For me the topic of navigation represents the root connection to the body - of being able to transform information in spatial terms. It assumes a relatively static temporal frame though, as I find it quite demanding to exert other complex relational change too broadly.
If wanting to exercise changes in the field of view of data I tend to like a math approach, which might be to consider it as;
- translation - unified movement (shift) of shape and size
- rotation - bound movement around a point (spin) to rotate shape, but keep the same size
- dilation - not to be confused with zoom? Actual transformation to increase or decrease the size while retaining the shape
- reflection - reversal of shape, relative to some axis (flip 'opposite'?), same size
So its interesting to do this with 'maps' of objects with the point of view located as a defined field of view. Translation is quite easy as its just like movement, dilation is probably next easiest as it can be as simple as collapsing or expanding distances but retaining ones angular associations to objects. Rotation in the same way retains distances but changes the angles. I think those three really exercise base natures of perception and decision making which our bodies are wired to do for interacting with our environment.
Maybe then any combination of those 3, like say zoom could for example become a mix of dilation and translation, to offer a 2d vector for the point of view itself in relation to the field of objects or representative map. Which could represent the impulse from mind to body.
So while I like to exercise concepts of temporal change across those 'dimensions' of perception.... I do think the use of reflection is a novel way to grasp some causality in temporal transformation - as it respects the objects permanence in relation to the point of view which seem to be otherwise perhaps lost to some extent by moving 'through' it to observe its reflection. In these terms reflection is both a transformation of the object in its own right but also potentially a translation in respect to the point of view - which suits the perception of complex entities quite well as it involves change and movement. I find this approach more useful to distinguish those 3 other's in spatial terms of perception and the later as a bridge between some temporal and spatial transformation. Just as an exercise though, not a law or anything. Does that make any sense!?
:pinch:
