Poi Theory of Everything - discussion

The document has been moved to: http://www.homeofpoi.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/886966.html#Post886966

If you want to directly edit the post, PM us and we will send you the log in information.

Just skimmed it, but it looks like a decent summary.

Wow, there is a ton of info here!

I love what you're trying to do here. I myself will be formally studying physics in the fall and attempting to understand poi in both physical science and mathematics. While I have yet to read your summary in entirety (going to work in 45 min), it seems like the information and categorization of terms is off to a great start. I'll be reading this more thoroughly and offering any feedback if I can.

So far, though, it looks great! Keep up the good work.

This is a GREAT resource DyamiTK!! Thanks for putting in so much work!

wow, a LOT of information. I need to go spin right now after reading this!

Hey there, Dyami.

My views on such a web have been expressed in the past, I like a lot of gaps in order for people to piece together their own understanding, the definition list on Rainbowmarys page is as comprehensive as I'm likely to get.

I think the best system of understanding poi is the one you develop yourself.

If you don't mind a little constructive criticism on your post I've got some below, I'll apologise now if its a little short, I'm low on time so I'm going to just say what I mean with very little emotional padding thrown around it, please try to take it as intended.

Fountains and chasing the sun aren't the same. Chasing the sun is a same time windmill, a fountain is a link of weaves and a windmill to create a flower.

Basic stuff first: Alien Jon's unit circle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transverse_plane

I think this must have been an error, its not really relevant. ^_^

Contact poi component is incorrect, contact poi is quite literally contact juggling movements incorporated into poi.

You might want to clear up some of your references to plane bending, you've demonstrated you understand the term as not requiring to incorporate a stall and yet some of the later references are ambiguous.

My knowledge on the specifics of inversion classification is sketchy at best, but how is it that a crosser and the butterfly are inversions? And I'm reasonably certain buzzsaws aren't either, even though they're technically negative space the poi are each on the natural side.

Your information on stalls is doubled up.

With such a large amount of content especially I think you need to get your format into something a little more easily understood. Quite simply I feel you should probably have a description before throwing together all the different movements that fall under that heading.

Whats the demographic you're aiming at? What purpose would you like it to serve? If the demographic is everyone I certainly suggest letting people know what something is before suggesting variants of it.

Anyways, you clearly put some time into this, please take the above into consideration and good luck.

I agree with you that people gain the most when they piece together their own understanding. I talk about that in my introduction to the project under the paragraph on potential drawbacks.

What is the definition list on Rainbowmary's page? I couldn't find what you mean.

I am going to contend your statement on fountains but I think Nick Woolsey agrees with you and so I think I will loose. The definition I have been using for a fountain is that it is any move where a pattern (such as a weave or buzzsaw) moves in a larger circle. By my definition both fountains and flower patterns are compound circles because they both have two centers of rotation (this is what Nick disagrees with).
I don't like that name "chasing the sun" anyways. I don't like attaching non descriptive names to combinations and then not following them up with proper descriptions. It is because of abstract terminology like that which leads to the confusion. The names of moves are not important to me personally, as long as they come with descriptions and we all understand what they are referring to. I am more interested in the underlying fundamental concepts which make up the moves.

I am going off this definition of contact poi: "movements where the poi handle leaves your hand and the poi swing round various parts of your body, OR THE OTHER POI before the handle returns to your hand again; or rather the process of manipulating the poi without gripping it."
which I got from this post: http://www.homeofpoi.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/395111/contact_poi.html#Post395111

Could you clear up some of my references to plane bending? I think you have put more though into it then I have.

Alien Jon and the people at the Vulcan are my resources on concepts such as inversions, introversions (I still don't know what that means) and inswings. I am waiting for them to come add their input on that stuff.
I am saying that inversions can be done with crossers and butterflies. I am not saying that they themselves are inversions. By crosser inversions I am referring to what people call straight jackets (Zan does 'em really well) which use inversions to get into a crosser with the arms folded. By buzzsaws, I mean doing a same-direction split-time inversion in the reletive position that a buzzsaw usually is in (across the axis of the wheel plane).

I know my information on stalls is doubled up. I hadn't decided what of the stalls part should be in the Concepts section and what should be in move families. Do you have an opinion on that?

I know a lot of content in here is lacking descriptions and good explanations. That is one of the big things I want help on. I want people to add any explanations they have on anything in here, in any format they want to make it in and I'll edit the original to include those updates (until we find a wiki)

The page I referred to above: http://www.homeofpoi.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/886502/Poi_terminology.html#Post886502

Well, a straight up fountain is a combination of weaves, you can also have a buzzsaw fountain, it works of the same idea that a previously established movement repeats, reverses with high and low transitions in order to create a flower pattern. Chasing the sun doesnt fit this category.

That contact poi description is almost right, except it assumes that you're going to incorporate contact. The movement requires one poi to be released for it to make its way around something with contact for some period of time. Perhaps your definition could slip in, but I would be very wary about including wibbles and releases, but I'm not an expert in the area of contact poi so I'll leave that for someone else but it seems silly to me to include something into contact poi that would be much more at home in tangles.

