The Sandorian Grove: The Toth Diagram
 The Toth Diagram 28 comments

 [< Back] [The Sandorian Grove]

Category:   Tags:

19 Jul 2008 @ 23:30 by mx @189.68.170.89 : still missing...
is an integration of the polarization matrix (Zousel graph). But I gotta leave s/g for Ed to do, haha

20 Jul 2008 @ 00:27 by Ed Dawson @71.106.210.60 : 90 degree rotation
I recognize that photo taken on the carpet in Tujunga. I remember how frustrating it was trying to show splits that way... Max, you said:
" ...new branches rotate at 90 degrees with every binary split..."

This just dawned on me:
THE ROTATION IS 90 DEGREES FROM ALL PREVIOUS ROTATIONS!
Tao splits into yin and yang (level or two or "L2") - this forms a one dimensional structure, a line.
L2 splits into L4 - a 2 dimensional plane.
L4 splits into L8 (Taoist trigrams) - a 3 dimensional space.
L8 splits into L16 (the olodu) - a 4 dimensional hyperspace.
This can be extended down to at least L64, a 6 dimensional reality.

But consciousness normally seems to track only 3 dimensions; would these be the 3 lowest of L16, L32 and L64?

As for the Zousel diagram, it merely shows the relations between the poles of any split.

I want to make what I consider a crucially important point at this time:
ALL OF THESE POSTULATED STRUCTURES ARE POINTLESS UNLESS ONE FINDS AN APPLICATION FOR THEM. Application, application, application.

The 4 wheels of olodu I found have several applications. They teach how to transform any olodu into the next one around the wheel; and they also serve as a template to demonstrate how evil is created by reverse motion around a wheel.

The Zousel diagram I found is perfect for unraveling the archetype complexes. Using it I can predict human behavior and general life direction simply by knowing which of the four a person is using with their archetype.

So I say to you Max, your task is now to find the application for the Toth Diagram. If there is an application then it is a correct abstract of reality. If there is no application, then it is not a correct model. Have fun! :)

cheers
Ed

20 Jul 2008 @ 01:10 by mx @189.68.170.89 : application & update
Ed, I had at least 4 goals with this, proving my own pet theory, adding on support to the notion that Ifa is indeed a complete axiomatic system of our universe, increasing the understanding of the interaction and providing a tool for study and analysis for students of Ifa, and show a new way how to dive into some deeper aspects of the odu in general. The last two are already useful and practical applications.

I added a section on Ikabara with a picture as an example of how one can use to dig into some odu that are usually held secret. And to have a chart to quickly look up the relative stability (binding) and the intensity of polarizations (flipping) for me are applications that I find very useful when analyzing life paths.

20 Jul 2008 @ 01:33 by mx @189.68.170.89 : things to unravel..
2 more 'applications' (research) :-)
one could say that a forward push of a particle in the odu space has a 'positive' charge and a reverse directional vector a 'negative' charge. How do those charges impact the other odu in the vicinity?

What are the next states that are likely to be entered? We have found 4 wheels but there are many other possibilities of wheels.

Another point that I forgot to mention (there are just toooo many fascinating features in this thing!) The graph orders the binary numbers in an interesting way. All opposing TP outside poles are bitinversed with (3+1 and 1+3 ogbe/yeku bits) and the RL outside poles are also of one class (2+2, two 0s and two 1s),
The center ones are of maximal order and maximal disorder (called shuffling), and so on.

90 degrees: yes, I forgot to mention it, every time there is a new level, new 'dimension'. Tony Smith demonstrated that already years ago. The relative position is still the way it is in the Toth diagram on the final plane.

20 Jul 2008 @ 03:40 by Ed Dawson @71.106.210.60 : + and - charges of odu
An odu is a 2-pole arrangement. Only 16 of them of course are natural polarities, but they still interact as indicated by the Zousel Diagram. You asked how do these charges affect other odu in the vicinity?

My research indicates that a "Being" (a person, not an orisha) consists of two odu (four olodu), set up as two pairs, one inside and one outside. (My outside is ogbe meji and my inside is okanran'fun) I graph these as a cross. Your question acts as a very intriguing suggestion! Each odu would be acting in one of the four ways indicated in the Zousel Diagram.

I hope you realize that I just stated that dafa imori should be done rather differently from the traditional pattern. The traditional way we learned is a gunas arrangement (triangle). But if you go back to Bascome you will see in his book mention of a double opele, for casting two odu. We don't see that used, do we? WHY? It evidently had SOME purpose but the tech is either lost or concealed.

