Threesology Research Journal: Hybrids, Hybridation, Hibridization
Hybrids
page 3

~ The Study of Threes ~
http://threesology.org


Hybrids page 1 Hybrids page 2 Hybrids page 3 Hybrids page 4

Flag Counter
Visitors as of 30th July, 2021

FWT Homepage Translator

Since the topic of alternating and direct currents as a type of analogy to analog (DC) and digital (AC) has been made (on the previous page), let me supply the hybrid arrangement needed for a complete circuit by looking at these dualities taking on a "threes" theme:

You need three things in order to make a (a particular type of) hybrid called a complete circuit : (Source: Electrons on the go)

  1. a conductor (e.g. wire)
  2. a power source (e.g. wall outlet or battery)
  3. a resistor (e.g. light bulb or motor)

  • Metal Conductors: (Copper- Aluminum- Silver/Gold)... Generally: Copper, Aluminum and alloys (hybrids)... but other conductors exist.
  • Power sources: The three major categories of energy for electricity generation are 1) fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, and petroleum), 2) nuclear energy, and 3) renewable energy sources. Most electricity is generated with steam turbines using fossil fuels, nuclear, biomass, geothermal, and solar thermal energy. Other major electricity generation technologies include gas turbines, hydro turbines, wind turbines, and solar photovoltaics. (Electricity in the United States)
  • Resistors: There are 3 main types of resistors based on their composition: carbon-composition resistors, carbon-film resistors, and metal-film resistors. ()

Let us also look at electrical Transistors: (Notice the embedded dichotomies in each of the three.) Source:
What types of transistors are there?

A transistor is a semiconductor device used to amplify or switch electronic signals. Transistors are broadly divided into three types:

  1. Bipolar transistors (bipolar junction transistors: BJTs): A bipolar transistor is a type of transistor that uses both electrons and holes as charge carriers. Two types of bipolar transistor are manufactured: npn (negative-positive-negative) and pnp (positive-negative-positive)... (NPN vs. PNP: What's the Difference?)
  2. Field-effect transistors (FETs): A field-effect transistor is a unipolar device constructed with no pn junction in the main current-carrying path. Also, two types of field-effect transistor are manufactured: N-channel and P-channel. Difference between P Channel and N Channel on MOSFET; What is a MOSFET? (MOSFET stands for metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistor.)
  3. Insulated-gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs): An IGBT consists of a voltage-driven MOSFET followed by a high-current transistor.

Transistor examples

Whereas I am not trying to belabor the explanation about transistors, I think there is a need to restate it using different wording and images as an attempted simplification and realization of an existing (apparent) contradiction with respect to diodes:


Another look at transistor construction
Two diodes back to back

We cannot have a complete (electrical) circuit hybrid with two things, that is if we take the 3-part emitter-base-collector ensemble at face value. In fact, despite our number line of possible (but highly improbable) hybridizations heading off into infinity, we see only a few enumerated values of hybrids being used again and again in science, art, music, language, etc... Indeed, but in singular instances and in those circumstances where groups of hybrids are categorized under a single heading such as with the word "system". Similarly, we of today (as yet) only see the singular planet Earth sprouting life, though there are several other planets nearby, nor has any supposed "other" sentient being attempted to make contact with us in a way we humans can comprehend. In other words, all hybrids appear to either "complete a circuit" in our brains as being sufficient in a given representation, or fail to make a complete circuit... with only a very few quantities (in either case) being composed together. This is despite those hybrids which we consider as being a composite of only two parts of different animals/creatures. One limit after another is being expressed... is being constrained or otherwise contained. We do not routinely see hybrids containing billions, or millions, or thousands, or hundreds of parts. What we see is conglomerations of hybrid groups put together, but those groups are of small quantities... as if an unseen constraint is dictating to us and nature not to exceed a given hybridization structure. We see conglomerations containing a few types of animals or creatures, and perhaps a handful of uncommon ones with Patterns-of-two, three, four, five, etc., as recurring themes being exhibited in the overall constraint. We can see groups of these different numbers combined to give the impression that there are hundreds, millions, etc, of components, like counting the billions of cells in our brain... but they are then typed (categorized) sometimes to represent only two, or three, or four... etc. For example, in reference to the brain:

Glial cells are the supporting cells of the neurons. The three types of glial cells are astrocytes, oligodendrocytes, and ependymal cells, known collectively as macroglia, and the smaller scavenger cells known as microglia. Glial stem cells are found in all parts of the adult brain. (Source: Brain cell)

The selection of Glial cells is a hybridization.

