{C[ircles] A[nalysis &] S[ynthesis] Personal Periods

[Redbook7:179-180][19900731:2305b]{C[ircles] A[nalysis &] S[ynthesis] Personal Periods}[31st July 1990]

19900731.2305

[continued]

The greater the period, I suspect, the greater the influence; but immediate periods have immediate influence. The quicker the change, the more noticeable it will be as a change; the longer the period, the more apparent as a period.*

It seems not implausible, then, that the 32-year and 16-year cycles should have degree periods (4 and 2 years respectively) long enough to be easily noticeable as periods, yet short enough in passing for the changes to be easily noticeable as well. The idea is that 1 year (the degree of an 8 year cycle) is too short (and too much overlaid with other factors) to be identifiable as a qualitative period in its own right, while 8 years (for a 64 year cycle) is too long for us to be aware, at the time, of the change.

This conveniently justifies my emphasis on the 16-year and 32-year cycles.

*(Copied from [[Redbook7:176-177][19900730:1007d]{Crisis Resolution in Personal Cycles (6) [continued (3)]}[30th July 1990],] p177 immediately after writing it there)

[PostedBlogger25072021]