The 90 degree rotations I first read about around 1965 in a story by sci-fi writer Robert Heinlein: "...And He Built A Crooked House". Glad to be able to apply it to something! LOL!
cheers
Ed

20 Jul 2008 @ 03:57 by Mark @124.82.50.17 : Putting things in the WHOAT (re-posted)
Hi Vaxen,
and everyone else interested:
If you want to have something in the WHOAT - then please copy the part you want to have in, put a title to it, the name of the article, author, date and Website/Forum and send it to me (i_am_alkaro@yahoo.com).

I will put it in the WHOAT within 1 to 3 days. (If - as far as I can see - it makes sense and is not yet in...:-) )

The reason is:
I am not too much into the Olodu-Stuff, therefore not qualified to do the extraction. And 2ndly, I am not reading everything.

Hope you understand.

Should anyone volunteer to keep the WHOAT up in re to Polar Dynamics, I can make a special arrangement with this person, so he can do it directly. In this case Max and Ed would have to agree to the person who volunteers.
This would be a good thing - as the WHOAT is very incomplete in re to Polar Dynamics and Archetypes.

Thanks
Mark

20 Jul 2008 @ 05:43 by Mark @124.82.50.17 : Authorship - to Max
From what I know, the Wheels have been discovered by Ed. If so, this should be clearly stated when mentioning them. :-)
Mark

20 Jul 2008 @ 05:51 by Mark @124.82.50.17 : Discrete and Structure in one process
The following belongs to the last subject - but I am not sure how this is handled here. Should I post it to the appropiate subject - and nobody goes and reads it - or does it not matter?

To what Max calls 'Discrete' (???) and 'Structure'.

Wouldn't it be nice to have a process that handles both sides (they one thing anyway..)??
If you do Incident running with R3X you will end up clearing the item in a Pre MEST Incident (or how ever you want to name these things), which is in fact a construct of PT Polarities. R3X - although certainly no replacement for Skywork (or the Grades on the other side) goes the whole way and is the easiest access for most people.(Can be done with new persons).
It will not create arrogant fanatics - nor blind followers.....
Mark

20 Jul 2008 @ 15:36 by mx @189.68.195.51 : various items
Mark - "discrete" refers to single events, accidents, incidents, losses, etc.
"structural" refers to charged GPMs/polarities/odu which create general attitudes, goals. etc.

authorship: this is a touchy subject for many people and often their downfall, witness history. The formations of Odu in specific groups and their types of charges became apparent after many, many hours of Skywork. Certain things like the Zousel diagram are so basic that many people would reject giving it an extra name. However, it is the discovery of the IMPORTANCE; Some say 'relative' importance which I object too because it is by its very nature 'relative'.

'Authorship' denotes who wrote what. Ed, if you feel you deserve more credits, let me know. After so much work with morphogenetic fields, I am suspicious, if not critical to the concept of individual ownership of ideas, discovery, etc. and don't claim it easily for myself.

Just 2 days ago I saw a simple, poor old man in the jungle of Brazil applying to a child what in Europe is known as the 'Dorn' Method (see http://www.the-dorn-method.com/ ). He learned it from his grandmother over 50 years ago as a child and she had it used already for many, many years. The website above says "In Germany about 36 years ago, was a Spine Healing method developed and presented by a layman-healer." Who is right, from where does it come? I would say both are right and the idea arose from the morphogenetic field.

20 Jul 2008 @ 16:17 by mx @189.68.195.51 : an application> finding rescue odus
I always wondered why Odi-rete is THE rescue energy for a stuck Otura-Meji. Of course, everything 'irete' will pull otura forward in the wheel. That shows not only in Skyworks but it also logical from the wheel itself. But why Odi-rete exactly? The Toth diagram showed me the solution to this enigma today and I realized how one can find powerful 'rescue' energies for other stuck polarities.

Also, will try to pull my math together and write a program to simulate the oscillations of the wheels when exposed to local disturbances.

Major parts of the Toth diagram were visible once in Slovenia in 2002, I realized last night.

Ed, for Orisha/odu interaction, one can track 'favorite' pathways in the maze of the diagram (and avoided ones). Script progressions ARE more predictable with this diagram.

20 Jul 2008 @ 17:20 by vaxen : Since...
we are now at the level of 64 bit computing I posit that soon we'll be way beyond that. So mx's theories, seems to me, need to go beyond the 16 to the 32 then the 64 bit modes in order to retain a bit of redundancy. Pet theories have much room for expansion and I thank you Edward for bringing in the BOC. Ever study Shao Yung's 'Map of the Greater Heavens?'

Beyond 64 we have 128 and in a few more 'steps' 1024. To see the binary truths of all these 'systems' is an incredible awakening of and by itself. Then we apply 'Grimms Law' and get what we get. Good to see you here Mark.

