Saturday, May 22, 2010

Translating Tainter to EBdish

It started this morning as I was playing in the twitterverse. After a while, I tweeted:

@openworld @spirospiliadis When you next have some time to play, wanna twittertennis to translate Tainter to EBdish?

Since I didn't get a response while it was top of my mind, the following post:

The point is :
It is not the strongest nor the most intelligent of the species that survives, It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.” Darwin

So let's say:

An Activity Space is a bounded entanglement of waves that move through Espace (Emotive) Cspace (Cognitive) Pspace (Physical) . Aspace can be used to frame a cell, a person, a community, an enterprise, a nation space, the global capital markets. It can also be used to frame an object - a book, a poster, a logo, a building, a tool.

The point is that each of the examples create an Activity Space in which E*C*P is entangled and made visible.

Then let's say:

It is in principle impossible to view Espace waves. What is possible to see manifestations of movement in Pspace. Art and Music are the prime examples. What Art is popular at what time for whom can produce insights on the E waves. But the E waves themselves can not be directly experienced. To make it even more interesting, the very act of seeing, changes the nature of the E waves.


"Social <-[ Aspace of interest ] complexity can be recognized by differentiated social and economic roles" [ Increase in nested Activity Spaces]

[ the existence of a class of information producers and analysts who are not involved in primary resource production] evo of Cspace Actors.

"complexity requires a substantial "energy" subsidy" [ Pspace is energy producer. Cspace is energy user. ]

"it tends to create new layers of bureaucracy, infrastructure, or social class" [Activity spaces with in Cspace Power Actors]

"When a society [ Activity space] confronts a "problem," [ A Pspace constraint on an Activity Space of interest]

When Cspaces can mash up to create new Bounded Cspaces synchronized with behavior in P space, stuff is mo betta, fasta.


  1. Hi Michael,

    Am with family on vacation - will welcome exploring this theme in a TwitterTennis in coming days. It seems like Mancur Olson's insights - and those of Constructal theorists - would be great to map into the conversation as well.

    Also, on a different topic, I've become intrigued with the question as to whether the theories of gravity as emanating from a dimension beyond PSpace - as discussed by Lisa Randall, a Harvard cosmologist interviewed by Charlie Rose - may have counterparts that can explain the pulls we feel in Cog Space and Emo Space. Let's say that something like the Willcock's dimension of 3D time/1D place is the "Cog" space dimension, giving potentially inherent cause/effect coherence for consciousness at each place in P (physical) space. Perhaps there's a similar dimension for 3D feeling (positive, negative, and neutral) in inherent in 1D time? Then our field of experience in this universe would be subject to not one but three gravity-like pulls. Our 'golden thread' of moment-by-moment action would reflect a wave-rider course through the converging interference patterns.

    Whatchya think?



  2. Fascinating... I'll do a little searching to get up to speed on Lisa Randall..

    Top of mind reaction is that it's something about nested activity spaces. Where any Aspace which is framed as an entanglement of E*C*P is nested in a larger scale Aspace.

    so is "God" is the ultimate ever receeding A Space?

  3. The A space always exists, it's the playing ground, for example an analogy if i may.

    Madison square gardens is A space, it's always there, but what we bring into that space ecp makes it what we think it is.

    Thus madison square gardens is "famous" for it's continuous ecp space entanglement.

    But most think A space is created, surely madison square gardens was built, but it was "made" by the ecp space players, thus A space unfolds, from ecp.

  4. I think we agree:

    To continue your metaphor. What I think I see is more of school yard basketball in the shadow of the Madison Square Gardens.

    How about if the Garden is actually a Pspace that is the seed of multiple ActSpaces. The emergence of a specific ActSpace depends on the flow of people - each of whom is a unique ActSpace.

    Each of them bring their E*C*P with them. When the flows are combined and focused on the arena a new ActSpace exists.

    It's the difference between watching the game/conference/class on the screen and being there in person.

    The intermingling of multitudes of ActSpaces with a common focus, creates a shared "experience."

    In EBdish = the precise boundary of an ActSpace is a bit quantum like. It is one among many possible ones that can emerge in a specific time/space.

    Will it be a concert or a riot? Same people (ActASpaces) subject to tiny variations that create enormous differences.

