Threeness games — some back-up materials

October 3rd, 2018 by Charles Cameron

The proof-of-principle network connects three people: two senders and one person able to receive and transmit, all in separate rooms and unable to communicate conventionally. The group together has to solve a Tetris-like game in which a falling block has to be rotated so that it fits into a space at the bottom of the screen.

The two senders, wearing EEGs, can both see the full screen. The game is designed so the shape of the descending block fits in the bottom row either if it is rotated by 180 degrees or if it is not rotated. The senders have to decide which and broadcast the information to the third member of the group.

This is all a bit primitive thus far, but then it’s also a beginning — a window on vast possibilities.

**

  • Zenpundit, Numbers by the numbers: three / pt 1,

  • Zenpundit, Spectacularly non-obvious, I: Elkus on strategy & games

  • Zenpundit, Spectacularly non-obvious, 2: threeness games

  • Zenpundit, Spectacular illustration of a game of three

  • & no doubt, more..

    • Three — watch out for it, in Hegel, in CS Peirce, in George Boole, in Clausewitz, everywhere!

    Page 2 of 2 | Previous page

    Posted in Charles Cameron, games, graphical thinking, justice, logic, philosophy, stratagems, strategy, supreme court, tech, three, Uncategorized | 5 comments

    Previous post:
    Next post:

    1. Derek:

      October 7th, 2018 at 3:32 pm

      Charles, hello! – I just saw your post at zenpundit re: taking the ternary turn, put me in mind of a book I’d recently read by this eccentric polymathic academic, Norman D. Cook: “Harmony, Perspective and Triadic Cognition” (Cambridge U.P. 2012). Poking around here should give you a taste of what he means by that – http://www.res.kutc.kansai-u.ac.jp/~cook/03%20TriadicCognition.html – he seems on the solidest ground discussing triadic chord structures (cf. downloadable PDFs) giving apparently the only objective, empirical account, grounded in harmonic theory, for why only a major or a minor chord will allow the music listener to relax and resolve the emotional charge of tonal structures. It’s very simple and Cook doesn’t attempt to take it further but it’s convincing. Interestingly, it follows his earlier work on prosody in music and speech perception, e.g. “Evaluation of the Affective Valence of Speech Using Pitch Substructure” … mmm, zesty! On visual perspective he’s much weaker – manages to miss the role of the harmonic mean as missing link between our intuitive musical gnosis and linear perspective / projective geometry a la Brunelleschi, Piero, Alberti, Leonardo, Durer & cet. Plato’s friend Archytas could have set him straight but nobody does their homework.
      .
      Threeness is good ..

    2. Derek:

      October 7th, 2018 at 3:33 pm

      P.P.S. – also this review: The Triadic Roots of Human Cognition: “Mind” Is the Ability to go Beyond Dyadic Associations


      .
      FIGURE 1. Examples of the interval substructure of the most familiar major, minor, and “atonal” tension triads. While three-tone combinations do not exhaust the possibilities of polyphonic music, these three modes are the minimal musical expression of positive, negative and unresolved, ambiguous affect through harmony. Note that all of the pitch intervals illustrated here are consonant, consisting of three, four or five semitones, but their relative positions lead to the very different affective implications that are associated with each mode.

      ..which is probably the most serviceable of all the foregoing.

    3. Charles Cameron:

      October 7th, 2018 at 11:43 pm

      On threeness, there’s also this:
      .

      .
      with a more scholarly and number-focused backup:
      .

    4. Steven R Cranmer:

      October 8th, 2018 at 2:08 pm

      This reminds me of the uber-witty liner notes to prog-rock trio @rushtheband’s 1993 album “Counterparts.” They were always referring to rock-paper-scissors in songs, & to the 3 stooges in concert, but this album amped up the ternary references. See just a bit of it here:
      .

      thanks, steven r cranmer

    5. Charles Cameron:

      October 23rd, 2018 at 11:32 pm

      Another gem via Derek Robinson:

      The “Three in One” is a philosophical concept expressing the original trinity proceeding from the Tao, the two principles, yin and yang, of the Great Pole. The Great Pole is the One that contains yin and yang, the Two, in the Three.

      From Wiki, Sanyi Teaching
      .
      I have to admit, “the Two in the Threee” is a new one on me..