joegoda | Strange Attractors.

These concepts have been bubbling in my mind for a while now. There is, in mathematical topography, a wonderful thing called Attractors. If my understanding of them is correct, then Attractors are individual points that, given time, will come together to create a set. In time, this set may break and spin apart, but in time, the individual points will come back together again.

I'm seeing this in real life as well.

A family, a club, or even a relationship is an example of Attractors in real life. Indeed, it's why we say we're attracted to a person or persons. It may be that the physical attractor was what gave rise to the mathematical label.

Still, I've been giving some thought to this rather unusual Family of Choice I'm involved in. I'm not sure that everyone has one, a Family of Choice. Then again, I'm not sure that anyone lacks one, either. Perhaps it is just that this group tends to be more vocal and giving this loose collection of tight friends the FoC name tag. Perhaps the possibility for all people to be part of a set of Attractors exist, and it is just that some don't recognize it, or for one reason or another, the paths of their lives carry them away from that set.

Regardless, this particular group of Attractors is something I've focused on recently. I think I blame our far away members, DocJeff and Capi for this. Do remember that blame is not always a negative thing. In this case, it merely means catalytic. It's like saying you get what you deserve. Sometimes we deserve good things, and I hope you get them.

Now, onto the oddity that exists in my mind:

As it has been said, Attractors are individual points that, given time, will form a Set. If there is a reason for this, some motivation for the Set to occur is not the point of this discussion. In fact, I'm almost certain that there is always a reason for a set to happen, even if that reason is just that we all got on the same bus at the same time. I leave whatever your reason is to your determination.

With me, in particular, because in a very subjective sense, I can only speak for myself, my true Set is Tim, Sherry and myself. This is not to slight the rest of this family. But my Set occurred and became stable long before the creation of this larger Super Set we belong to.

This Set of BP&G, because that is who our Archetypes are, is very stable because it consists of three points. Three points denote a plane, which is a very stable form indeed. In fact, it is the first prime stable form. One might argue that a single point is the most stable, although I suspect that may not be true. A single point tends to seek out others, and will, if not finding company quickly fade away. No stability there. One is, after all, the loneliest number.

This prime Set of mine came about because, given time, it had to. There was no choice in it. We knew each other and orbited each other and, given time, it was a Universal Necessity that our Set create. This may, however, be just my own bias, and if so, I accept it as such. I don't believe all that much in destiny, but I also do not believe in coincidence. Where does that leave me? The Universal Necessity, which means it is something that the Universe requires for a stable reality, and therefore the creation of pathways occur so the requirement is met.

To illustrate the concept of Universal Necessity, look at a situation in your life where you may have been tempted to ask "How in the world did I get here?" In truth, and if you are honest with yourself, you can travel back across the path of your life, you can identify the choices you made that carried you to exactly where you are now.

Each choice was made of your own free will, even though it may not have seemed so at the time. Each choice moved you along the path that had, at some point, the exact results of the situation you are examining. No other results could have happened, due to the culmination of the path and choices made.

Was it Universal Necessity, or free will. Predestination or just a collection of circumstances?

What if the answer is yes to all of the above?

Due to the nature of the Multiverse, any conceivable choice that could be made was, indeed, made. There is a theory that every choice made creates a breakaway point wherein another path is created in a different universe. A Multiverse.

So, in theory anyway, it is conceivable that my Set never developed in some other universe. I don't feel badly for that particular me. I don't feel much for him, at all. That is his life and his choice, and I'm pretty sure he's doing the best he can with what he has and, due to his nature, has created his own Set.

So, tossing all the other possible realities aside, ignoring Multiversal derivatives, I became engrossed with the Set, the smaller Sets and the rather large Super Set that comprise this Family of Choice. I have a belief that there wasn't much choice in this family. I have a belief it was a Universal Necessity. It is something that had to be, pure and simple, because of the choices made that led to it's creation. It isn't the Family that was the choice, but the pathways taken that led to the Family. It is more a Family of Necessity, from my viewpoint, because it is something that had to be.

