just observations I think I see, and can support, using peoples’ own words; actions; social choices and were they draw their line’s on their convictions. Use these things as a mirror. Spend a night in some type of real connection.


It is a lovely sentiment, don’t you think?


Again, it only leads to aggression in all but every case, but I still think it is the case. Questioning is not attack! Taking an interest is surely closer to a concept of love? I just try not to bring it up. Anything. I can do that on here.


It does stifle me though, slow my truth, slow my growth. If such things make sense.  


“Just the points that sold you, where it clicked”. Try it. You will be met with aggression. Because where it clicked was an in group, or a hook up, or a power lift from knowing the bare minimum about a vogue cause.


Some light arguments you can question and they can’t answer, then rejection sets in (that you aren’t really sending in the first place, genuinely curious if they are open to share, you watch them reject themselves and blame outwards). Projected anger at themselves as the glimpse of the dissonance from their own self deception and fraudulence terrifies them. Clasp and flail and throw fists to regain their footing in the smoke.


Television is saturated, and I can’t remember a time when what the people were pointing at was where we were suppose to be looking. In-groups get saturated. Any place you could see a fractal would not be a place critical questions would be welcome without ruining the vibe. And that is fine, It just took me a while to learn that is all.


Gawd forbid someone have an actual opinion they have developed and synthesised from constructing and meditating on a thesis and antithesis rather than spewing a chapter title quoted from the inside cover of “O magazine” or “simplified spirituality and politics for the modern busy grotesquely rich celebrity mother or poor idiot, quarterly”.


I get carried away. I really think every path is much of a muchness. And it is a lovely comment <3.


And correct. As much as anything can be as far as I can tell.


And I like process and patterns. Processing and cognitive science go together like lego blocks. In a mechano tower. Surrounding a dream house where Ken and Barbie sit protected from dissidents and enemy combatants (non-dolls). 


That is why I focus more on exchanges and philosophy of behaviour, over content.


I’m a biographer, more interested in the observation of the saying than the hearing. Hearing takes too long and I feel like I am the only one who does it, so in order to better fit in I have stopped. Largely.


I try very hard to fit in, I do pretty ok. Not great though considering the amount of effort. I think I am committed. I like having fun, I just don’t really remember what it is. There were things beyond reading and writing, I mean I want to keep those things, but I seem to think I am sure I have had conversations I engaged in rather than tolerated quietly. Few come to mind, granted.


That is probably why I write, and make videos and perform my way through life.


Although, for a lot of what I have said here, for it to make sense either, we would need to decide on what the measures would be: and that is a case in point of how hard my auto analysis is to shake.


Also a lot of this writing is emotional and intentionally provocative (or really expressive is what I mean) more than formal arguments. Which, as I said, I am trying to use less and less. Because people don’t like it.


I write though and that must be for something. Probably this. Thank you for this exchange, thank you.


The golden process. How did you come to finally allow yourself to connect with fractals in such an abstract way? What would you say to a child so that they would understand your position better and how do you explain it to yourself?


If you are able to share some thing that would be a lovely gift. Not refer me to a film or a book, understand. Or tell me to talk to your friend, who I’d love, who is really into this stuff: personal. Fractals for you. Personal. When thinking about it all, when something clicked for you how was it phrased and what did it mean? How might you further communicate what you have identified I have missed?


You don’t have to answer, of course. I would be remiss not to ask though. 





First Edition J..Raphael (2012) The Golden Process. J Chron. Lett. and Sci., (26), 511.

About J.Chron.Ltt.&Sci. [JCR]

~CogSc (Humor); NeuroPsych; Philosophy (Death/Identity); Methods (Research); Intelligence/Investigation (Forensic); Medical Error~
This entry was posted in Chronicle Core. Bookmark the permalink.

Become part of the journey. You will be welcomed by the others and your comments thoughtfully considered.

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