Axiom of Counter Symmetry as Inherency in Subject Object Interpositon: Prologue to A General Theory of Hiearchical Text and Integration as a pragmatic Model of Perception, Thought and Language

Hello and Good Day all,

Let's begin by looking more closely at our fundamental assumption of Inherency we have described in previous posts.

In any given system of at least two opposing definite capacities (x) and (y) from left to right bound by common indefinite Sub Quantity (z)  that both contain from right to left but neither fully occupy
there will always be a joint, direct or inverse variability in counter-integation of ( x y z ) such that  an overall binary constraint will result that constitutes underlying asymtrical capacity value.

In the Rectangular Coordinate System the left to right positions of  (x y) are indicated as variables of greatest common circumstance. In other words, the illustration implies all people for example as (x) or (y) are equal in Continous Quantity  because of the right to left expression of (z) as a derivational Sub Quantity, neither (x) or (y) occupy yet both contain in a variable temporal sense of counter-integration

such that an inherent binary constraint constiutes asymmetrical capacity value:

(-1 0 1)

x y z

In the diagram of the hydrogen atom we see on the one hand the symmetrical nature of the arrangement we propose P=1 N=0 and since the only negative constituent in the arrangement is the opposite of the only positive constituent, for our purposes we will denote this factor as -1.

However, asymmetricality

as the Adaptation of Swenson's Law of Maximum Entropy suggests who we are inherently  is the variable result of a spontaneous ordering from expected consequence in Physical  in so far as when any system of interactional value observed in correspondence to its opposite expression  is proportional to the likelihood of binary reoccurrence. In other words, as we read our example expression of (-1 0 1) we read negative and positive capacities offsetting one another. They are capacities because of the parenthesis in relation to the Zero , neither of which have a charge. And since Zero has no charge yet brings the two opposing capacities together, Zero is by definition a quantity which binds the two opposing capacities who derive their nature from their temporal identity as either negative or positive in realtion to the overall expression. Basically, who we are Inherently is the variable result of a series of correpsonding expressions in temporal entropy.

Examples of Entropy in the natural world of  experience.

Perception

Learning

Thought and Language

Asymmetrical Capacity Value is thus established as a range of probable expression from the greatest common general occurrence in variable constraint as co-functional re-capacity in either x, y or z...

Adapting researcher and author  Folke Gunther's  illustration, I argue that the overall illustration depicts the establishment of Asymmetrical Capacity Value. The Range of Probable Expression from the Greatest Common variable constraint whch is the tube squeezed by Entropy becomes the co-function of capacity in either x, y or z as joint, direct or inverse quality of subsequent interactional value.

The opposite end of the range then is the least common specific counter-result of symmetrical expression in (x y z) integration resulting from the likelihood of x, y and z reoccurrence..

Take your time, Breathe when you speak...

Subsequently with this counter symmetrical integration the condition of discrete inherency in subject object interposition is established as a result of Hiearchical Text and Integration:  a dynamic model in perception, thought and language.

That's enough for now. In upcoming installments we will discuss pragmatic applications of the Theory as we go deeper into historcal and contempioary aspects of its development.

Thank You.