It's all because of Attractors, you see. Any one of us, if asked 5 years ago if we could forsee this Super Set, this Family of Necessity happening, would say no. If anyone says yes, I will call them a liar, because I'm mean like that.

But the Attractors were already at work in our individual pointy lives. The Attractors were already accumulating choices and moving us all along our individual pointy paths so that this was a thing that must be, given time.

Each of us made choices to be with this person, opposed to that person. To make this life choice opposed to that life choice. To take up this hobby and interest as opposed to that hobby and interest.

These choices we made moved us to be parts of the Sets that we recognize as being our very best friends, our lifelong companions, our mates. Pure examples are familiar to all or most of us. Becky and Riley. Julie and Eric. Susi and Bruce. Larger Sets, like Queen's Gambit and the White Hart crew are examples, but those move and change on occasion. The dynamics of those Sets does not make them less of a Set. It makes them a special type of Set. A set of Strange Attractors.

Mathematically, Strange Attractors carry the same properties as Attractors; i.e. individual points that, given time, will form a set, but these Sets carry the extra characteristic of Chaos and Change. They are dynamic Sets, while no less stable, will move and change as the pathways of the individual points move and change. So it is with human beings and their Sets.

In all of our lives there are those who come in, stay awhile and then move away. In all of our lives we have those who are part of our Set or part of our Super Set who seem to thrive on Chaos. These are the elements of the Strange Attractors, and they will, by Universal Necessity, be a part of our Family of Choice. They are required because the larger a Set becomes, the more complex a SuperSet is, the more the Strange Attractors, with their element of Chaos, have to be there. To have a SuperSet that does not contain Strange Attractors would be incredibly unusual. Not impossible. Perhaps not even improbable. But, where humans are concerned, highly unusual.

In fact, the existence of Strange Attractors in a particular Set causes all the Attractors in that Set to become Strange Attractors, because the Chaos factor creates harmonious resonances among the other individuals of that Set. As long as the individual points are inclusive in the SuperSet, they will all be Strange Attractors.

Once the SuperSet spins apart, and the individual sets and points fall away, then the Strange Attractors carry far less weight and the effect is far less Chaotic. Keep in mind that Chaos is not a bad thing, by and of itself. It is through Chaos that growth occurs, that learning occurs. Chaos can be a very useful tool, when applied in the proper places and using the right leverage.

But once the individual Sets spin away onto their own individual paths, the Chaotic elements that are contained in the SuperSet of the Family of Choice may have far less effect, and the stability that is normally existent in the Set is restored.

There are times, however, when the Chaotic elements will actually cause individual Sets to spin apart and the points that make up that individual Set will follow their own paths. The Set will be no more, and the individual points will fall away.

If that occurs, then that particular Set was going to spin apart regardless, due to either an inherent instability or the nature of the Set itself. Most Sets tend to spin apart given enough time, just as they came together, given enough time. It is the nature of individuals points to follow their own paths, and sometimes those paths will lead us away from the Set. It is natural and normal.

The SuperSet, this Family of Choice, is an unusual Set, in that, being comprised of not only smaller Sets but also individual points as well as Strange Attractors, all elements can come and go as they please, without affecting the stability of the whole.

Granted, in every SuperSet, there is a Seed Set, a Set that brings all the other Sets together. It is difficult to recognize exactly which Set it is that is the Seed Set, because the obvious is not always the the true catalyst. The obvious choice is only the obvious choice due to the circumstances of subjectivity.

It is the seed set that creates the Catalytic element that brings the elements of the SuperSet together. The interesting thing about this is that even with the removal of the seed Set, or even the dissolution of the Seed Set, the SuperSet continues. This is due in part to the very same Strange Attractors that can create the very same Chaos and discord that threaten to break individual sets apart. It is this Chaos that can even create entirely new Sets or Subsets of the SuperSet.

Okay... I will leave this babbling where it is. It's 3 am and I suspect I should go to sleep. I can't promise that I won't write more on this later. But I can promise that I might.