...For the spinal cord though, we can say that there are three types of neurons: sensory, motor, and interneurons. Source: (Types of Neurons


Anaolgies using brain neurons

If we arrange brain cell types in an order like that of a number line, we find ourselves faced with a primitive ordering... like an ancient culture with a rudimentary form of counting... where the 3rd value is referred to as "much, many, heap," etc. Biologically speaking, the human body is an old piece of machinery that has undergone multiple changes by way of adaptation frequently referred to as evolution. Despite its collectivity of multiple types of hybrids, it is a primitive architecture with multiple vestigial (artefactual) remnants bespeaking of different ages and conditions under which the body has had to traverse through. It has done well with the equipment that it has at its disposal, but is insufficient for the multiple tasks which humanity is and will be further subjected to in the years ahead. While we can use the structures as a type of sketch-pad model of fundamental forms and formulas, but we will no doubt need a new form of Mathematics and architectural framework which traditions of the body have not entertained as substitutions.

We are inclined to think of human consciousness as the center of THE Universe, if not merely our own reality. However, this may not be the case with respect to developmental biology which appears to have a mind of it own... so to speak. Since we attribute what is called "higher functioning" to the brain or overall cranially constrained (on a leach) processes, let us consider that the above image describing a rudimentary counting system is an actual representation of that which is developing towards its own higher functionality, albeit unacknowledged by humanity. Whereas we assign counting as a human capacity and in some respects describe what appears to be some form of rudimentary counting amongst some animals which give us the impression of having some sense of more and less in quantity; could not physiological process exhibit the same within the constraints of their own developmental sequences and respective capacity for illustration? This is not to say that physiological processes are conscious, but that they are able to exhibit rudimentary counting and perhaps speaking... if not other rudimentary processes which humanity presently wants to advertise as some especial quality to itself as it thinks it is in terms of mental development? Indeed, might not all life forms in their own way exhibit some measure of a rudimentary counting mechanism even if in most or a few cases the level attained may not be past one, or perhaps two?

  • Animals that can count
  • Some Plants Can Count
  • Do atoms and molecules count? (Or are they the "numerical digits" used in the counting process, but that which is directing or assigning the count, is yet to be revealed?)
  • How do the three Germ layers count the type and number of body parts to include in their respective sections of development? Why has physiology "chosen" only three (or a fourth Germ layer according to some views)? Why not a separate one for each body part? Why the hybridization?
  • Do planets have a sense of counting or anything in space have a sense of counting as determined by constraints imposed on types and quantities of singles (playfully: "singularities") and groups (such as star clustering)?
  • Is the constraint of having only so much water available on Earth due to a type of counting system humanity is oblivious of?
  • Is the triplet code of DNA and RNA and the pattern-of-three particles in atomic physics due to a counting method unknown to humanity?
  • In some instances where humans have counted more than three, we may find that there are two or more independent processes (processorial) counting systems running parallel, in sequence, or... by looking at electrical circuits where some claim there are five (What Are 3 Types Of Circuits?), I can see three groups of dichotomies:
    1. Open and Closed circuits
    2. Short (and Long) circuits; ("Short circuits" can be defined in terms of Direct current applications, and "Long circuits" can be defined in term of Alternating current applications). However, this was true when Edison and Westinghouse were battling over which power was best (cheapest) for commercial applications. There were no High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) transmission systems available in their era. Although today we do, changing out the well-established AC system can be costly. HVDC transmission systems appear to have an advantage over distances longer than 300 miles for bulk power distribution.
    3. Series and Parallel circuits

Where some see three or less or more than three, what we humans may be counting may be separate systems we've grouped together because of an individual's inclination to group in a given way... for whatever reason during a given or multiple moments/events.