  5. The activity space is neutral to it's purpose, a purpose that is made up of ecp spaces, the activity space on an individual level is consicous of the ocnsciousness, ecp then begins to entangle in that activity space.

    IN other words, to get school yard b-ball into a madison square garden space, you have to be conscious of the fun that is taking place in the school yard, the same fun that happens in MSG, the difference is p space and e space delusion of being better, but really it's all good.

    i just confused myself:)

  6. 2me Activity Space is not neutral but actually many potential activity spaces co exist in different dimensions. The observation event calls one specific one into existence.

    The kid walks into class. Multiple potential activity spaces are worried about his girl friend, excited by the prospects of his team, interested in learning chemistry, wondering what his friends are saying now on Facebook.

    The teacher calls on him.

    Which activity space - with it's corresponding E*C*G mashup is called into being? So the trick is to create a "class" ActSpace that maximises the likelihood that the "interested in learning chemistry" is actualized.


  7. >>Which activity space - with it's corresponding E*C*G mashup is called into being? So the trick is to create a "class" ActSpace that maximises the likelihood that the "interested in learning chemistry" is actualized.

    Exactly! I think there's a "golden thread" of synergy (a potential path) that we can navigate by when we are attuned to our whole self (our personal, business, and civic frames of reference). Each of these frames has a set of present, planned, and potential initiatives at the ready. When we're in an Activity Space favorable to learning and growth, our initiatives enter into the mix - giving and taking physical, cognitive, and emotional resources that fill out our narrative fractals, and those of others. When exaptive opportunities arise, the game changes to one of co-creating an enlarged self or collective - a team, gang, circle of friends. This larger network starts trying to fill out its own narrative, looking for attractors, tensions, opportunities, strategies, tests, and decisions to feed the new common activities in the shared E*C*P space. Hence arise the stacked/standing CogSpace and EmoSpace waves that crest into PSpace action.


  8. 2me? Y.

    More after it rumbles around a bit.

  9. I understand what both of you are saying, in relation to the "classroom" activity space, i agree that it's putting them into the frame of mind for learning and growing.

    but 2me, then activity space has to be conscious of p space, the classroom, the teacher, the student, and the lesson.

    2us this is easy, we've experienced it, but to them it may not be so easy if the patterns of cog space are not developed to reach this.

    i may be off topic, but doesn't cog space require skill, where emo space be talent and p space be conscious of that talent and skill?

  10. The thing is that in this framework it's not "activity space has to be conscious of p space" but more like a particular activity space is activated by the Pspace.

    Consider a retail shopping experience, an event, or walking through a marketplace. The Physical space is information laden. If it's a familiar space it energizes the "history"(2u) of that physical space. history(2u) is just the flows in yourself (Your activity space) combining emotion, cognition, and if your hungry (your individual Pspace.)

  11. Just one more;

    So ActSpace is where emotion, cognition, and behavior come together.

    The new thing is what OReilly calls Web Squared or the Internet of Things, It means that Physical Space is now becoming connected to the web through any where screens - home,office,smartphones . For me the most interesting is the new opportunity to connect Print and the Web through matrix codes.

    I'll be away in PSpace protected from the Web. Back tmw.

  12. >>more like a particular activity space is activated by the Pspace

    Yes, agree. Christopher Alexander's discoveries of 15 deep patterns that evoke "alive and whole" responses in CogSpace & EmoSpace show how apt your comment is on this:

    Truly beautiful insights in the links above. Christopher Alexanders pattern language ideas have already broken through the silos of PhySpace design to influence software development (CogSpace) and game design (EmoSpace) activities. er

    My sense is that deep patterns also exist in creating Activity Space narratives that lead to transitions from the narrow self -> extended self... the story of what unfolds where EmoSpace, CogSpace, and PhySpace dimensions meet.



  13. Michael/Mark/Spiro,
    Great discussion. Here is my short pov on this. Feel free to agree, disagree, poke holes.

    I like the ECPA dimensions, but feel that the interaction between these is much more complicated than what we make it to be.

    For simplicity, let us break the world into 'real world' and 'surreal world'. In the real world, E could be a fundamental unit driving all other spaces. I have an emotional need, which in turn kick-starts my Cspace, I then look for a Pspace to realize that emotion, which brings me back to the Cspace which then creates the Aspace using the given Pspace as the constraint (this is just one possible scenario).

