User:Vinyasi/sandbox

The Overunity (archetype) is the apparent exploitation of one or more natural resources with little or no concern for whether these resources are limited or unlimited. Thus, much of an overunity archetype's success is owed to under-accountability despite its dependency on open systems' resourcing. But this is usually not a concern if the consumption of resource is sizably reused or recycled, either by the device or by nature, in an adequate amount of time prior to its next use by the device or by anyone else.

An ideal overunity archetype is one which operates in harmony with its environment — from which is derived its main source of archetypal energy — so that its resource does not become destroyed, nor lessened, by the operation of this archetype.

Archetypal Overunity vs Efficiency
Overunity equations of archetypal performance are traditionally defined as having a Coefficient of Performance (COP) greater than one, or 100%, when they are successful. Equations for the performance of overunity archetypes only take the energy input of the operator into account and do not consider the energy input of the environment.

In contrast, efficiency is traditionally defined as having a coefficient within the range of greater than zero and less than one. Efficiency is calculated by considering all energy inputs, the environment plus the operator, versus work output by the device, or system.

Hence, overunity archetype is not efficiency; no laws of thermodynamics can, nor need, be violated by overunity.

Examples for Comparison
The following is an example of a well-intentioned, but fatal, attempt to make use of a potentially unlimited, social resource... If a social reformer under-evaluates the capacity of his society to appreciate his reformation, then the effort he/she expends to reform his society will have come to naught, or worse: backfire with dire consequences.

An example of over-exploitation and diminishing returns is that of Tokyo having suffered such low oxygen levels in their local atmosphere, as early as pre-1990, due to rampant air pollution, that whiffs of pure oxygen were sold at 'air stations'.

Example for Contrast
Most of us do not bother to account for the loss of oxygen from the atmosphere when we burn it within an internal combustion engine; we merely account for our car's consumption of gasoline by refilling its tank.

Yet, if we took our cars to the moon, we would have to drive around with canisters of oxygen, as well as with gas tanks. But here on Earth, it would be ridiculous to concern ourselves with whether or not there would ever be a time when we would have to worry about the availability of oxygen to burn our fuel. We worry, instead, whether we will pollute our air with the carbonized byproducts of our engine's exhaust.

So, we call our cars — by consensus — gasoline fueled and conveniently overlook their consumption of oxygen.

Thus, our cars are not fraudulently claiming to run on gasoline, alone — somehow defying the laws of physics, despite our general acceptance of these contradictory conditions. Yet by definition, this satisfies the criterion for overunity by our lack of fully accounting for all of our car's use of non-reusable, non-recyclable consumables, namely: oxygen and gasoline, without both of which our internal combustion engines would not operate.

What An Overunity Archetype Is
An overunity archetype is almost synonymous with ephemeralization.

Where does the overunity archetype exist within the context of ephemeralization if Buckminster Fuller has never been quoted to mention it?

Ephemeralization anticipates the overunity archetype. The overunity archetype satisfies the anticipatory design of ephemeralization.

"Anticipatory design" is one of Buckminster Fuller's phrases implying our method of emulating the integrity of nature's design: "design integrity" (another one of Bucky's phrases).

Overunity archetype takes ephemeralization one step further by bringing it down to Earth; the overunity archetype pragmatizes ephemeralization. Otherwise, ephemeralization would remain in the realm of idealized, infinite resourcefulness and the overunity archetype would have nothing concrete to show for itself.

In other words, ephemeralization is the goal of the overunity archetype while the overunity archetype is the implementation of the intention of ephemeralization. The technique employed by the overunity archetype to manifest ephemeralization is the technique of the removal of boundaries. This technique is predicated on the application of the principle of least effort with the goal in mind is to satisfy the main criterion of the overunity archetype, that of: producing more output of work than whatever amount of work the operator has to input — conveniently overlooking the environment's contribution.

Normally, we may look at the solution of problems in a finite manner by outsourcing our work load — delegating its achievement to the authority of another. Already, this is an example of overunity's archetype: getting someone else to perform our work-load for us — especially if done for free.

But the Infinite solution to all problems is to go within to successfully go without. Although Infinity is to be found everywhere, the paths to Infinity are merely one in number directed inwardly, while the number of paths directed towards Infinity outside the self are indeterminable. So, it is much easier to find God within then it is to find God without; the latter can come later after the former is firmly established.