I think what Edward says about 'application' is very wise indeed as these 'systems,' ancient, venerated, chaordic (Look at Africa, birth place of IFA, today), and much in need of some firm overhauling... which, they are getting. Tons of theories 'out there' but what can we apply towards the end of freeing and healing both ourselves and this planet. Ton Theon Ouranon? Tos Theos? To Theo? To Mega Therion?

"Do what THOU wilt shall be the whole of the law."
"Every man and every woman is a star."
"Love is the law, Love under will."
"One star in sight!"

Installed my new modem today. Motorola SM56 Speakerphone. Install went without a hitch. Connected to the net like a charm. Applied the knowledge that I have. That's IFA.

I hope someone does elect to put the relevant niceties in WHOAT...

Thanks mx, et al, for this discussion. Deeper and deeper we go. Caracole anyone?

21 Jul 2008 @ 03:58 by Mark @124.82.50.17 : To Max - c-right
Yes I fully agree. Ownership of spiritual things is a joke. BUT - on the way it IS a touchy subject. I saw You do take your discoveries 'serious' (The Steingruber Principle... or some such). That's why I came in - it's a balance thing. Just giving credit - nicely playing the game - keeps all calm.
:-))
Mark

21 Jul 2008 @ 14:01 by mx @189.68.186.65 : spiritual & engineering technology
Hi Mark,
yes, indeed, it seems non-consequentially pointing out the relationship of the Concur (not Steingrubner) Principle in the article but the latter is in the area of engineering and computer programming and it contains stuff "invented", meaning details that are NOT observable in nature. For the philosophical part, I don't claim owner- nor authorship on the findings, only at the formulations & presentations. Here on the BLOG, everything is labeled as "Primarily Public Domain", pls follow the link at the left bottom of the BLOG's main page. See also their new concept of "Ethical Public Domain", following the link there.

21 Jul 2008 @ 15:05 by Ed Dawson @71.106.210.60 : authorship?
More like "discovery". Am I the first Being in this universe to notice the wheels? Hell no! I am apparently the first recorded (in our history on this planet) Being to notice them locally. Did others on this planet notice them before me? Almost certainly. But there is no existing record of such that I can find.

Same goes with the splits of Tao and their true characteristics. I worked VERY hard to discover the nature of the Level of Four items. I take credit for that hard work and the success therein. Was I first? Not in this universe and probably not on this planet. The chinese seem to have had them, but also seem to have lost them. Even their yin/yang (Level of Two) is screwy. The Hindus in the Samkha materials have the Level of Two cleaner in my opinion (prakriti and purusha).

So no authorship or ownership for me. Local discoverer in modern times, yes. Shrug. I take credit for hard work and success.
cheers
Ed

21 Jul 2008 @ 15:12 by Mark @124.82.50.17 : To Max
Thanks Max for clarifying. I was jumping in a bit too fast - MU. :-)
Mark

21 Jul 2008 @ 18:11 by Ed Dawson @76.168.215.49 : Actually NO.
The four olodu wheels were not "suggested" in skywork; it was not a coproduction. Nor is a wheel a tetrahedron; it is a wheel. Perhaps you have an MU?

I found them. You had a contribution of the binary tree that allowed me to join the splits. They cannot be found by anyone who has not merged the binary tree of splits (your discovery, not mine) to the Level of Four. Once I had audited myself to the Level of Four, THEN I could see the wheels.

Let's give proper credit where it is due to each of us.

Edward

21 Jul 2008 @ 18:22 by mx @189.68.186.65 : misunderstanding
ok the. I must a misunderstanding of what you call the 'wheels'. I was thinking of the block formation as observed in Skywork and that, for me they are clearly tetrahedrons (like all complete tetras). Same the level of four what I saw always simply as the second binary split comparable to the four elements/directions etc. I give you certainly the credit for what is your discovery. It appears I have not duplicated it correctly. Which would explain why you choose the first wheel as representing "mathematics", a name that I still don't understand.
best
mx

21 Jul 2008 @ 19:38 by Ed Dawson @71.106.210.60 : Mathematicals
Inside the mind they appear to be the Operators of math:
exponents/infinities = ogbe
subtraction/division = ofun
roots/zeros = oyeku
(Yes, this means that both zero and infinity can be used as an operator)

Outside of the mind they are the other name: The Tools Of God. They are what is used to bring things into and out of existence in the other three wheels.

