Let's talk music, no genre boundaries


This is an offshoot of the jazz thread. I and others found that we could not talk about jazz without discussing other musical genres, as well as the philosophy of music. So, this is a thread in which people can suggest good music of all genres, and spout off your feelings about music itself.

 

audio-b-dog

@mahgister 

My basic thesis: Men developed physics, from the Greeks through modern quantum physics. How can it not have a male lens? Some highlights you might not agree with, nor would most physicists, but you must admit it's an intelligent argument:

1. Order vs. Process

  • Traditional physics (masculine-coded): Prioritizes laws, permanence, universal invariants. The universe is a machine with predictable gears.
  • Feminine-informed physics: Emphasizes process and becoming over static laws. The universe is not a clock but a womb — continuously birthing new structures through cycles of emergence and dissolution.

2. Entropy and Creation

  • Traditional physics: Entropy = inevitable decay, order → disorder.
  • Feminine-informed physics: Entropy = compost. Decay is not just loss but the fertile medium for new creation. Dissolution is honored as part of a regenerative cycle.

3. Reductionism vs. Holism

  • Traditional physics: Break systems down to smallest units (atoms, particles, strings). Knowledge comes from isolating parts.
  • Feminine-informed physics: Sees wholes as irreducible. Patterns, webs, and relationships matter as much as particles. Complexity is not “mess” but the creative weave of existence.

4. Time

  • Traditional physics: Linear time, arrow of progress, measurable units.
  • Feminine-informed physics: Cyclical and rhythmic time. Seasons, oscillations, feedback loops, birth-death-renewal. Physics would stress recurrence and resonance as much as linear progression.

5. Metaphors

  • Traditional physics: Nature as a mechanism to be controlled (“mastering nature,” “laws,” “fundamental building blocks”).
  • Feminine-informed physics: Nature as a living field, a womb, a flow. Physics would favor metaphors of weaving, gestation, dance, or symphony.

6. Examples of “Feminine Physics” Already Emerging

  • Complexity & Systems Theory: Life and order emerge out of chaos through self-organization.
  • Quantum Field Theory: Reality is not little billiard balls but an underlying field that “gives birth” to particles.
  • Ecological physics: Seeing energy flows through ecosystems as cycles, not linear exploitations.
  • Information & Entropy: Information is not just abstract bits but a generative principle that shapes matter into meaning.

7. The Synthesis

A feminine-informed physics wouldn’t discard equations or rigor. It would add another dimension:

  • Laws are not just constraints but also gestures of creativity.
  • Disorder is not the enemy of order but the partner that makes creation possible.
  • Matter is not inert; it is pregnant with potential.
  • The universe is less like a machine and more like a cosmic womb, endlessly birthing patterns through the interplay of chaos and form.
All history is driven by archetypes and rooted in them...
 
  Once this is said,the fact that there exist a mother achetype and a father archetype does not means that all physics  could be reduced to these underlying  archetypes.. ( we can easily class everything in yin and yang  that does not means that physics is yin or yang ) 
 
 
 In my own thinking as an exemple, we have three sides: the materialistic social tribal and now  robotic ego,& the daimonic (Plato)"possessed" "inspired" isolated ego, but also the free thinking "I" which result & manifest as a balance & controls between the other two sides. History describe the emergence of this third Christic component.
 
 As you see instead of using your feminine and masculine polarities, i use three symbolic forms or achetypes :  the material (feminine) the mind (masculine)  the transcendent "i"...
 
My reading is as much good  or as much bad as yours...wink
 
Instead of a feminine physics , why not a physics integrating the two polarities in a higher dimension ?
 
A Goethean physics as described by Henri Bortoft  in two books ...
 
If i consult A.I. dont doubt  he will obey my prompting biases and confirming my perspective as it did with your  schematics...
 
 A.I. is not truth... It is a confirming biases tool so useful it could be it dont think ....
 
 There is plenty of people saying A.I. helped them and confirmed their  view right now...
If i prompt A.I. about my view as i just described to you i can also wrote a physics description  ( encompassing biology and psychology ) as good as  your own with my three perspectives archetypes of the "ego " instead of yin yang or feminine /masculine  ...
 
 In my physics perspectives the observer must be himself transformed in the act of observation.He then cannot observe a feminine or a masculine physics out of himself. 
 
In a word you are "not even wrong".
 
It can be helpful for you to contrast a feminine physics with a masculine physics but i doubt that it will be productive... It was already done long ago by the way ...I read the "tao of Physics" by Capra  50 years ago , he contrasted newtonian physics (masculine ) with Quantum physics (feminine )  and all your description correspond to his own... 
 
i prefer Goethe who goes deeper ....
 
 The great thinker Gilbert Durand classified all imaginative archetypes...(" Structure anthropologique de l’imagination " a total masterpiece translated in English which i read 55 years ago, i recommend it to you and be assured this book is not obsolete )
 
 The imaginative cosmos is a tree with three main branches with one branch which is double ( the three musketeers are 4 ) ... Then not just  a feminine/masculine simpler classification ... Our bodies male or female support the same workings functions and are complementary not opposite...
 
Jean Gebser i recommended to you described in his 600 pages book how  consciousness is transformed by evolution/history dynamically. he does not use a simplistic binary classification... You decided without reading it that his book was obsolete ... Ask A.I. if his book is obsolete and why ? devil
 

 I will illustrate  my point about the "I" transcending the robotic or the tribal ego  as well as the daimonic ego with a quote about consciousness because the ego robotic or possessed is not conscious...

Only the transcendent Christic  "I" or Atman   is conscious ...

«“Consciousness may behave like an attentive supervisor who keeps an eye on everything that is happening but intervenes only when it realizes that the automatic processes could be inadequate to handle the situation.” - Federico Faggin physicist designer of the first INTEL processor and mystic 

is there some sound  experience able to elevate the conscious level  out of our robotic body and robotic mind ?

It seems some music were used as such in many spiritual culture...

An example  will be given with the Barabar cave in this astounding documentary :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RJ3Epd_SXk&t=2958s

 

 Dont miss this documentary.... It is related to sound experience, ancient history, and almost superhuman technology... It is factual not speculation by the way ...

If you know some piece of music able to elevate the conscious level by the way sounds is used you can suggest it here ...

 All music in a way or another may  elevate the consciousness level if someone is prepared to live the experience , but some music are designed for this in a very peculiar way ...

Music is for me not just pleasure but change of consciousness ... it is not just about our taste but about a higher truth  if we change ourselves et prepare to receive it ... music help and cure or makes us ill ...

 

@mahgister 

The idea of physics through a feminine lens and problems with entropy are mine. The idea that there must be a creative force is mine. I got these ideas from reading books like "The Tao of Physics" and "Gaia" and many others. Chatgbt did not lead me along, I led it along. I have long wondered about space and why it has been so overlooked, until recently, by physics. The book "Gaia" gave me ideas about a creative force in the universe. If you could see the very long process I spent with chatgbt, you would know that chatgbt was not feeding me nonsense just to please me. Many times I tried to lead it in a direction and it opposed me. 

It is a fact that women have had little to do with the writing of physics. That is why I thought that physics overlooks the creative force. The concept of entropy has long seemed problematic to me. How is it measured that the creation of a human or any life form creates more entropy than the value of the form? How does one count the quality or quantity of a human being versus entropy?

Anyway, these are my ideas and I was helped by chatgbt to organize them and bring them into line with modern physics ideas. I can show you blogs I wrote twenty years ago about books on string theory. These thoughts are not new to me. I've been thinking about them a very long time.