# Universal Pattern



## Chicago Green Dragon (Apr 4, 2003)

A while ago I remember reading one of GM Parkers Kenpo books and he was talking about the Universal Pattern. He mentioned that as we see it now it is not in its true form. The patern was was a more complicated.

I was wondering if anybody has ever created a 3-d version of it to show its full form?


Thanks

Chicago Green 
Dragon    :asian:


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Apr 4, 2003)

This pattern image


----------



## jeffkyle (Apr 4, 2003)

Don't know if this is what he meant, but it is a neat pic.


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Apr 4, 2003)

Thank you for the pic posting. I have seen that one but I was thinking that it would be more complicated and advanced.
I do think its a good effort. But the more I thought about it I could see something more intricate.

Chicago Green
Dragon   :asian:


----------



## KenpoGirl (Apr 4, 2003)

How much more intricate can it get than the second picture????

:shrug:


----------



## Robbo (Apr 4, 2003)

> But the more I thought about it I could see something more intricate.



Here's a project, develop a self defense following all the paths of movement in the 3D Universal Pattern.  

I'm not sure you can get more intricate than what is shown without the concept being lost.

Maybe if you were a little more concise as to what you are looking for.....

Rob

P.S. Like most things in EPAK it is just a guidline to tailor to your individual tastes. If you have a geometrically inclined mind and can imagine a more complex UP then by all means use it. It's just that the visual representation is limited by the medium.


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Apr 4, 2003)

Hmm I was thinking something more b-spline oriented.

Instead of spheres using b-splines to define the paths.


Chicago Green
Dragon  :asian:


----------



## KenpoGirl (Apr 4, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Robbo _
> *Here's a project, develop a self defense following all the paths of movement in the 3D Universal Pattern.
> 
> I'm not sure you can get more intricate than what is shown without the concept being lost.
> ...




About the only person that could do that would be Neo from the Matrix.  Hey maybe he'll do that on the matrix 2 or 3.


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Apr 4, 2003)

ok I realized after I posted my last reply.

That people are problably going to say what is a B-Spline.

B-Spline - A generalization of the Bézier curve.

This might be an easier explaination of what I was thinking.

Imagine a 3 dimensional universal pattern. But instead of the spheres used in the photo above. You would use curves (splines) with thickness. 
When you think of it. Think of a wooden ships planks that make up the hull and create the paths that way.

:soapbox: 

Chicago Green
Dragon   
:asian:


----------



## Robbo (Apr 4, 2003)

> Hmm I was thinking something more b-spline oriented.
> 
> Instead of spheres using b-splines to define the paths.



But....Kenpo (all martial arts) is based on circles of movement. Nothing in the human bocy moves in a straight line or in a Bezier spline type of movement. All of our movement comes out of circles of motion.

Besides a Bezier Spline could be broken up into many small arcs and what better way to represent movement that to break it down to it's basics. 

I not disagreeing that movements could be based on a bezier spline but what's that spline based on....controls points, weighting, curvature, which is a heck of a lot harder to explain to the average joe. Like rank the UP means everything and nothing at the same time. You could explain it to death or just use it to illustrate a particular motion.

Rob


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Apr 4, 2003)

Rob

im looking at defining the path more precisely. That is why I was thinking of B-splines..

Chicago Green
Dragon   :asian:


----------



## Robbo (Apr 4, 2003)

> im looking at defining the path more precisely. That is why I was thinking of B-splines..



I would think that if you tried to define the path more precisely, ironically the 3D sketch would degenerate and just look like scribbling on paper. Maybe a computer holodeck  would do it justice. I don't think it can represented on paper though....too many variables.

Rob :asian:


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Apr 4, 2003)

Hmm I think you are right about a holodeck

Maybe the only real way to show it in its absolute form is in a holodeck. Captain Kirk Beam me up  :shrug: 

 


Chicago Green
Dragon   :asian:


----------



## Robbo (Apr 4, 2003)

LOL  

Interesting idea though. I don't post much except if it piques my curiosity like your did. Thanks.

Rob


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Apr 6, 2003)

Thanks Rob

I guess I am a bit out there sometimes.

LOL


Chicago Green
Dragon   :asian:


----------



## Kenpomachine (Apr 6, 2003)

Shouldn't there be a cube in the 3D?


