cage's relating 26 to each lesser int

to be playing John Cage (JC, Jesus Christ, as my teacher of Grapes Of Wrath pointed out) in a film I am thinking of being him, and uncovering similar decisions (that the second coming might laugh at the first coming, looking in on a superseded instantiation. (thought before current cage involvement, before remembering GoW) maybe as the relation of a zodiacal sign to its predecessor. limitations)
an examination of the decisions inherent to the tables in John Cage's Song Books
13:13:12:13:13;// 64/5=12+(4/5);(12*5)+(1*4)=64,
      five twelves, four of them increased by one.
10:11:11:11:11:10;// 64/6=10+(4/6);(10*6)+(1*4)=64,
      six tens, four of them increased by one.
9:9:9:10:9:9:9;// (9*7)+(1*1),
       seven nines, one of them increased by one...
7:7:7:7:8:7:7:7:7;// (7*9)+(1*1)
7:7:6:6:6:6:6:6:7:7;// (6*10)+(1*4)
       // so why not 6:6:6:7:7:7:7:6:6:6 ?
5:6:6:6:6:6:6:6:6:6:5;// (5*11)+(1*9)
5:5:5:5:6:6:6:6:5:5:5:5;// (5*12)+(1*4)
5:5:5:5:5:5:4:5:5:5:5:5:5;// (4*13)+(1*12
       // in this case I can explain the bimodal distribution
4:4:4:5:5:5:5:5:5:5:5:4:4:4;// (4*14)+(1*8)
5:5:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:5:5;// (4*15)+(1*4)// and here also
3:3:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:3:3;// (3*17)+(1*13)
4:4:4:4:4:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:4:4:4:4:4;// (3*18)+(1*10
        //  why not 3:3:3:3:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:3:3:3:3?
3:3:3:3:3:3:4:4:4:4:4:4:4:3:3:3:3:3:3;// (3*19)+(1*7)
4:4:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:4:4;// (3*20)+(1*4)
3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:4:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3;// (3*21)+(1*1)
2:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:2;// (2*22)+(1*20)
3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:2:2:2:2:2:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3;// (2*23)+(1*18
  // explained (4 cases: odd and even*quotients and remainders)
2:2:2:2:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:3:2:2:2:2;// (2*24)+(1*16)
       (2*25)+(1*14)// explained
        (2*28)+(1*8)// why not {{10:8:10}}
        (2*29)+(1*6)// explained I suppose
        (2*30)+(1*4)// why not {{13:4:13}}
this as it was, as of last typing week.
and in the time since then, a simpler explaining abstraction of 'symmetry' (optimality theory taste), closer to what might inhere to the tables
?parallel to Schoenholtz' examination of the probabilities in yarrow stalk  method of I Ching cast.
'smoothness' [consider "moments" (of inertia, of distribution. I have not yet understood this verbal yƫgen cloud in which some physics masters are smiling.)]
composed as music might be, ?smooth-modulations progress

kinds of heat VI

note regarding Kinds Of Heat posts and investigations I have found something that perhaps should have been assumed from the premise and ways of talking: infrared radiation can be polarized! thus carrying some quality or coefficient which may serve to explain it's differentiation into kinds. To be examined the description shape implications of 'polarization' and how the shapes apply to a possibly structuring of the kinds of heat. more generally, an analysis of these shape domains (quartets, rings.. missing patches) and meanings in theories. the converse possible realization that after examining the structure of the kinds of heat (like laying out of the periodic table) it bears a structural relation to the shapes implied by the facts on polarization, and hence conclusion that the 'coefficient (sonantique)' is polarization, and therefore that ir may be polarized.
a book of just these shapes, and a longer appendix of further possibles, to be named later. I can see the fonts