If we are correct in ascribing "higher functioning" to brain activity, might then its respective "apparatus" exhibit a higher counting ability then some other physiological process deemed "lower functioning"? Surely at the outset (dawn) of the human ability to count we found one or another person with the mental "equipment" enabled to engage in such behavior, while others did not (on their own nor by mimicry)? If we view different physiological processes (as well as other life forms) as different people living in the same social sphere; do we not think to imagine that some will be enabled to do counting more easily... even rudimentary counting, than others? Such is the case we encounter when viewing math skills of different people. Whereas it is a given some people show an aptitude for mathematics while others have an aptitude for some other subject or activity, the point is that physiological processes may well exhibit their own form of rudimentary counting or aptitude for some other subjects language(s) and tool(s) of expression.

Whereas it has been customary for humans to think that "thinking" is wholly and solely a human capacity, we consider that some type of thinking occurs with animals, and it is not simply mere instinct which plays the part of a drummer that they march to. Likewise, we ascribe many pets with having feelings. Though such may not be exactly as humans feel, their behavior is interpreted to reflect that which we understand as being emotion. Likewise let us consider that there are different types of memory and that human memory is the not Sun which they rotate around. Human memory is but one (or multiple) types/kinds. Whereas some may want to ascribe other feelings and types of thoughts to any and all forms of living matter, we can only speculate about inanimate processes taking part in the directed expression thereof, though the idea that magnetism is a retained type of memory which we can measure according to our standards of what we describe as magnetism (and not memory), does not magnetism reflect some characteristic of memory? No less, because we define memory into quantified types, might this not also suggest that different life forms and non-animate items exhibit some model consistent with its form... regardless if it is like human memory or not... since human memory may be misinterpreted and requires a fresh... unbiased appreciation to fully understand what it is on a basic level?

Why is it that we do not consider living matter able to create different hybrid types of memorization to fit within the niche' of a given animate subject's ability to express its own kind of memorization? If it is said that someone has a memory like a billygoat (someone once told me I had one), or the memory of an elephant, or the memory of an animal who sought revenge against an abuser, why is it so difficult to consider there may be other hibridated forms in different life forms? Whereas we say that a Venus flytrap closes due to a mechanical-chemical pairing of activity, the process that makes this occur again and again is a type of memorization... much like an automobile "remembering" how to activate by a key being turned, or a battery said to have a memory of its charging and discharging history.

If we can get rid of a battery's "poor" memory by discharging it to a very low level before recharging it, can we also do this with other "things" such as humans? (Memory effect in a battery)

At this point let us say that just because multiple life forms (and inanimate forms?) may have the ability or capacity to memorize, think, feel, etc., does not mean such abilities or capacities are used. They may be some "process-in-waiting" for a specific environmental event, circumstance or condition which may or may never arise. Like a type of vestigial organ in reverse. Whereas it is said that human Vestigial organs are said to be 'remnants of lost functions that our ancestors possessed', and presumably used in the past under different circumstances; we should not think that every part we are developed with will be used at all, much less to its fullest capacity... because such a usage requires specific conditions... like a fish needing water to use its fins most appropriately and birds need the right environment to use their wings most appropriately, etc... Indeed, one, two, or more or perhaps none of our human qualities will ever be subjected to the foremost environmental circumstances which will make our particular qualities most valuable.

In some instances, individuals have considered that their particular mindset is more geared to an earlier period of history, making them,... then, a vestigial human, so to speak... or at least their manner of speaking in more in tune with a past era. they are like a memory deposit which did not awaken when it would be most useful, and came upon the scene when its value is not that which it would have been in a past day and age.

et us look at human memory for a short instant: (Noting that the kinds/types are representative models of hybridization.)

If we agree with the following article's assessment that there are four types of memory, (What are the different types of memory? Scientists debate memory c)classifications here again I can create three sets of dichotomization out of these four: (working, sensory, short term, long term)...

  1. Working memory... (we might as well as the idea of "lazy" non-working or couch potato memory)
  2. Sensory (externally driven)... Internally driven (not necessarily muscle memory)
  3. Short term... Long term (Why no medium term or calculable fractions?)

