The Art of David Rankine MANDALA

Sacred Geometry page 3

Potentiality fields within and without - the dynamics of relationship

There is also another potentiality field that surrounds the two elements in this model. If it is two people, this all encompassing potentiality field is opened through the intent of the two people to enter into relationship which could be as simple as a conversation.
 The Potentiality Field without- that which is held open by the intent of two individuals to be in relationship (entering into a negotiated transfer of information in any form) This negotiated space can also be seen as a sacred space- within which both parties van express themselves safely.

The information contained within this field is provided by both participants and by their shared interaction.  As this field is created it acts as the stage upon which the interaction will occur and at the same time it acts as a compressive factor which will provide the force needed to allow the two systems to interpenetrate. When applied to three systems, this same dynamic will then force the three systems to, at first touch and then form flat faces so that as much of them as possible touches (interfaces) and then actually interpenetrate to create the maximum utilization of shared space without loss of  structural integrity.

 The potentiality fields of three people within a potentiality field of their relationship ( fig 1)

The compressive dynamic is created by a shared intention to enter into relationship. This intent includes the idea of " entering into" a new state and moving beyond the usual boundaries of an individual's State of being (potentiality field) into an area of shared information and energy. The compression is an act of coming together.

The flat interfaces that appear before the interpenetration of the circles seem to linger as  footprints and they themselves inform the directional path of information flow as we observed on page 2

Obviously what is modeled in this example is an optimum one...and it requires that all the participants  at least share a common intent. Note that  the potentiality fields are always circular and that although they briefly adopt straight edge interfaces they return to circles when they interpenetrate.

Could a three way conversation happen without interpenetration of each individuals potentiality field? The answer is yes but not in a tensegrous manner. With three fields touching as circles the area of interface is minimal - a point and there is no common  area shared by all three.
 Three people within the potentiality field- but not yet truly interacting to an optimum level

I   If compressed slightly, the circles develop flat interfaces and in this instance more is shared, circle to adjacent circle but still there is no common area shared by all three.

 Compressive force (commonly held intention of relationship) applied. The three potentiality fields develop flat interfaces as they enter into relationship and communication

It is only when the potentiality fields of each person penetrate  those of the others, that a common area is developed- an zone within which true three way communication results.

 Three potentiality fields entering into shared space (communication) -the edges having interpenetrated. Still not at optimum position.

In this arrangement the three participants  hold equal positions within the field of their relationship.

This same flattening of the circle physically occurs when cells are compressed and all the empty space is filled by the cell material. When observed under a microscope, cells subjected to compressive force often take on hexagonal arrangements - similar to that of a honey comb. It is simply the best use of space - the most efficient way to fit circular systems into a given space.
Of course, in this section we are talking about energy (in the form of feelings and ideas)  and it is actually possible for each system to penetrate through the rim of the potentiality field of another. The rim or edge can be seen as  a  porous membrane - but one that can be opened or closed at will. Any real relationship of communication is of course a negotiated space ( fig 1)- free of dominance, subservience or dependency . It is action (synthesis) and goal intermeshed. The interaction informs the model and the model informs the interaction.

As you can see there are paradoxes at play here- potentiality fields that inform reality while they are themselves being informed by the participants. What is very important to keep in mind is that everything within these potentiality fields is in a constant state of synthesis - re-organizing itself as new information is received. When it is two people interacting, they are in a constant state of negotiation and re-negotiation. This process mirrors that of the Universe - all matter form and energy in a constant state of activity - the activity of re-negotiation. This is an activity directed toward achieving a tensegrous state of being and in a paradoxical way the state of being is that of not being static.