The reason they are not a tetrahedron is that there is a motion from one olodu to only one of the others in a fixed sequence, if one "pushes" an olodu to extreme manifestation. For example if you push oshe from addition it will become multiplication (addition doubled), then exponents (multiplication doubled or more), then stabilize at an infinity, which is ogbe. You can do the same with any of the four to turn it into the next in the sequence. This only requires two dimensions, not three.

cheers
Ed

21 Jul 2008 @ 21:06 by mx @189.68.186.65 : aah!!!
ok, I'll change the mentioning in my article to tetra structures (as only as such they make as I will show in my upcoming article and the "twheels" in your sense are outside the scope of that article.) and do an extra reference to your work.
In this sense, also the Zousel graph is beyond that scope as they are only used as charge orientation and not as a mathematical tool (I remember now that you talked to me about the "new math" originated by her. cool.

Do you have any writeup I could refer to as a link?

22 Jul 2008 @ 00:06 by Mark @124.82.50.17 : To Max
The basics about Ed's Wheels are in the WHOAT.
See "Topics / Polar Dynamics" and "Processes / Polar Dynamics".
(But of course you can not link to it directly, as it is for members only.)
Mark

22 Jul 2008 @ 02:31 by Ed Dawson @71.106.210.60 : Zousel
No she doesn't have anything written up in words. She's been scribbling hand-drawn graphics that I find had to make out. There is a certain path of Oya that acts like she is from another world or another universe. Whatever it is (Ajalorun? Igbale?), she's it. LOL!

She's been insisting for years that there is at least one undiscovered operator. She's working on it...
cheers
Ed

22 Jul 2008 @ 20:12 by mx @189.68.203.248 : undiscovered operator
indeed, what you describe as the first wheel is not identical with my findings.

But that's totally OK. More than one viewpoint :-)

It comes closer to my description of the secondary split (what you call 'Level of 4') except that I would never call them infinities (that my rigid education, perhaps, haha). But it is obvious that this level of 4 is reflected in the 16 olodus AND IN ALL OF THEM.

In Ifa the Level of 4 is called the '4 types of ashe' (still designing some pictures for the next article that talks about it). In India the symbol of the Level of 4 was the swastika (Hitler destroyed the meme of this symbol thoroughly). This it goes in line with the observation that always 4 poles rotate to a create an energy (what I call the quadpole Girapoli effect). The Falun Dafa people have some cool drawings (or they had them, don't know if they're still up on the net because they show the energies as a clockwork of swastikas within swastikas, cool animations, too, but some people feel insulted by that still today).

Anyway, maybe Rita is looking for the first binary split operation?

I see it as 'creation of the first difference' , also could be called 'folding'. ('split from Tao' is impossible as a naming as it would presume 2 already existing qualities that could be split) But there is still another operation: rotation. In my first such musings (Gunter may recall those times at Los Feliz Blvd) I called it the Theory of Vibrators but this naming is unfortunately ridiculed by a certain type of industry and I since dropped it, haha... The (un)folding can also be seen as the bending of something to give it a shaped surface.

Note, 'Folding' mirrors down in the next levels as 'division into parts', as too much folding BREAKS the unity of a substance.

In short, 'folding' (BEFORE any 'split') yields movement and rotation (level of two) which downline on the level of 4 create 'join', 'flow', 'concave', convex'. The closed for me to this level is actually 'ogbe, oyeku, iwori, odi, the original Ifa sequence but the orginal level is mirrored downline in ALL 16 within the groups of for.

This original thinking stems from binary logic, not from the Concur Principle (which doesn't contradict it).

(whooaa. if I don't stop here, I already write a summary of the next article...)

For me personally, (binary) mathematics is a mental abstraction of the structure of the original realities and therefore wouldn't call any of the 'realities' mathematics for this reason.

But we need to see the things from as many different viewpoints as possible. And there is more than one truth to the same thing :-) (Ed formulated it nicer in for Polar Dynamics 1)...

22 Jul 2008 @ 20:44 by Ed Dawson @76.168.215.49 : #1 wheel
I don't call them "mathematics". If you double check above you'll see I call them MATHEMATICALS. This is short for "Mathematical Operators", like addition, subtraction, division, exponents, etc.

In the mind they are "mathematical operators" but in the physical universe they are "mathematical operations". Cycles of action in the physical universe follow the functions of the #1 wheel.

Hey! Write that next article! :)
cheers
Ed

22 Jul 2008 @ 21:29 by mx @189.68.203.248 : cool
that makes good sense to me, Ed !!!!

I shall make an effort to understand it better myself so that I can integrate it better in my own view! It seems very close to my binary approach (which came itself from contemplations of the geometry of nodes within wave systems).

The article is written, what is missing are some crucial designs for visualization. Could of course make crude ones and replace them later with more elegant ones.