A schematic of human memory types

Different hybridated models of human memory concepts

When we discuss memory we often do not think in terms of the idea that the quantity of brain waves (five: Gamma, Beta, Alpha, Theta, Delta), organs in the body or organelles in cells is the result of something... some process which remembers to include a certain number and type of structure, as well as its coordinates. Despite opposing views on how many types of overall organs are in the human body (315 at the highest [unless each cell is to be considered an organ] and 5 major organs essential for life at the lowest); and despite the different quantities of organelles that one or another person says is part of an animal and plant cell (but in any case is less than 20); something is keeping all the quantities quite low. Does this mean... like the constraint on human memorization, that the process(s) one might assume exist in "remembering" cell and body parts, is limited? Indeed, is their a maximum to which galaxies can exist? Is there, as we assume from our 118 count of basic elements, only this quantity because of some Universal limit to some supposed memory which enables this small quantity to come into and remain in existence? Is the Triplet code of DNA a memory that repeats itself because conditions on Earth are such that the memory is not permitted to expand... or expand (in the case of mutation or adaptation) on an incrementally slow rate of development... but only within the confines of a triplet-governed memory? Likewise for the recurring triplets in particle physics... or two-pattern in cell division, or the 7-range of the color spectrum?

While millions of people are arguing over a particular number or symbol's significance, all of these views fail to recognize that collectively, they represent a very small number when compared to the infinity of numbers in existence. The low quantity may be a tell-tale sign that current conditions required a limited "memory" process or system because this is a survival mechanism within the confinement of an incrementally deteriorating environmental system (the Sun is burning out, the Moon is receding, the Earth's rotation is slowing)... whereby our insistence that a particular symbol or number is most significant is nothing more than a distraction, a rationalization... a means to keep humanity ignorant of the fact that it is being forced to abdicate its free will in order to comply with the requirements of a system of deterioration as a survival mechanism.

Let us return to ideas concerning numbers and enumeration:

Constraints of the number line

The zero in human usage

Whereas some are inclined to consider that one or another subject is unstoppable in the sense there are no limits to improvements, such as for example in mathematics; where observations of recurring themes involving such patterns as dualities, dichotomies, pairing, oppositional's, triplicities, quadralineals, quintuplets, etc., can be counted... we need to add another label to the recurrences;... namely, constraint. Conservation implies constraint, though the words are not often used in the same context as synonyms. By mapping the underlying patterns found in mathematics, we see a currency of routine familiars where some, such as dualities and trichotomies, if not quadratics... present us with a (three-patterned) ensemble of 2 (squaring)-3 (cube)-4 (quadratic refers to "two") where it appears that two-patterned identities in mathematics are most dominant. This characteristic harkens back to an ancient age where dichotomy (such as in the case of the yin/yang complement), was the main rule-of-thumb by which many a person oriented not only their day-to-day vistas, but were used in the then so-named sciences and religions, however crude and irrational they may seem compared to today's uses.

Here's an example of 2,3, and four ideas are lumped together in an illustration, as if it stands for a type of hybrid concocted on the spot for this moment, but will not necessarily endure or be used to the extent we have sculptured, painted or written records for other hybrids such as those notably recognized as mythological creatures.


A representation of 2, 3 and four pattterned notions.

Mathematics is an expression of hybridization with its different fields portraying different types of hybrid creatures... so to speak. Like creatures have been thought up in different cultures and therefore individualized characteristics, they nonetheless share underlying commonalities like a basic body form, aside from the rules of operation which some readers might cite as a skeletal structure instead of as a behavioral theme taking place in the convention of what might be viewed as a type of culture. In other words, an equation may exhibit different variables as if they were body parts, the parts are nonetheless assembled and function similarly, regardless of the person's native language skills in defining the values, or whether they write with one or the other hand... unless performing equations is done solely two handed at keyboard.

With respect to a presumed normal, and making a distinction between what we think is normal and that thought to be a hybrid, humanity of today is not fully cognizant of how much inter-breeding has taken place, whereby that which we might call a normal animal may in fact be a cross-breed. With respect to humans having a mixed origin, we find a racial category label of "Coyote":


Coyote (feminine: Coyota), (from the Nahuatl word coyotl, coyote), is a derogatory colonial Spanish American racial term for a mixed-race person casta, usually referring to a person born of parents one of whom is a Mestizo (mixed Spanish + Indigenous) and the other indigenous (indio). (Coyote (racial category))


When I was young the word "coyote" was explained to me as meaning half-breed, with no real distinctions of which race was being talked about, unless the circumstances dictated them. Hence, the word was applied to any person thought to be a mixture... with the "half this and half that" dichotomy being made by assumptions based on skin coloring and facial (or perhaps other) characteristics as well. It was not until years later that the idea of a mixture between a Spanish person and (North American or Southern American) Indian was the intended specificity. While the Spanish/Indian classification is a dichotomy, the foregoing definition of coyote suggests a trichotomy. If one parent is a mixture of Spanish and some Indigenous race and the other parent is an Indian (indio), then we have three flavorings.

