Drex's hybrid theory

There's another bit of refinement here that was pointed out to me over the weekend that I'd totally missed...everything we describe as a hybrid requires a relationship such that one point of interest at either end (read: hand or poi head) must share the path of a point of interest at the other end regardless of timing and direction.

For example: triquetra vs static the static poi head follows the same path as the triquetra hand, cateye vs extension the hands follow the same path even if they are not at the same point on it. We wouldn't regard performing these two moves in adjacent hand paths a hybrid but do classify it as such when the hand paths are superimposed upon each other.

But in the Russel's videos the first move didn't aply to this rule I think,
because only hands share the same path.

That just means there are head to hand, hand to hand or even head to head hybrids.

I've only found one movement thus far that I'd call a head to head hybrid.

Its antispin vs prospin in a linear isolation that traces a square.

No, than you could also call a simple weave a hybrid,
but thats no true.

We have to care about the simple targeting rules,
over ideas with broad ranges.

A weave has both poi travelling along the exact same paths, hand and head paths... whereas hand paths in the other patterns are opposite, yet parallel to one another.

Besides which, the original "Hybrid" which was isolation vs longarm was much closer to a weave than the examples I gave.

They did...the hands switch between occupying the same point on the path and phased apart on the same hand path. Russ's hybrid switches between antispin vs pendulum hybrids and antispin flowers (hence my contention that they're actually CAPs composed of hybrids).

We only need this relationship between two points of interest, so poi head can match hand, hand can match hand, or in the case of unit circle hybrids we can have hand match hand AND poi head match them both. This weekend at Wildfire we even played with some examples where poi head followed poi head but I think we're more likely to perceive the previous two cases as hybrid movement as this latter case is dependent upon point isolations.

How does hand/head connection apply to pendulums.....i think that is a general trend but not a rule.

of course some pendulum patterns have head following or hand following configurations...

hmm...

Hand/hand?

Could a hybrid be a "double CAP" ?

I'm not so familiar with the term "CAP" but so far as I understand it, it tends to be switching between two different hybrids in a single, fluid motion.

If thats correct, then I guess you're on the right track, if you doubled one half of a CAP, you'd end up with a hybrid, doubling the other half would result in a different hybrid.

Buuuuuut, someone more well versed in the term can correct me if my use of "CAP" is incorrect.

I am under the impression that a CAP (Continuous Assembly Pattern) is not necessarily a 2-handed pattern, but rather a CAP is a looping pattern where the poi goes through two or more driving styles (I know, this definition brings us to the same dead end as hybrids, due to lack of clear definition for "driving style"..). And by this definition, CAPs can be done with just one poi. Whereas I think we all agree that hybrids are all necessarily 2-handed patterns.

This is the definition of a CAP as provided by the guy (Zaltymbunk) who invented the term:



It's explained in greater detail in this post: http://www.homeofpoi.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/892290/Zaltymbunk.html#Post892290

In other words, CAPs and hybrids represent two different means of superimposing patterns upon each other. In the case of CAPs, it is done in series while with hybrids it's done in a parallel fashion. A hybrid, then, is not a "double CAP" as sequentially we can arrange pieces that do not create contrasting shapes in parallel--for example if both poi and hands are moving in the same symmetry simultaneously (both opposites or both same direction) in which case the parallel shapes are identical even as we switch our move in sequence. CAPS and hybrids represent a Venn diagram of contrast, then, that occasionally overlaps but represent two distinct and unique ideas.

@Tankboy: It totally depends on the intention of the handpath. Two examples: triquetra vs pendulum where there is a unit circle distance between the pendulum and antispinning hand or Ronan's pendulum vs CAP hybrid. As long as the non-pendulum move is sufficiently slow you can really combine pendulum with anything. Other examples: cateye vs pendulum, extension vs pendulum. I did a video on many of these tricks here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMljLtddHiQ

Edit: Tank, I think I may have mistook your point in the above. If you're asking what I think you're asking, then yes there should be a hand/poi variant for every hand/hand pendulum-based hybrid.

@Mother_Natures_Son: hand/hand examples: triquetra vs extension (the mercedes), cateye vs extension, triquetra vs pendulum, etc. In each case the hands share the same path, though they do not have to be at the same place on the path to qualify. The relationship between them can be thought of as derivative of any of the four major combinations of timing and direction and each will yield a unique "flavor" of the particular hybrid as contrasting shapes coalesce at different points in the cycle.

My "hand/hand" comment was in response to Tankboy whose comment I read seemed to imply that there head to be a hand/head interaction.

I replied with "hand/hand" quite simply to state that hand/hand was an option that would allow pendulums to fit into the rule.

I the Russel's video he says:


I think, it's correctly 1/2 = CAP circle, pendulum 1/2 circle,exetended by anti-spin..

