C-169. The Big Step

What came after -- and is still coming after -- the Big Bang?

The Big Step: the Expansion.

The Expansion? Yes.

The Universe, a hypothetical biggest body? No (C-163).

Seeing the Big Bang as something happening to an entity (aka body), and seeing the myriad of particular bodies that have emerged in consequence … then to envision a body big enough to contain all these particular bodies is not surprising. But is this our seeing at its best?

The Big Step beggars comparison. Man’s journey to the moon is but a “giant step” – a very large, very molecular step, but a particular step. How can we best see (aka Read) the Big Step?

As the G-step? As the (long, incomplete, punctuated by collisions – most especially involving humans in recent history on the planet Earth) step of the Nature of Things (III), the step under the general persisting conditions (GPC) of partial order, consequentiality and -- at least midcourse (C-139), by particular bodies in a discontinuity relationship?

To be Read, perhaps, in “wave” terms? Wave as in the sense of radio wave technology (e.g., amplitude modulation [AM] and frequency modulation [FM].) And to which the Fournier transform contributes a way to section out a radio wave to Grasp and Involve (C-105) these sections so as to realize needed functionality.

(The idea implicit in the Fournier transform -- i.e., the utility of transforms to enable G<=>I efforts -- is not limited to that transform’s operating principles. The big question [C-102] is which transform and/or transforms we might and should use … as emergent parties [CEM-history: App XI] in the Big Step with expansions of our own to consider [C-170: Becoming]. The Big Step in this G-step sense is a single broad wave. Broad enough to comprise midcourse [the human condition in history {C-108}] a variety of lives as particular expansions – i.e., for our becomings as R-entities {C-147,170} and further Realization as Excaliburs {C-149}. In the G-step, all bodies are behavioral: some more than others [i.e., multi-steppers]. What we have been doing under the banner of the putative universe has been to focus on particular bodies [aka behavioral entities: C-114] and their behavioral relationships [e.g., connections, forces, correlations]. We have, in effect, been employing a B[body]-transform, seeing the G-step cross-sectionally in terms of B-particulars, seeing behavior incompletely, often inaccurately, and often with ineffectual or disastrous outcomes. And weakly Grasping step making … that beckoning [C-110: What is called for] problem-solving way forward in this World of Possibility, [App. XIX].)

Although radio waves have been of enormous importance in our Read of pre-human history (i.e., dating the Big Bang event), and although they figure prominently in contemporary human life (e.g., broadcast media), radio waves are but one particular kind of behavior in the Big Step’s spectrum. We need to Grasp all of that spectrum, using whatever transforms are, or can be made, available to us. Here as Pioneers (C-119) at the Frontier (C-118) we are on the leading edge of the Expansion, very much in need of all the help and support we can get to handle unsolved and poorly solved problems.

Consider, for example, the limited guidance we have for our steps (their making and taking) from employing only the B-transform. We have norms and statutes, based on behavioral entities’ past steps and their outcomes. We have laws that govern some of body-body relationships (e.g., “four forces” – but see C-41: Another fundamental force). We have constants, such as the speed of light. But there is more available for guidance: the Nature of Things’ generalities (the GPC and, for our purposes, the Expansion itself are constants), plus the behavioral Requisites and Imperatives in consequence of the GPC (VI-XI) which are invaluable before the fact at the Frontier, here and now on the leading edge of the Expansion.

“The Big Step” is as much announcement as pronouncement. We need to give more emphasis to steps relative to bodies, to step making and not just step taking … to overcome the I<=>G weakness in our minding (0:S-P), to redress our minding’s imbalance of B/S>1+ and thereby bring about a more productive B<=>S (C-71) in the progressive (but not progressive enough) human condition in the Big Step.


Human Expansion works in more than one direction. Forward is a major concern (e.g., “the Way;” in Accord with the Nature of Things [C-9]). In size, as in the number and variety of our ways – the steps we have taken, from which profusion we may now opt to choose one to take again. In stretching: we can and do take longer molecular steps (e.g., “actions”) … as when helping needs help (App. I), when our attempted solutions fall short (0:Sp,S-P, Ps,P) – functionality less than needed functionality.

Perhaps most consequential of human Expansion stretching are the steps for making steps – only then to be taken …extending the molecular step, before the fact a well as after the fact, backwards toward needed functionality in consequence of the Nature of Things (III; C-144) – i.e., the behavioral problem, not just forward re this and/or that situational problem (I).*

We need to invest in step building (C-90: Behavioral architecture; App. XXIII: R-blocks). Not just in making bodies that take steps, to solve or help solve, situational problems. Our knowledge can only increase as we make more and more of step making per se – i.e., enriching how we try to do things in this World of Possibility (C-93: Kt).


“Expansion: yes; universe: no” may grate harshly on the B-tempered psyche **… but if it serves the cause of human Realization, redressing the body/step>1 imbalance and thus helping to strengthen our body <=> step development and the many strengthening “<=>” development opportunities within the molecular step (C-173), redressing the imbalance between the historical and the ahistorical perspectives (C-108) on behavior … then so be it.

This simple change in focus from body to step, from “universe” to “expanding,” clears the way to look at the multi-step (!) human condition more helpfully, skirting the impediments to problem solving imposed by viewing behavior through the lens of the B-transform (0:S-P).

This paradigmatic change in focus opens the door (It’s a place to start over!) to the R-transform and its corrective implications (C-135 re C-39) … implications for B-protocols as well as for our L(language)- and V (valuation) - protocols clinging to, limited by and biased by the B-transform. It opens the door fully to history, to behavior that lies ahead of us and not just to stories about the behaviors behind us.

It’s a view of Everything that changes everything. Or should.

* Given that added functionality adds to needed functionality (C-115), the “backward” extension to step making before step taking is never ending.
** A B-bias that often finds parallel expression to the universe in concepts of agency (B-ness) within the human Expansion (gods) and prior to the Expansion itself (one god) … one consequence of which is the stunted, if not aborted, development of the very useful responsibility <=> capability dynamic.

(c) 2016 R. F. Carter