This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Visik (talk | contribs) at 06:45, 11 March 2011 (revised assessment tags using AWB). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 06:45, 11 March 2011 by Visik (talk | contribs) (revised assessment tags using AWB)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | Taoism (inactive) | |||
| ||||
 | China Start‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
"Cracked"
A Code Cracked by C.J.Lofting There is no "solution" to the King Wen Sequence here.
That page confuses me, so it could be a hoax. To "crack" has many meanings, just like "hack". In this case, it means trying to figure out something, even if it doesn't seem to be a riddle, even if it doesn't seem to need solving or decyphering. He mentions the traditional sequence is "1,43,14,34,9,5,26,11", which "seemingly" has nothing to do with binary, but then goes into how the numbering is logical - which is really long that I can't explain or shorten... Well, here is two quotes:
"From this process I have been able to determine that the traditional sequence reflects ALCHEMY with a distinct semantic emphasis on PURE - MIXED"
"Since the moon is also seasonal (as in four to eight phases are used to identify the cycle) so its cycle will map into the I Ching (note that the 384 lines = number of days in a lunar year (13 months))" {sjöar}
- Agreed, I removed A Code Cracked and the two other external links to Mr. Lofting's work.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 06:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
"Ancient 384 day calendar" disputed
http://selmarie.com/jackrabbit Explication of the I Ching Portions of The Invisible Landscape by Terence and Dennis McKenna, by Dicky Zyetz (a.k.a. Jack Rabbit ?) thoroughly exposits the notion of a 384 day calendar. J Shirk (talk) 22:31, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- I love this line:
Terence McKenna's work attracted me many years ago because his amazing mixture of brilliance and blarney was sometimes informative, sometimes opaque, but usually highly entertaining.
- I don't think this article is the right place so I removed the "ancient Lunar Calendar" stuff. Cool link, thx—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 06:30, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
"Why"
"There are no instances in which five lines change" this is worth further explanation. Would some kind mathematician expand this please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lethargicandstupid (talk • contribs) 12:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- No math required: the sequence was chosen in regard to invertible hexagram pairs and no instance of 5–line–differing pairs just–so–happens to appear in that sequence.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 06:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
- It doesn't "just so happen" - it's guaranteed by the rules of the arrangement. A hexagram abcdef is paired with its reverse fedcba, unless it is a palindrome abccba in which case all six lines change. Suppose it isn't a palindrome. Then going from abcdef to fedcba, we have a changing to f and also f changing to a; b changing to e and also e changing to b; and c changing to d and also d changing to c. Note that all those changes happen in pairs. If a is unequal to d, then we have two changes there (a to d and d to a). If b is unequal to e, we have two changes there; and if c is unequal to d, two more. The changes always happen in twos; as long as we're pairing hexagrams this way, the number of changes must always be even. There are odd numbers of changes outside of the pairings, for instance between hexagrams 62 and 63. 99.234.64.72 (talk) 01:35, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- Supposing it didn't "just so happen" to be arranged in invertible pairs... which, it would seem, non-obviously precludes the possibility.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 09:13, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- I don't mean to say the original poster's question was trivial... For example: if the sequence were 9,10 then 1,2 there would be a 5 diff.—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 09:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Mathematical structure
A number of articles on the internet reveal more clear mathematical structures in the KW sequence.
I propose to add a few lines about it under the Notable Characteristics header, and add them as cite "Notes". The article needs more footnotes to become better.
Suggested additions:
"The number of possible different arrangements of the 32 partner pairs is 32! = 2.63 * 10^35 .
There is clear evidence for a mathematical structure in the sequence. Several clusters of hexagrams point to a careful arrangement rather than a random distribution. .
The placement of certain hexagrams also suggests that the geography of China, as traversed from North to South, may have served as a model for the King Wen sequence "
Notes
- ^ "I Ching Portions of The Invisible Landscape by Terence and Dennis McKenna: Background". 28 August 2007. Retrieved 30 May 2010.
- The explanation of King Wen's order
- The I Ching Landscape
--MakeSense64 (talk) 09:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Categories: