There are a few fundamentals i cling to while exploring Shunya.
Motion-sequence, which motion consists of 3 fundamental motion sequences: "reflective" motion through a centre, rotational motion around a centre, radially expanding or contracting motion around a centre.
The Logos Summetria Response, which response consists of comparing, comtrasting and distinguishing.
Now when i first formulated the The Logos Summetria Response i wrote it in terms of measuring, comparing and naming, and i have used similar synonyms for the basic notion. But lately i have fallen into the use of comparing and contrasting as fundamental actions in measuring, and distinguishing being a more general notion of making distinct referents to states achieved through the actions of the other 2.
Actions as they are fundamentally understood are distinctions of motion sequences, and motion sequences fundamentally underly the 3 basic actions of the Logos Summetria Response.
Of course these 2 divisions of the fundamental notions are aspects of my experiential continuum, and represent, structured sets or schemas of attributes which i may step aside from and view as objectively as i can in order that i may tautologically define them as "fundamental" in some innate sense. The process is tautological or in some cases analogical, but tautology is unavoidable, and analogy is simply accepting distinctions as separate and so not analysing to the reductionist limit. Then i may distinguish a set of relations as analogical, and develop structures according to the salient features of the analogy.
So By a tautology which i hope is instructive, i may set up an explanatory structure or schema within myself that explains by a systematic application of rules and procedures all aspects of my experiential continuum i perceive as of interest.
Thus by filtering out, dropping, or otherwise excluding certain of all the relations i attempt to construct a a set of tools, procedures and actions which enable me to make some constructed, rational sense of my experiential continuum.
I never therefore deal with any ultimate reality, merely some constructed subset of it if it exists, and certainly a subset of a larger set of possible relations which i have systematically separated from the larger subset with a view to developing a structured explanation of the whole. whatever that might be.
This may seem unsatisfactory, but rather than remain in that frame of mind it is best i find to draw out the beauty of this situation, beyond which i cannot go in terms of the fractal paradigm. in other words, this is the nature of a fractal structured experiential continuum, and the overwhelming response to that is awe, and wonder at the beauty of it all. This serves better than a a mean spirited dissatisfaction to no useful end.
I migt add in passing that the reflective connection through a centre of a small region with ots opposite is the fundamental notion of symmetry, but not of summetria which has any shared connection as its fundamental notion.
So as i defined ealies a joined collection of sequents is a series of sequents, and this series has as a consequence a natural sequence in the motions of joining. This resulting sequence is my definition of "sequence"
Thus a sequence always has a an underlying structure of a series, that is a joining of sequents in some order chosen or propelled by natural motions. That a sequent may in fact be devolved into a sequence is not to be ignored, but rather observed as a redefinition of units.
It has to be noted that until now i have not discussed sequents rigorously.
A sequent has to be a moment of a unit of space in motion, or tautologically a sequent of a unit of space in motion is a moment.
The former defintions are thusly suitably modified and by doing so one observes that changing the unit changes the sequent into a series of smaller sequents if the unit is mde smaller, and the sequent then also becomes viewable, or apprehendable as a a sequence.
Clearly enlarging the unit does not have the same effect, and it is important to note this antisymmetry in sequents and series, and the structure of sequences. Thus i may derive a series of sequents from a sequence, but i have a modulo constraint on deriving a sequent from a series of smaller unit sequents.What this effectively means is that we often cannot see the wood for the trees.
We may proceed with an investigation which gives us more information and apprehension, the smaller the sequent unit we use but things may not be so revealing going the other way . So called emergent properties may not be obvious because we have no idea od sequent series structures required to observe this larger systematic behaviour. We may flood the investigation with too little or too many smaller sequents hiding or not revealing the unit sequent required to make sense of it all. The advisce is to double and check.
We might also observe that the unit has to be defined in terms of motion sequents and in this case i have to refer to a state of my neural mesh that perceives and accepts the motion of or from the newly defined unit as a unit.This tautological definition is backed up by further actions which move the unit into positions of comparison.The relative positions highlights the relativity of all measurements and the observer state of apprehension.
So we have a curious notion,dynamicspace structured insequents ofunit space. These are what i refer to as motionsequents, which are joined in series to make a structure i have called a motion sequence. However, if i join the sequent by spatial relation of the units, rather than the sequential relation of the units then i have a structure which is fomed out of an increasing unit sized sequent which is a motion sequent with a geometrical distribution.
Such a sequent is like an image in a frame of film, or a static sculpture of motion, or a 3d animation freeze framed, a holographic image perceivable in space and or in he perception of the observer.
We have 2 structural pocesses to regulate or observe here: one the spatial one has to respect the relative positions of nits and the summetria of the form. IO may have symmetry to respect as well.
the second is the motion sequence relation. this motion sequence relation effects the relative spatial relations of the unit sequents.
It is clear that relative spatial position is dependent on motion sequents, and the relation or joining of motion sequents into series will effect the spatial behaviour of a form. A motion sequent series can completely disintegrate a spatial form, or alternatively condense a form into a blackhole.
Motion sequents do not blink in and out of existence, they move in a sequential manner resulting in motion behaviour that impresses sensors to make a comparable signal that can be sequentially stored.