    In the surreal world, a Pspace could act as a fundamental unit driving all other spaces. Again, as one example - I look at MSG (in real, a photo of it on the net, or as a mental visual when someone mentions it) which then reminds me of something I did there in the past (virtual Aspace) that then triggers the Espace, which in turn kicks of my Cspace into taking some action (maybe making another trip there).

    In other words, at this point in time I think the manifestations of E*C*P*A will have to be understood on a case by case basis and unlike the 'general theory of relativity', I don't think we can [yet] come out with a generalized theory on their roles.

    Of course, this is as of now. I will ask my E*C*P*A to spend some more time on this and I might possibly change my opinion :-)

  14. Michael JosefowiczMay 29, 2010 at 12:14 PM

    Welcome back to the C*E*P of this ongoing convo ;-) No doubt(2me) "that
    we can not [yet] come out with a generalized theory on their roles. " It does get the flow going in my Espace to think it's even possible. And as you say, that feeds the ongoing flow in my Cspace playing with the notions captured in words and pictures to get us from here to there.

    You might want to take a look at the most recent post on this blog on how that's playing out for me in pictures and some little sounds.

    My sense is that one hurdle is to invent ways to capture that we are talking about flows and "fundamental units." My hunch is that it is analogous to the problem the physicists faced with "Light is a wave versus light is a particle."

    You say "I have an emotional need, which in turn kick-starts my Cspace, I then look for a Pspace to realize that emotion, " but as you allude to it is more complex. The fact is there is a constant swirl in E and C space. But yes something does "trigger" a new flow that in turns triggers...

    It's funny to me that you suggest "will have to be understood on a case by case basis" Funny because I did a post yesterday at this blog playing with framing the case of success in the Los Angeles School District in EBdish.

    A bunch of ID(2me) keep moving through my Cspace. When next ready to focus and respond I'll publish at this PSpace.

    It's starting to feel a little like Alice down the rabbit hole...but way fun.:-)

  15. P-space is active
    E-space is reactive
    C space is automatic

    When i physically see something a picture, a sound, a taste, a smell, if that physical space causes a reaction, my espace goes into motion setting off the automatic c-space in relation to that emotion.

    My activity space then becomes active from the cause of reaction, that activity space will continue on from a reactive state, until i become conscious of my physical space based on that reaction.

    If i am not conscious then emotion will either go through the motion, ending up in a different dimension that originated from the original trigger of that espace.

    What you think?

  16. Michael JosefowiczMay 29, 2010 at 5:47 PM

    Nice. "P-space is active" captures something I think is so important and under appreciated - the independent constraint is the environment. I've always believed that intellect workers especially are so trapped by the "people-like-me" PoV they mistake what is in their heads for what is in the world.

    My sense is this especially a problem for some creatives. Speaking for myself lots of trouble caused back in the day when the patterns that seemed so obvious to me were not obvious to people in my connected Activity Spaces. My hunch is that if one goes down this line of analysis there are useful insights about the relationship between "bi polar behavior" and "creativity."

    In any case, some more ID(4U) morphing into ID(2me) and getting into the C stream. hmmmmm

  17. Spiro - in the example you gave, I totally agree with your framework of "P-space is active / E-space is reactive / C-space is automatic".

    But here is what i am struggling with. What if the P-space is not in real-time but a manifestation of a emotional trigger (E-space active??).

    For example, I could physically see MSG, but then while riding a train I could have the P-space MSG manifest itself in my consciousness while thinking about the fun I had (E-space trigger). Or I could physically have tasted a wine at a tasting ceremony which evoked certain E-space reactions which was stored in my C-space. Later, I could reverse the flow by recalling that E-space and 'reliving' the wine-tasting.

    What I am trying to understand here are two questions- (a) can any of these states start out as an 'active' space which then triggers a chain reaction in other spaces, and (b) depending on which space is active, does it and how does the other relationship between the other spaces manifest itself.

    Not sure if I am making sense here or just rambling. This relationships between these 'spaces' actually have implications on the relationship between our conscious and subconscious states.

