Reciprocal System Research Society

A post made by "archer" on the RStheory forum made reference to a concept of "tempo" in relation to motion. I think it may actually be a better term than "motion", and it means about the same thing--the speed or rate at which something is done, with no implication of "something to move" or vectorial direction.

The "tempo" of the Universe would be unity--the progression. The "tempo" of atoms would be the rotational speeds.

I find the concept to be a lot clearer than "motion" or "ratio". But then, I do have some musical background. How does the concept of "tempo" feel to the rest of you, as a description of motion?

Tempo may be better than motion, because it deals with change. Kirilyuk uses a non-linear "quantum beat".

What is being represented in Larson's new motion concept is fundamentally change itself. So it could be called "primary flux'.

To keep things simple, it may be helpful to emphasize that there is no need to introduce additional entities (i.e. newtonian background or container or stage conceptualization) at the same level as change, as change itself gives rise to all manifestation.

Alexander used the term "point-instants" to refer to individual units of change.