Aside from what we might call "normal" and a "hybrid", we also have to decide on what we mean by "Pure". By designating something as being pure, we thus also create the narrative of something being un-pure... or impure. Yet such distinctions are largely arbitrary concoctions of ideas which others come to accept as a definition. If a hybrid means something that is not pure, then so-called "Pure Mathematics" is impure, as noted on the previous page's illustrations. Purity, in its most straight-forward sense means without mixture and therefore without division. If the yin/yang symbol and accompanying ideas represent a two-part hybrid which many attempt to attach the notion of the two representing a perfect one; where did they originate from in the sense of an original singularity? Whereas the Ancient Greeks came up with the word "Atom" to describe what they thought was indivisibility, we of today know this is not true since atoms have a world of recurring three-patterned entities... and each of those entities may have some sub-particle or circumstance, even though we of today don't have the technical or intellectual skills to conceive of such, much less confirm by form or function.


3 genrations of matter in the standard model of particle physics

Exploring the word "hybrid" by using the word "layer" or "layering" seems to me to be quite similar to the word "generations" as well as sedimentation and other words the reader might find come readily to mind. Yet, with this layering comes a balancing act whose referential word "balance" brings to mind the idea of coordination. Whereas in the Yin/Yang concept the notion of balance or complementarity is noted, not all... in fact, perhaps most hybridizations do not openly characterize this point. Both odd and even number as well as fractions can represent a proportioned balancing act. However, if we look for a two-patterned hybrid standing alone without some other supposed support, we come to find a three-patterned circumstance in attendance. For example, the human bipedal gait is attained by a three-patterned array of semi-circular canals. The doubling of cell division is accompanied by a triplet code DNA, triplet microtubules, etc... Yin and Yang are accompanied by the I-Ching and its usage of Trigrams (which are actually [two types of lines] Bigrams masquerading as trigrams).


The two and three of the I-Ching triads

If we use mythological creatures as an example to illustrate both quality and quantity of different animals/insects/plants being fused or added to a central body, do we call a Cyclops a hybrid, or a mutation... thus advancing the notion that not all hybrids are mutations and not all mutations are hybrids. Then again, if we say that the rule of thumb for ancient giants was to have one eye in the middle of their forehead just above their nose... despite the number of Cyclops was extremely few; then are we forced to conclude that two-eye humans are the mutation and hybrid? Even if no one has ever seen any of the hybrid forms expressed in ancient stories, the illustrations describe the type of animals (etc.) and quantity of parts which were combined. While there are multi-limbed characterizations, it may be of value to viewed different types of limbs as a form of hybridization and multiple quantities of the same limb as a different type of hybridization instead of lumping them together.


The three cyclopes brothers of Ancient Greek Mythology

Nine headed hydra described in Ancient Greek Mythology

When speaking of Greek mythology and before that, Mathematics... both as hybrids, we can include the notion of Numerology.

When we take a review of supposed hybrid examples, we are confronted by identifying both quality and quantity, thought most people may not take part in actively counting the number of (external) "qualities" which make up different creatures. When we do, the philosophical contention which can arise in our attempts to discern whether there is actually a "one" formula of hybrid... that is, with no composite at all; we arrive at an attempt to distinguish what is or what is not meant by a "two-patterned" hybrid. A generalized approach would be to claim that the ancient model of a Sphinx, comprising a human head and a lion's body would suffice as an example of a two-part hybrid form. Yet, what of those two-part ideas which many not at first be artistically illustrated such as the two-faced Janus, the Yin and Yang concept, Nature/Nurture, Heaven/Hell, etc.? Do all dualities, or dichotomies or pairings... represent some model of a hybrid... or the beginning of an expressed hybridization attempt?


Egyptian sphynx hybrid of human and lion The Janus figure as both a symmetrical and non-symmetrical hybrid?



Date of Origination: Friday, 30th July, 2021... 6:38 AM
Date of Initial Posting: Sunday, 12th September, 2021... 8:40 AM