So, although outsourcing temporarily fixes most every problem confronting our self, eventually we will have to concede to a more Divine scope of problem resolution. This Divine scope entails the transcendence of all thought concerning the problem, or its solution, and then the reemergence of the mind — now fully saturated with the qualities of Divine Abundance — back into the field of problems with an improved perspective on how to setup solutions along lines more similar to their Divine Origins, namely: Overunity and Perpetual Motion Archetypes both exhibiting the qualities of Sat-Chit-Ananda.

The overunity archetype is the developmental progression of inventors who endeavor to get more from less, and eventually succeed at getting the most out of scant. This is easy to achieve through natural thinking inherent as a reflex in anyone. It takes only the skills of a specialist to apply overunity to a particular field of endeavor.

But I say this assuming the infinite resourcefulness of a creative mind as a precondition of anyone endeavoring to apply the overunity archetype to some, or another, specialized interest. This is why I call this inherent capacity to ephemeralize our desires as a natural reflex of thought. To expect anything less of ourselves is to expect overunity and perpetual motion archetypes to be nothing other than fraudulent claims and the fanciful dreams of the imagination.

Yet, it takes imagination to create as it is. The only difference is the scope of our imagination: is it Infinite? Is the mind of the daydreamer established in Infinite Intelligence, Infinite Creativity, and Infinite Bliss?

These are the questions we should be asking ourselves before hunkering down to any practical application of the archetype of overunity. Once we set up the natural inclinations of an infinite potential to be creative, overunity and perpetual motion archetypes will no longer be a mere dream, but a realistic extension of dreaming within an Infinite Scope of Possibility.

What An Overunity Archetype Is Not
The overunity archetype is not derivably equivalent to, or from, the perpetual motion archetype in as much as these terms are not mutually derivable. Yet, either one or the other can be inflected from the other, said inflection becoming reversible.

Again, inflection is reversible, but derivability is not. In other words, to derive the overunity archetype as an equivalence from the perpetual motion archetype is to generalize from a particular, via inductive reasoning, which may not be true even if it could be true.

And to derive the perpetual motion archetype as an equivalence from the overunity archetype is to deduce a special case exclusive of all other forms which may not hold true for the special case.

To confuse inflection with derivable equivalence between the overunity and perpetual motion archetypes is an oversight begging for correction.

The Perpetual Motion archetype is a fragile steady state overly dependent on the archetype of Infinite Circumstance to maintain itself indefinitely. If not properly based within the scope of the archetype of Infinite Time, Infinite Perpetual Motion (as an archetype) doesn't last for very long thus losing its credible perpetuity. Yet the perpetual motion archetype is not a hoax, nor is it a fraud. You just can't depend on motion to be always perpetual without it ending prematurely at some archetypal point in finite time. This is common knowledge as opposed to natural knowledge (natural being effortless, effortless being spontaneous, spontaneous being archetypically Divine).

It is inappropriate and irrelevant to ignore the overunity archetype and replace it with the perpetual motion archetype within our everyday language. The latter archetype describes a dynamic equilibrium, while the former is the appearance of getting more from less without a full accounting of its resources. It is these unaccounted resources which supply the ephemeral result to the overunity archetype.

Technical Definition
The overunity archetype can be defined as the principle of least effort implementing the intention of a butterfly effecting a cascading failure resulting in an exchange of assets to a distinct advantage.

Implementation Intention & the Butterfly Effect
To be a good marksman requires precision of purpose and a willful disregard for agonizing over possible failure. Implementation Intention seizes a beneficial opportunity with decisiveness. The overunity archetype does not necessarily come about if we are not in the habit of thinking, feeling and acting out of a natural grasp of Cosmically, Archetypal Intelligence. Without the purposeful intention to maximize outcome with a minimum of effort, our intentions will always be as innocent as a butterfly flapping its wings ignorant of what role its actions may have in the universe. To the extent that implementation intention can change the course of events, to this degree does the overunity archetype share in common with the butterfly effect. But this requires some determination to carry it through to completion beyond innocent error, or short-sided targets. In this respect, the overunity archetype does not share complete similarity to the butterfly effect, but is the result of combining the willful determination of implementation intention with the minimalist actions of a butterfly flapping its wings to start things progressing towards a goal of ephemeralization traversing the path of least effort.