Also, want to take some time off to think about your (or Rita's or both) approach. First I need to remove a certain resistance I had in talking about 'infinities' and see if I can find/remove some inner bias on that , hehe :-)

I think the missing operator may be 'rotation'. That would make both systems compatible already now if I would replaced (for myself) the 'infinities' with 'defined' and 'not defined' (particle view) or 'maximal/minimal elongation' (wave view) as I was planning this afternoon after recognizing how those four mirror down into the distribution of odu within the Toth Diagram.

But as I said, I'll do a little session first, haha.

In any case, I am thrilled to see how finally we see how the actual qualities appear in what people call the 'Sacred Geometry'. Without this step, all the circle and fibo-loops are all just fancy little toys for grown up kids ;-)

22 Jul 2008 @ 22:10 by Ed Dawson @76.168.215.49 : INFINITIES
I can understand some resistance to the idea of infinities. In this physical universe it is impossible to actually place an infinity. Infinities only exist in that "higher" universe of the pool of shining gods, AKA Coexistence. But by taking an infinity from there and applying it here, you end up placing an exponential effect. Please note above that I said ogbe was exponentials/infinities. If infinities bothers you, just use exponentials.

Einstein's famous semi-stolen (if not completely stolen) formula of E = MCsquared contains this. Iwori (space) tends to be as large as energy can push it; not quite infinite, but it tries to be. One represents this mathematically by the use of exponents.

By the way:
E = irosun
M = odi
Csquared is a lame attempt to represent both space AND time (velocity being distance/time).

cheers
Ed

22 Jul 2008 @ 22:50 by Dario @83.103.75.194 : square root of (-1)
maybe is an off topic question, but i can't understand in my mind the fisical definition of root of negative numbers in matter of odus and their transition.

here's a link (j is the root of -1)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor_(sine_waves)

maybe it is a way to represent non fisical things, but I like to know your points of view.

Dario

23 Jul 2008 @ 00:02 by mx @189.68.203.248 : unlimited vs infinite
In e=mc square the rest of the (infinite) Taylor Series of the entire term is dropped. In any case, published in an Italian scientific journal 10 or so years earlier (his wife worked in the patent office there, what a coincidence!). Whatever...

Ed, you're right when you go from one dimension to another. For example the line of a circle (or a line on a sphere) is unlimited because it doesn't have an endpoint (neither starting point) but it strictly seen it is a finite manifestation. 'unlimited' feels better to me. Hmmm...

Speaking of who did what: that thing today called the Taylor Series has been written up (invented) already by Madhava of Sangamagrama (1350-1425) of which wikipedia sez:
"If we consider mathematics as a progression from finite processes of algebra to considerations of the infinite, then the first steps towards this transition typically come with infinite series expansions. It is this transition to the infinite series that is attributed to Madhava. "

In the sense of 'infinite series expansions', too, of course, I accept the 'infinite', hehe

14 May 2015 @ 04:40 by Blog Sardine Factory @39.36.179.87 : Hello there, just was alert to your webl
Hello there, just was alert to your weblog via Google, and located that it is really informative. I will be grateful when you continue this in future. Many other people will probably be benefited from your writing. Cheers! -

 Your Name: Your URL: (or email) Subject: Comment: For verification, please type the word you see on the left:

Other articles tagged as ""
16 Nov 2009 @ 00:24: Hitlist of the major flaws in Human Thinking
5 Oct 2009 @ 15:05: Buying my own paper from over 18 yrs ago...
3 Aug 2009 @ 18:35: The Solfeggio Scale on the Toth Diagram
23 Jul 2008 @ 14:57: Linking the Toth Diagram to Traditional Sacred Geometry

Other articles in
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:18: A summary of the summaries of Max Sandor's projects
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:04: Project Summary 6. Game Theory - why and how do we manifest?
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:02: Project Summary 5: Polar Dynamics - theory and praxis of polarities
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:01: Project Summary 4: Quantum Fá - a practical guide to this Universe
23 Sep 2016 @ 16:45: Project Summary 3: The Book of Numbers
22 Sep 2016 @ 16:12: Project Summary 2: UrTon - the basis of spoken languages
18 Sep 2016 @ 00:32: Project Summary 1: The ConCur Paradigm - the structure of Reality
9 Aug 2016 @ 14:35: Robot Psychologist (by Awaz)
9 Aug 2016 @ 14:35: Project Summary 7: Archetypology of the Human Being
1 Aug 2016 @ 00:40: Victory, submission or what else? Sign and symbol of the Rio 2016 Kickoff

 [< Back] [The Sandorian Grove] [PermaLink]?  [TrackBack]?