----------



## Robbo (Apr 6, 2003)

There is a square on a 45 deg angle in the centre but you also can just join any 4 intersection points and get a square.

Rob


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Apr 6, 2003)

I did a mock up using the 9 different planes.   I just talked to someone the other day about making one up to illustrate several visual points of reference.

:asian:


----------



## Kenpomachine (Apr 7, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Robbo _
> *There is a square on a 45 deg angle in the centre but you also can just join any 4 intersection points and get a square.
> 
> Rob *



I saw the square, but that isn't the same as a cube. I had problems as well with the dodecaedrus (sp?), but it's possible that it's just my 3D vision. But no cube anywhere...


----------



## Robbo (Apr 7, 2003)

> I saw the square, but that isn't the same as a cube.



The UP that you see is a 2D representation so you are not going to see a cube. If you are referring to the 3D image, then just join 8 equidistant points to get a cube. 

Most of the paths of action you will extrapolate out of the UP will be 2D representations....triangle, circle, line, square....all the basic shapes. If you go deeper it becomes a lot more difficult to put into words. Remember the UP is a teaching aid therefore we use it to make concepts clearer, not to complicate things.

Do you have an example of a action that is a cube?

Rob


----------



## Kenpomachine (Apr 7, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Robbo _
> *The UP that you see is a 2D representation so you are not going to see a cube. If you are referring to the 3D image, then just join 8 equidistant points to get a cube. *
> 
> I was refering to the 3D. If it was a projection of the UP, there should be a cube and no need to join the points.
> ...



The action won't be a cube, but a side of that cube, think of it like a mopping, sweepping (maybe I'm getting this more confusing????). It's like a plane of motion.


----------



## Michael Billings (Apr 7, 2003)

Path of Motion as vs. Line of Motion.  Think a squeegee or winshield wiper, with movement along the entire length of the blade.  This could be the movement along one side of the cube (inside or outside the cube.)

-Michael


----------



## Kenpomachine (Apr 8, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Michael Billings _
> *Path of Motion as vs. Line of Motion.  Think a squeegee or winshield wiper, with movement along the entire length of the blade.  This could be the movement along one side of the cube (inside or outside the cube.)
> 
> -Michael *



That's exactly what I was thinking about, the windshield wiper  
Thanks


----------



## True2Kenpo (Apr 12, 2003)

Green Dragon and others,

Many times I find myself drawing the Universal Pattern in classes and such, and the more I thought about it I was always told that the Universal will cover every conceivable angle, line, circle, etc...

So with that in mind, wouldn't the pattern if drawn or made as a model be just about solid in that every angel would be covered and there would be no gaps?

Thanks for your comments in advance.  Good journey!

Respectfully,
Joshua Ryer
UPK Pittsburgh


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Apr 12, 2003)

> _Originally posted by True2Kenpo _*
> Green Dragon and others,
> 
> Many times I find myself drawing the Universal Pattern... wouldn't the pattern if drawn or made as a model be  a solid black ball, in that every angel would be covered and there would be no gaps?
> ...



Yep, that would be a big "correct"!  

:asian:


----------



## sumdumguy (Apr 15, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Chicago Green Dragon _
> *Hmm I was thinking something more b-spline oriented.
> 
> Instead of spheres using b-splines to define the paths.
> ...


I don't have bspliens but if you have 3d publisher I did put together an animated version of of a 3-d universal pattern. I will see if I can save it as an animated gif? it took a while to do, a couple of years, but it's pretty cool.


----------



## jeffkyle (Apr 15, 2003)

> _Originally posted by sumdumguy _
> *I don't have bspliens but if you have 3d publisher I did put together an animated version of of a 3-d universal pattern. I will see if I can save it as an animated gif? it took a while to do, a couple of years, but it's pretty cool. *



I would like a copy of it, if you can get it animated as a gif.  I don't have 3D publisher though.


----------



## Randy Strausbaugh (May 17, 2003)

> _Originally posted by True2Kenpo _
> *Green Dragon and others,
> 
> .. wouldn't the pattern if drawn or made as a model be just about solid in that every angel would be covered and there would be no gaps?
> ...


* 

Yep.  Just like a big black dot. Hmmmmmmmmm.

Trying to avoid life's potholes,
Randy Strausbaugh*


----------