Cascading Failure
For any fantastic achievement (verging on the miraculous), a cascading failure is at the core of it whether the result be deemed good or ill. A cascading failure is not unlike a domino effect except that it is predicated upon an interlocking network of potential energies compounding their incremental results into an acceleration as the effect progresses. It does not maintain a steady pace. If it did maintain a steady pace of change, then the potential for archetypal overunity would become over-shadowed by entropy.

Principle of Least Effort
This acceleration takes advantage of a specific virtue, the principle of least effort, to tip the balance of dynamic equilibrium. This specific virtue is the inherent potential for any unit of a network to holographically incorporate the point of view of the entire network within, and between, each of its inter-associated units. This facilitates the coordination of each unit's actions to be 'in concert' with the rest of the network as an extension of the network's collective intelligence: an integrated unit of numerous parts — a kind of lemming approach to solving problems or moving mountains; a crowd effect.

Mechanical Advantage
The power of the crowd, of numerous supporters, is the mechanical advantage of the individual multiplied across the diameter of the crowd networked in such a coordinated manner that the network acts as if it were a single individual.

Law of the Lever
Partaking of a concerted action among many integrated parts exercises leverage beyond the limits of a single participant. In leverage, something is exchanged for something else. In this sense, isolation is exchanged for consolidation; otherwise, the network would not cascade with a modicum of effort.

Emotional Advantage
Emotional advantage, taking advantage of someone's emotional vulnerability, is a form of Mechanical Advantage utilizing the Law of the Lever: exchanging one thing for another. In this case, trust is exchanged for a powerful effect at the other person's expense.

Human emotional energy is a form of free potential energy that can be triggered (through a cascading failure of mental equilibrium) using physical situations that require much less energy to trigger than what is actually released in the end (the principle of least effort).

For example... Shaping someone else's mental state with a few words, or simple actions, to inspire them to do something that requires (of themselves) much more energy — than is required by the perpetrator to initiate — is an example of the 'Spirit of Competition' via exploitation of the free perpetual energy of human resources. Like saying some words to an egotistical guy who gets extremely angry and starts throwing heavy objects around. The energy required to say the words to him is much less than the energy the speaker brings into existence by changing the guy's mental state. If the goal is to move the heavy objects — or whitewash walls — then this would be an archetypal overunity mechanism.

We need to eat, though. So, there is no free energy; only (sometimes) energy free of accountability.

[edited by: Vinyasi (talk) 23:28, 9 March 2014 (UTC) with a major contribution from John Cappelletti.]

Analysis of a Prank
One sensible example for analyzing an overunity archetype is the prank, or practical joke.

Inherent in the prank is the requirement to expend the least amount of energy to help maximize and contrast its jolly outcome.

We see a lady approaching a table about to pull out a chair to sit down. We offer to scoot the chair in towards the table for her so that she doesn't have to do it herself as she proceeds to sit down. She obliges us by accepting our offer to assist her. But as she is descending into her seat, we rattle the chair — just a little — but enough to cause her to reconsider her trust in us as we flash her a wide smile.

Now, let's take this prank apart.

Implementation Intention
We offer — We seize the opportunity before us without wasting the moment in soulful deliberation. Time is of the essence. Humor is all about timing. We make an offer to assist the gal, without which she could not have opened up to trust our appearance of sincerity. Now, we have her confidence. Her vulnerable trust of our appearantly, good intention is a resource which we do not have to guarantee. Instead, her blanket trust in us is her guarantee to us that we may use her confidence as a resource to bleed a little humor from, thereby.

Butterfly Effect
She obliges us by accepting our offer — If she had not obliged us, we would have had to either look forward to another opportunity to play a prank on her or someone else, or give up entirely. Her kind acceptance tilts the balance in our favor, so far.

Mechanical Advantage
descending into her seat — If we miss this ripe opportunity, we will have missed taking advantage of her trust at a moment when her trust depends on us the most, and her suspicion is at its least. This implicit trust during her most vulnerable moment loads the potential for a laugh to its greatest degree. Let's just hope that she chooses to laugh with us!

Cascading Failure
rattle the chair — Her trust is blown to shreds and it's too late for her to turn back. She'll either have to let go of her pride and laugh with us, or remain enclosed within her shell of self-remorse — or worse, hatred — and scald our butterfly wings to a singed, wisp of smoke.

Principle of Least Effort
just a little — We waste no undue energy in shattering her repose. Just a little rattle ensures that she not take our jest in the wrong vein and accuse us of ill will. We want this butterfly moment to soar!