I think you understand plane bending. A plane bend is quite simply that, bending your plane til you're in another one. Swing your poi even time by your sides, bend the planes til both are in a front wall plane, now you should be in a butterfly.

To distinguish a plane bend from whats known as a plane change (Note that I said whats known as because both are plane changes, really, but theres not a better name for the latter as of yet) in a plane change there is a very clean switch between planes, involving a point isolation, a plane bend does not have this and as such does not have the same effect.

Hahah, you're right on your comment on inversions, I got fooled by something I'd already pointed out. Just shows you need a description put before you go into listing variants.

I can't offer you my opinion as I don't separate into families, everything to me is a construction of concepts, I categorise in a completely different way.

"Contact Staff: spinning or manipulating a staff without holding it with your hand/s. (specifically with out gripping it using the palm of your hand.) Where the staff comes into contact with your body and rolls/ wraps around it." - MCP
and, A simple theory of contact, also my MCP: homeofpoi.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/876943/simple_theory_of_contact.html#Post876943

Rovo is an expert at contact poi. I will go ask Rovo what he defines contact as and get back to you.

You do separate into families. You recognize the family of contact poi. That aside, could you describe how you categorize?

I will work on adding your updates.

I'm famous. I've been mentioned in a random thread.

Hey everyone, this is dyami again on a new account I just made. My ultimate intention for this project is that it be something like a wiki which everyone can easily access and contribute to. It occurred to me earlier today that one way I could do that is by posting the Theory of Everything from an account that everyone sign into, which is what I have here.

Now I want to take a poll: Do you think I should post the log in and password publicly here or wait for people to ask for it directly? What difference would it make? I am going to PM the log in info to everyone who has contributed to this forum so far.

Now I am going to go re-post the theory from this account. I'll leave this post open and link to the new one, but I don't want to use this one anymore.

Well, by that same token you could also say that you seperate everything into the fact that its split time, same time.

I don't tend to categorise in any significant way because the boundaries are all really blurry.

Line isolations are stalls, point isolations, cateyes.

I could also say floats there, but a float literally is a line isolation.

You couldnt construct the way I view poi in a list like this, it COULD be done in a web, but I'd never do it because that takes away half the fun of teaching. I like to give concepts, hint toward where they can go and then see how much the student gets out of it. I try to teach ways of thinking, ways of understanding, not movements themselves.

You could say a web of movements is teaching a way of understanding, but thats the thing it teaches ONE way of understanding.

Best example for this is Nathaniel_Everist. I've taught him a few movements over time and if he had the same system of understanding that I did he probably wouldn't have come back to me with the kinds of stuff he did and I really enjoyed trying to think of the best ways to teach him something he'll understand from his point of view. So because of this I try not to make the people I teach from scratch think the same way I do.

But not just that, so much of whats out there in poi hasn't even really been touched on. Its a young art and as such theres so much to discover and learn, I feel the whole artform would be better off just knowing the concepts that're out there but not too specific on where those concepts can go from there. Having a resource to learn from is all well and good, but what happens if someone has relied on that the whole time and then they get to the end of what it has to offer, they have no experience with the inquiry learning procedure.

Stuart, I've been thinking about your comments on categorization. Things like musical genres, social categories, and families of moves are all extremely blurry around their edges. Nothing ever fits under only one label, life is to complex for that. I do think there are certain fundamental concepts which are definable.

I am going to work on redesigning the theory with a structure which is more based on the fundamental concepts being the focus. In cases where we do still refer to moves or families of movements, I'll include them as how they fall under the more fundamental elements they are based on.

"Teach them how to fish and they'll eat for a lifetime... "
I want to design this in a way that will give us an understanding of the fundamental nature of poi, and allow us to develop our own techniques and connections.

I just re-posted the Theory and sent everyone who has replied on this forum so far the log in information so you can edit it directly.

http://www.homeofpoi.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/886966.html#Post886966

sweet! and after reading all this I got to thinking, how do poi fundamentals, if at all, change if you are upside down? would it change your muscles to think differently about the moves you have done for years? or is this just a pointless thing to talk about?

by upside down do you mean literally hang upside down? Because we've tried it and it throws off our coordination. It is not as bad as when we go behind our back. Upside down is just the same muscle movement in a new orientation. Behind the back is almost completely new.

yea I'm talking literally hanging upside down. I would have to assume it would throw off everything. just wondering if having gravity pulling the poi upwards instead of down changed any theories of spinning.

Yes! because in vertical spinning it is only at the down beat that we really need to give the poi momentum. The poi give me a tug at that moment when I am supposed to help them back around. If you are upside down then that gravitational down beat is closer to your head then it is to your feet. Good stuff.

I've spoken with Alien Jon. I've been going about this the wrong way. Stay tuned for updates.

10-4 dyamiTK



whoa! what about zero gravity spinning? I just thought of this (probably been thought of far before). How and what would THAT look like, or feel like. and I don't mean to get off topic per say, just thinking of a more "All Inclusive" theory of everything.

peace.