  18. All,

    On Spiro's summary

    >>P-space is active
    >>E-space is reactive
    >>C space is automatic

    I agree with Ned that there's more happening - possibly linked to the recent finds here on "quantum darwinism" ( They suggest P-space "scars" are reacting to cascading quantum forces below our event horizon.

    For argument's sake, let's say a realm of 3D time (past, present, future) can be collapsed into a single 1D point in space (the "here"). This realm would converge with our 3D space/1D time (always "now") experience in a way that can lend potential cause-effect intelligence (Cog-space) understanding of the potentials.

    But what about EmoSpace? It's a hunch, but perhaps a third realm exists - one of potential 3D affect or feeling (positive, negative, neutral) and 1D time.

    If "waves" of quantum potential in CogSpace and EmoSpace converged, forming standing waves, perhaps these extrude (per the recent quantum Darwinism observations) into P Space?

    Under this way of seeing things, we (and other sentient beings) may be formed by quantum processes to become E*C*P "probes" that map paths of higher-scale evolution in the universe. (Michael, something like this seems to be Howard X. Bloom's thesis in "The Nature of the Beast", which BTW concludes that manic-depressive cycles are intrinsic to evolutionary growth!)

    Where it gets truly mindboggling 2me is the possibility that our (hopefully) increasingly intelligent evolution will lead to ways of consciously influencing the course of quantum evolution.

    Then it is into the rabbit hole, indeed...



  19. A further thought...if we are the ground of being where EmoSpace, CogSpace, and PhySpace converge, it may follow that the evolutionary purpose of sentient activity in the eternal "now" is to fully understand (CSpace) and value (ESpace) each place (PSpace).

    If so, a pretty good telos!



  20. I think the best way to explain what I see happening is to give an example.

    The other day, i was having dinner with a friend, and during our conversation, i overheard something that someone said at the table next to me.

    What that person said, had nothing to do with anything, but one word that he did say triggered me. That trigger helped me solve a problem i was having in regards to a client of mine.

    So what happened here. The physical space is active only when I am conscious. In my example, the restaurant and it's surroudnings were my activity space. The sounds, the smells, the tastes, all circulate in my physical space making everything active.

    When that person said what they did, my e-space reacted. Because my c-space is working constantly (automated) to find things that are important to me.

    In this case, what was important to me was solving a problem for a client of mine.

    Thus, P space is always active, e-space is actively reactive, and c-space is actively automatic.

    I think then c-space is the subconscious mind's working constantly, but the conscious mind has to be alert, and active to pick up on the e-space, which leads me to believve e-space is intuition.

    What I found interesting though was and this only came after contemplation was when I entered the restaurant, the host was taking us to our table, when i asked if we could sit at this table instead (the table that was next to that person that triggerd me)

    Thus, p space is always active only when your conscious of it, c space is automated activity, it's processing, but here's where we finally understand the relevance of e-space's reactive state but in essence it's active reactivity.

    espace then is intuitive, but it's also acquainted to the importance of what the subconscious mind is working on...

  21. E-space is always circulating our c-space.

    Energy in motion, thoughts, feelings, desires, etc circulate our c-space which is our perception of the world.

    C-space are character traits, intellectual development, talents and gifts, thus e-space is flooding our c-space and thus p-space becomes our reality.

    Thus, emotional intelligence is what matters most. The energy that is in motion is constantly flooded with thoughts, thoughts, feelings and action then are all happening at once.

  22. Michael JosefowiczMay 30, 2010 at 5:59 AM

    I want to highlight a couple of phrases that strongly resonant with me.

    E-space is always circulating our c-space.

    c-space is working constantly (automated) to find things that are important to me.

    emotional intelligence is what matters most.

    P space is always active, e-space is actively reactive, and c-space is actively automatic.

    a realm of 3D time (past, present, future) can be collapsed into a single 1D point in space (the "here")

    If "waves" of quantum potential in CogSpace and EmoSpace converged, forming standing waves, perhaps these extrude (per the recent quantum Darwinism observations) into P Space?

    This relationships between these 'spaces' actually have implications on the relationship between our conscious and subconscious states.

    An emerging pattern is that the relationships described in one's head, articulated best by the cognitive scientists, at the level of the Activity Space of a single human, also apply at different scales in the ActSpace of classrooms, communities, bio regions and nation states.

