<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Hi Lucas, thanks for adding some of your thinking here. I was
intrigued by something you said at the Qiqochat supported online
Open Space experience we had on the OSHotline this past Tuesday. It
seemed to relate to what started happening soon afterwards on the
OSList.<br>
<br>
About "creating" or "opening" space - I do believe these are useful
and powerful metaphors. But in terms of some of the cosmology
thinking - I'm remembering what my college professor at my first
Physics class said.<br>
<br>
We don't really know what time is beyond <b>time is what we measure
with clocks</b>.<br>
We don't know what distance (space) is beyond it is what we measure
with rulers.<br>
<br>
I opened that class's text book, and couldn't find it, but I found
the time definition with a quick internet search. It is attributed
to Einstein, and other text books do consider it an operational
definition of time. It seems fit well with Harrison's notions that
we don't really understand time or space.<br>
<br>
Even given our not really knowing - we still measure it. Play with
it. Live in it. And one huge transformation from Prigogene which has
been discussed on the OSList before - was an insight from the life
sciences that essentially overthrew the principles of Entropy that
caused the character played by Woody Allen in Annie Hall to get
really depressed as a boy that the ultimate end of the universe was
complete dissolution. <a
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U1-OmAICpU"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U1-OmAICpU">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U1-OmAICpU</a></a><br>
<br>
"Why are you depressed, Alvy?"<br>
"The universe is expanding... Well, the universe is everything, and
if it's expanding, someday it will break apart, and that will be the
end of everything."<br>
<br>
The problem with the principles of Thermodynamics that Entropy (i.e.
disorder) always increases, is that these principles came from the
study of closed systems. If the Universe is truly a closed system,
our old physics required a rather dismal cosmology.<br>
<br>
Maybe trying to nail down the ultimate truth about the Universe into
a formula or equation is a bad idea anyway, but the Universe *AS I
SEE IT* will certainly decay and dissolve to death. And I'll have to
grieve that understanding. Because my understanding most certainly
is FINITE at any point in space/time. But all I have to do is let
go, and I can open up some space in my understanding. And maybe at
that point - I'll break open into a new understanding. One that is
bigger and greater than the previous one. New Space! at least for
me. And if it creates space for me, perhaps I can invite someone
else into this new space as well. Or maybe we can walk into it
together, after properly grieving our past understanding - may it
rest in peace.<br>
<br>
To me - how this relates to your insight if you create space for X -
you are creating space against Y: perhaps there's something valuable
to that. Because often there really is a clearing away necessary in
order to "open" space. When I go to an OST event, I most certainly
am choosing to clear my calendar to accept that invitation. Yet - if
anything - I've always found my world expanded after attending an
Open Space. Always! And perhaps that is simply because my
Understanding grew - and therefore - voila - more space at least in
my own head.<br>
<br>
And about your final sentence in bold, although there's some truth
in your win/lose perspective - perhaps if you viewed things from a
different perspective - the perspective that could take in the whole
system - you would see that the pie grows enough for everyone to
ultimately win - if they accept the invitation into this bigger pie.
And that bigger pie is the growth of our collective understanding
and comprehension of this infinite mystery.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Harold<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/2/15 7:47 AM, Lucas Cioffi via
OSList wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEj+rxo6OD-ejMH_EEjq4XEHKPt2uydne11r5k+QuGNbsBj10w@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">That's an interesting thread you started, Daniel,
about inviting non-invitation.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Harrison writes yesterday:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Here’s
a thought... Space/time is infinite, defined by our
minds, and limited by our imagination. So
“constraints” are only what you make them out to be.
AND... it is always nice to have as much “space/time”
as possible. A “genuine invitation” creates a LOT of
space/time.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><b>Do y'all think we are creating
space or are we opening space? It's an important
distinction, because creating implies a win-win but
opening could be a win-lose situation. </b>I'd say none
of us is ever creating space, just opening it, and that
someone or something is always losing something else when we
do. </div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><b>I'll do my best to explain...</b></div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Instead of "creating space" I'd argue
that instead we are "creating space <b><i>for</i></b>"
because the space literally already exists. We are creating
opportunity for voices to be heard and for people to
participate. But in some indirect way a <b><i>space for X</i></b>
is at least indirectly a <i><b>space against Y</b></i>. We
are never actually creating new space, instead we are
creating "<b><i>new space for</i></b>" by marking that space
with an invitation/purpose, principles, and a law of two
feet. The space (the hotel conference room, the warehouse,
etc) already exists.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">I don't disagree, Harrison, that
overall space/time might be infinite–I don't know :) –but
each of us is limited to being in one physical space at a
time, monitoring/interacting with a handful of physical
spaces virtually, and having 24 hours in a day. In that way
we'd all agree that space and time are nearly zero sum at a
personal scale, so when we open/create space for _________,
and people accept the invitation, we are decreasing energy
and time spent some where else. There is a cost. We don't
talk about that, but I don't think we forget that either.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">So, to take this argument full circle
(pun intended), I'd say that whenever we open space, we do
it by force. Space doesn't open on its own (or does it?!--
what if we aren't really <i>opening</i> space and the space
is already open, that we're just the first to see it?).
Well, even if space opens on its own and then if we're the
first ones to walk into it and invite others, we are still
inviting by force–this not a bad force or a coercive force,
but it's a force nonetheless. We know this, because we know
how it requires force to launch an invitation into the
world. (Or is this not always the case? Can someone invite
by simply being?)</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Any invitation displaces people's
time: to read it (maybe just 30 seconds) and then much more
time is displaced for people choose to attend (an hour, a
day, etc). What I'm trying to say is that I'm beginning to
see opening space more and more as active, forceful (in a
good way), and intentional. When we open space that was
previously closed, we are using force, and that might mean
that someone else is experiencing something else closing
(the old order of business in an organization or fewer
people attending another event or doing something that they
would have otherwise been doing if they weren't attending).</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Bottom line: It's hard to argue with
creating space because it looks like a win-win, but
somewhere someone or something is losing our time, energy,
and support in the short term. In the case of an
organization the person losing is the boss who wants to keep
the old order of things. When that situation isn't
applicable, we're at least spending time away from other
things we could be doing such as tending to a vegetable
garden or taking Fido for a walk. <b>So it's always
important to keep in mind who/what is losing when we open
space, and perhaps using the phrase "creating space" is a
good way to focus on the upside.</b></div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Harold Shinsato<br>
<a href="mailto:harold@shinsato.com">harold@shinsato.com</a><br>
<a href="http://shinsato.com">http://shinsato.com</a><br>
twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/hajush">@hajush</a></div>
</body>
</html>