So, the CAP originaly reffere to "assemble pattern" that
for sure it is, but visualy reffere to half circle motion
as first show by Maelle in Romaro video or by Yuta,
also described as paracircle.


I want more !

All right, I've reallized that one hand can compose CAP,
but one hand can't compose extended cat-eye.

What does in meen, it's composite?

(not that anyone's holding their breath, but I haven't forgotten about this thread. Still processing the influx of stuff from Drex, and am also picking up enough group theory to address symmetry formally. [Also bringing in some category theory since I think we may not be after symmetry, but something better handled by groupoids.] Anyone's guess when the follow-up posts will be, though.)

I just found this thread.... weeee!



Sister Eleven, I'd love to discuss my concept of symmetry in poi with you, and hear what you have to say about group theory!

That said, I think this issue of a clear definition of Hybrid has gone round and round as Ed said. As has what a CAP is. If we keep focusing on the trees we will miss the forrest.

Here is the bigger picture: The people posting in this thread are all exploring poi and object/body manipulation on a level way beyond what the words (or acronyms) "hybrid" or "CAP", and their attempted definitions thus far, can accommodate. So let's stop trying to expand the definitions into complete dilution of specificity.

In 2007, mostly on Tribe.net and my early Youtube simulations, I started using the term "composite"... It started out as an attempt at a new classification for the things that didn't fit neatly into the understanding of hybrid of CAP at the time. What it lead me to was that I needed to majorly upgrade (and dissect) my mental model for the attributes of poi physics. So I started thinking of it more as a way of understanding what I was doing with poi patterns. I was "compositing" samples of other simpler patterns I know together in interesting and harmonic ways. Wile compositing poi patterns, what I was doing could still sometimes be labeled as being like a hybrid and/or CAP.

I will say this that I seem to agree with Damian & Drex on this:
CAPs can be accomplished with only one poi and have to do with sequencing different geometric figures together over time.
Hybrids need 2 poi relating to one another.


At this point I've moved focus beyond just sampling elements of other poi patterns and have been focused on better understanding the physics and geometry of what we do on a more fundamental level, like understanding music synthesis from the sine-wave on up.

There is a trend in poi towards "movement synthesis", in the same spirit as the development of electronic music syntheses. It is no longer as simple as talking about what musical instrument is playing what notes, or even what samples of what instruments you are arranging together. There is enough understanding of manipulating the physics of sound to both synthesis an instrument's wave producing attributes, and isolate/tweak those attributes until you have morphed the character of that instrument's sound into something completely different. When does a piano sound stop sounding like a piano and start sounding like a guitar, when you are making subtle changes to different sonic attributes?

The same is true for poi.

Out of all the possible sequences of all the possible additive sine-waves that can be expressed in sound, most of it sounds like noise and cacophony, too chaotic for us to discern pattern let alone beauty. The same is true for the possible sequences of human body movement, as well as the graph over time of 2 spinning objects.

We find something intriguing and beautiful where we find patterns, repetition, cycles, and harmonic proportions.

So let's stop talking about hybrids and CAPs, and lets start talking about movement synthesis. Lets upgrade our collective mental models of a few things:

A) How our bodies can move effectively & and safely in expressive ways.

B) The physics of how we create interesting geometric proportions and relations expressed by spinning objects over time.

C) Finding the Sweet-spots where A & B work together in harmony.

C is the collection of what we find interesting about poi.

For the past couple of years I've been increasingly breaking everything down into 1D oscillatory components. Then looking at the symmetries that can be observed in the 3D + T combinations of those oscillators as representative of what we do with poi.

I need a breather but I'm going to start another thread as a forum to discus where I'm at in modeling these ideas. I'll link to from here it soon.

*UPDATE* I started a related thread called Object Manipulation Synthesis

Hey Jon once again we seem to have a similar mindset !

Since we met at BM in 2007, i have as well pushed further my researches and i am actually finalizing a "spinning" notation which is basically an kind of analogy of music theory. Basically, this is an extension of what i mentionned in this post a few monthes ago.

I am close to get to the point of a direct conversion between the music notation (mostly rythmes) and the spinning patterns. Again, for instance nothing is really layed on paper (I just did a few workshops at the National French Juggling Convention last week) but as i'll have time this summer all of this could emerge soon (i hope).

The notation (called SPLIN) can be computable on a simulator (working with Flash AS for instance). I am restructuring my initial version in an object oriented one ... that's why it has not been released so far.




Hey Unregistred here is a link about the notion of " Paracircle", as i am not sure of your definition below. If you have any question let me know.

Tschüss.

Zalty.

*droooool*

Wow...I would love love love to take a look at this. A primary goal of mine when I started dissecting hybrids and their ilk was to come out of it with a system of poi notation that would be universal enough to not just describe the movements we currently had access to, but all their derivatives we hadn't seen yet. It sounds here like you have a vast head-start on me. Anything I can do to help you shepherd this to something that can be posted/shared?