Law of the Lever
reconsider her trust — We've swapped out her innocent trust — in us — for a jolly good laugh. Leverage always loses something whenever it gains something.

Heat Pump
One of the easiest conceptual overunity archetypes to conveniently wrap our minds around is the Heat pump running off of the Heat pump and refrigeration cycle. It may often display archetypal overunity — as a coefficient of performance greater than one — when its efficiency is high enough to offset losses.

Atomic Hydrogen Furnace
Another example of an archetype, or technique, which puts out more energy (as heat) then is required to source the process (as an input of energy) is the Atomic Hydrogen Furnace as described by William Lyne in the last chapter (six) of his book, entitled: Occult Ether Physics. This technique of Mr. Lyne is not to be confused with Atomic hydrogen welding (AWH), nor with Oxy-fuel welding and cutting. Instead, it is parallel with the Atomic Hydrogen Blowtorch, and with the use of a tungsten arc.

The Archetypes of Overunity and Perpetual Motion
The Archetypes of Perpetual Motion and Overunity are descriptions of an Infinite Life lived in the Fullness of Infinite Bliss, Infinite Intelligence and Infinite Creativity: Sat-Chit-Ananda.

Although both the archetypes of perpetual motion and overunity co-exist within a framework of an infinitely full and abundant lifestyle, they have some distinctions which set them apart from each other...

The Perpetual Motion archetype describes the quality of Divinity which is Ever Active; Divinity never ceases to be, nor does Divinity ever cease to act. Even in repose, actions of the Divine Personage Constantly Pervade His Being.

So, the archetype of Perpetual Motion is a distinct quality of Divine heritage.

And in as much as the archetype of Creation is Divine in its origins, Creation will exhibit every aspect of Its Archetypal Being coincident to the Being of Its Originator: the Creator.

So, Creation is archetypically Perpetual just as the Creator is also Perpetual.

To expect that any and all mechanical archetypes cannot possibly be Unceasingly Perpetual is to deny the possibility of God stepping into His Creation — which He/She/It has already endowed with Perfection of Ceaseless Archetypicality.

Now, how can an archetype — or a contrivance of archetypes — exhibit perpetual motion? Through the construct of archetypal overunity.

What is another aspect to Divinity apart from Its Eternity? That of Its Abundance of Archetypes.

And what sort of Abundance can Surpass Itself? The Abundance of Infinite Archetypes will always Outdo Itself.

Daoism provides us with one truth which can explain another truth from the Vedas....namely,

From fullness comes fullness and fullness remains...

...can be explained by...

Two fullnesses, yin and yang, coexist: 1. The fullness of fullness, and 2. The fullness of emptiness.

Almost incidentally, The Aleph number within the realm of the theory of infinite sets allows for the coexistence of uniqueness among sets of infinity.

In other words, In order for fullness to remain after fullness comes out of it, each of these two fullnesses — the causative fullness and its resultant fullness — have to be unique, or else the extraction of fullness from fullness would leave the original fullness empty as a result; but it doesn't.

This is because there are two perspectives on any one individual fullness. One aspect of fullness is that of its uniqueness; the other aspect is of its infinite stature of never lacking for fullness no matter how much is taken from it.

The concept of the Aleph number of infinite set theory fully accredits these important points by allowing for the differentiation among multiple sets of infinity — namely, multiple unique fullnesses each of whom never lack of fullness no matter how much, or how many, fullnesses may arise from each.

So, the overunity archetype is Infinitely Abundant while the perpetual motion archetype is Infinite Time coincident with Infinite Motion. Without Infinite Time, Eternity would have no Infinite Scope within which Infinite Motion could exist.

So, the overunity archetype is more over-arching in its scope than is the archetype of perpetual motion; it is also more vague at first glance.

In actuality, the overunity archetype is more complicated than is the archetype of perpetual motion. The overunity archetype has several distinct parts to its functionality, while the perpetual motion archetype has merely two ingredients (as mentioned previously): Infinite Time and Infinite Motion, the first being inferred as a prerequisite for the latter.

Conclusion
The overunity archetype can be ostensively defined within the context of tacit knowledge.

The overunity archetype is difficult to define a priori using common sense without first and foremost observing the world in its "natural state" from a Cosmic perspective endowed of archetypal scripture.

Yet, a posteriori analysis can be rendered independent of the availability, or existence, of any overunity archetype capable of refuting disputes as to its principles of operation using knowledge by acquaintance — a subtext of common knowledge.