    I think it might be helpful to consider a manic depressive economies, neurotic governments, schizophrenic schools and ADHD enterprises.

    Turtles all the way up and down...?

  23. I said "An emerging pattern is that the relationships described in one's head, "

    What I should have said is an emerging pattern(2me) ? So hard(2me) to remember that Cspace(2me) may not be Cspace(2U) .

  24. Spiro/Michael/Mark,
    I think before we go into this further, I think we should clarify what these fundamental units actually mean and that we are on the same page on that (before we go into the interactions).

    Spiro says in his example - "The physical space is active only when I am conscious. In my example, the restaurant and it's surroudnings were my activity space. The sounds, the smells, the tastes, all circulate in my physical space making everything active."

    A couple of days ago if someone had given me this example and asked me to define the spaces - I would actually have said that 'the restaurant' is the physical space and "the sounds, smells etc." is the activity space. After reading Spiro's description, I am back a couple of squares and thinking..

    Maybe the disconnect is because when I think of 'physical', I immediately associate it with tangible, material objects. When I think of 'activity', I immediately think of it as a verb or something that involves motion, change, transformation etc.

    I am not saying that I am right in my thinking, but would like to hear what you have to say on this and what is your basis of classifying something into these spaces.

  25. The way I see it the restaurant is the physical space. But the Activity Space is meant to capture the complexity of the interactions of E G P within a "thinkable boundary."

    For example, an enterprise is an Activity Space which contains nested Activity Spaces. In each activity space there are constrained flows of E C P.
    Silos are their own Activity Spaces with porous changing boundaries.

    In this framework, a "school" might be described as the Student as a bounded by her skin ActSpace nested inside a classroom Act Space nested inside a Grade level nested inside a a school building nested inside a school board.

    The important point to me is that specificity of the E*C*R interaction is boundary specific. It makes little useful sense to talk about the 'Culture of a school or enterprise" without specifying how that plays out in each Activity Space.

    I hope this makes some sense. Please @ me so we can clarify together.

  26. Just one more important point. A very important lens is what I've been calling the Power Actor. (usually a person, but could also refer to a place)

    My hunch is that it is the Power Actor's control of Time and Space that is a significant determinant of the flow of information, incentives and thus the culture of a particular Act Space.

  27. And...(excuse me while I manage my natural ADD) another maybe useful phrase. I think the unit of analysis is the "event." In a school it might be the publishing party for student work or the completion of a project. In the twitter Act Space it's the @ or the RT and most especially the return @.

    It's the exchange event that creates new energy. The exchange could be money, a tweet, a memo. In my view a f2f conversation is only very rarely an exchange event. It's most usually some really dumb useless meeting where a bunch of boys are swinging their dicks.

  28. I'm trying to keep it as simple as i can with my narrative so that "story telling" helps us even more dig deeper into "what's happening"

    2me, anything physical is sensed, our cognition does this, however emotion gives it meaning. but the observer, understands that it's the emotion that drives cognition to make meaning out of it.

    My subconscious mind was given a command, by me to find a solution to that problem, when we adapt to any environment moment by moment, that physical space is only relevant as the conscious observer receives the signal,

    Thus, what was said by that person, was a signal,

  29. Ned, 2me,

    P-space is object consciousness.
    E-space is space consciousness.
    C-space is activity consciousness.

    Before i go into the transitions, does this resonate with you gentlemen?

  30. Spiros, 2me

    P-space is the Physical World 3d world. The only one directly observable by two observers.

    E-space are the emotions that are only observable by a sentient being. Only one.

    C-Space is the symbolic world math,art,images, stories. Also only observable by one.

    The Big deal 2 me is that only when an artifact is created in P space do we have the possibility of sharing and testing our C*E space.

    It helps answer the question : Am I nuts? or do I make sense? Also the only real way of sharing is in PSpace. All the rest is by Nature - so far- unshareable and thus creates Aloneness. Which let's face it sucks.

  31. And....:-) The big deal problem is that Pspace(2me) is NOT necessarily Pspace (2 anyone else.) The signals from Pspace is filtered by what's going in with the entanglement of MY E*C*P...

    and so we have the Tower of Babble problem.

    So.. the only way to connect is through Pspace. But Pspace actually exists in n-Dimensions. Pspace(2me) and (2u) and to any number of thems.

    So.. my hunch is that if we can align our Act Spaces, we can all go to the concert and "see" pretty much the same thing. Nice.

  32. P-space is the Physical World 3d world. The only one directly observable by two observers.

    E-space are the emotions that are only observable by a sentient being. Only one.

    C-Space is the symbolic world math,art,images, stories. Also only observable by one.

    "Please understand me" we are trying to narrate e and c into p. If P is the only observable by two and E is only observable by one, Then perhaps the understanding like you've been saying is in Cspace where we want to interconnect so to speak is only observable by "us" thus it's not two but one.

    but the ego won't allow this cognition/ the brain has identified by itself, it's the means and end, that is why we need to detach from P, to understand E, and rewire C to see the relations, simplicity at best.

    I don't understand you, I don't know you, but i can feel you, that's where it is.

  33. "we are trying to narrate e and c into p"

    2me The game we're playing is to try to understand why people do what they do. Most especially why good smart people do such obviously stupid destructive things. Take almost any example. In the Oil Leak or the Iraq War. Sure we can use venality and "bad people" but at the end of the day, 2me that's bullshit. Are there sociopaths? sure. Is Cheney a sociapath. My guess is probably. But it doesn't matter.

    Explaining big stuff going wrong on the basis of Bad people is childish thinking at best. So...

    "I don't understand you, I don't know you, but i can feel you, that's where it is."

    Yes. but,
    You can only feel me through the mediation of Pspace. My tweets, blog posts, words. My history through the web... all Pspace manifestations of "me." What do I do. When do i do it. In a very real sense that is "me."

    The sweet/sad existential truth is that an individual's E*C is a deep mystery. I would take the strong position and say that any individual's Act Space is in the final analysis unknowable.

    Now I'm only talking for myself . But my own Act Space is a mystery to me. The good news is that if one is focused and lucky every day one can learn a bit more about one's own E*C. I think what I've seen is that easier the exchange and sharing or words,pictures, sounds (all by def in 3d Pspace) it helps one's personal Aspace unfold.

    So every day it's possible o discover something new about one self by finding new things in other people's self and the natural world.

    That's way cool.

  34. I agree that p space helps one's personal a space unfold, for me, when i am "being" i am the "essence" I am as Jesus said, "one with the father" however I had to transition away from my p space, and if p space includes my brain, then that's what i see in my e and c, but it seems c space is my brain, that is why i called it activity consciousness, because p space is object conscious and when i continue to see p space as the end itself, then c believes that, and sees words, pictures sounds as just that sounds..

    but my e space is where that is open to the essence, call it emotion but with cosncious awareness it's feeling the feelings...

  35. I'm pretty sure we agree on the phenomenon. The challenge is to get a common language say Ebdish to capture slices of that phenomenon in ways that we are both pointing to the same thing at the same time.

    In the service of that goal,
    The new science says that the notion that "C and E space happen in the brain is incomplete. The best I've seen is the Second Brain ( I think that's the title I'll find the link a bit later and tweet it along.)

    One reason I think ActSpace is a useful notion is that a human can be usefully framed as an ActSpace bounded by their skin. In that framing, It can be said that E*C is critically dependent on the Pspace that are the gezillion cells that make up a "body."

    To me a single human Act Space is more like the "soul." We know something is there, but human language just can't capture it.

    The further advantage is that my hunch is that by looking closely at the network exchanges inside of us, we can learn almost everything we need to know about the characteristics of social networks.

    It's a bit mind blowing to me - a life long believer in the non spiritual world - that what seems to be happening is a way to talk about the religious experience in terms that make sense. And even more mindblowing to me, is that newest science is providing some evidence and even more important elegant metaphors - both in numbers and words- of a way to capture what's really going on.

    In that context, I would ask is the essence you experience best described as movements in e-space or better captured in ActSpace.
    Where Act Space is where E*C*P get all mashed up, turbulent, then move in a synchronized rhythm.

    From what very little I know about Yoga and meditation, it seems to me that the secret sauce is understanding that we live in the moment in 3D physical space AND changes in Physical Space are often the best ways to trigger changes in emotions, cognition and feelings of well being.

    So that's my story and I'm stickin' to it. At least for now.