[SUB-SPACE (ma chronosphere)] [^^fleeding HOME page]## mfa MAIN page

mfa: [Intro] [creativity] [modeling] [Text] [tools] If they give you paper with lines on it, turn the paper the other way, and write across the lines. -- Juan Ramone Jiminez Now I even traveled with the orchestra to Burgdorf to play the Pastoral Symphony and various trifles. I earned twenty francs. From time to time I return to the small picture on a plate, technical attractions to tempt and delude me. With watercolours as long as possible, then fix them and use oils on top. This operation comes to a rapid and dismal end. "Resigned Man in Spring", that is probably what I shall soon be myself. Now it is still December and it is still 1902. -- Paul Klee If you do not understand my 5th symphony. Then you do not understand anything about my work'. -- Dimitrii Shostakovich See also: -^_6 On this page: {Introduction} {z-thinking}

## Introduction

This work is an attempt to (at least partially) linearise what is essentially the non-linear process in the visual arts. Specifically, the work that i do as an 2-d and often 4-d artist. There are several aspects to this process that will be of interest in this investigation; namely, our old friends: [asesthetics] [creativity] [modeling] [text] [tools] It might well be a good idea to at least familiarise yourself with those pages. Use the BACK key to return to this page. The process of art is naturally one that (like ANY art) draws upon the current state of mind of artist, evevnts of the moment (both personal and global), as well as the history of the artist in the pursuit of their art. We as artists are forever stepping into the river of time (past, present, and future), and at the same time we are grounded in a linear process of things that happen to us and in our lives.

## z-thinking

## z-thinking

This an attempt to put down as rationally and clearly as possible the results of my (thus-far) research into the areas of creativity and understanding. I diliberately use in my work "odd" formating, spelling, punctuation, etc. And that's just from a "formal textual" POV (point-of-view). The key progress is not just innovation. Himler saw too it that the NAZI's developed a more innovative way of killing women and children when he saw how they suffered in the "normal" fashion. Indeed, as Jeff Goldblum (in the role of "Dr. Malcomb" in Spielberg's presentation of Michael Criton's "Jurassic Park") put it: Your scientists were so pre-occupied if they could, that they didn't stop to think if they should. We are again reminded of Einstein's warning (and from a man who most certainly KNEW (in that most horrible of ways) the dangers of can and shoulld: It is not enough that you should understand about applied science in order that your work may increase man's. Concern for man and his fate must always form the chief interest of all technical endeavors... in order that the creations of our mind shall be a blessing and not a curse to mankind. Never forget this in the midst of your diagrams and equations. -- Albert Einstein That i should start this work (ostensibley a "magnum opus" (Latin: Great Work) with so many quotations is part and parcel to the problem of understanding. How shall we understand? And by what means shall we gain the tools TO UNDERSTAND? And what nature shall this understading be of? It seems to me (i could and probably should start EVERY sentecne that i utter with the phrase "it seems to me"). It seems to me that in the new millenium, we will certainly need to THINK and UNDERSTAND in a new way. Otherwise, many are sure to suffer, and in the end we (tlu: Those Like Us) will be doomed as well. If you (dear reader; as Isaac Asimov used to address his readers) have been attentive, you can already begin to understand the nature of what i'm trying to do here. Some sort of new synthesis as well as a "tieing together" of past synthesises; er, ah: synthi? Actually translating Latin's complex and often iregular grammar into modern English (and especially the "King's English") is frought with dimlemmas. START AGAIN (as they say in "Monty Python Land")...## Geometric Thinking

We can use geometry as an ANALOGUE to algebra. And in the same way we can reverse the process -- although it seems to me that the process is NOT symmetric; ie, Alegbra acting on X ---> Geometric view of X, call it X' does not give us: Geometry acting on X' ---> returns the Algebraic view of X pristine and as it "was". The futurist/author Philip K. Dick explored this in his short story "The Preserving Machine". In which a professor concerned about the survival of civilisation (particularly Classical Music) created a machine to convert works into creatures. Unfortunately, after the creatures were released, the natural forces of evolution came into play. Some short works were wiped out (eaten) completely, others adapted and when reverse-transmogrified the original music could at times only be slightly recognised. Thus, i would state the first axiom of my thinking: AXIOM 1: You can't really ever go home again. That this should be a trite phrase (that despite the efforts of convservative Hollywood to prevent with the sappy ending of their rendering of Frank L. Baum's "The Wizard of Oz" -- in the books it WASN'T a dream; in fact Dorthy return a dozen times to Oz) should be obvious is an indication of the power of z-thinking.## z-thinking: redux

Redux is a wonderful word. Or should that be: "Redux" is wonderful word. Or should that be:Reduxis a wonderful word. But, then i don't mean: Redux, i mean the word redux -- no capital otherwise, i would be speaking about words such as: redux reduX redUx redUX reDux ... REDUx REDUX (there are 2^5 or 32 of them in all) This is the power of z. (pun clearly intended). But, what is z (or is it "z" or "Z" or rather notZor... START AGAIN## Helpful Digression Ahead

In psychology, there is a test based on the folloiwng choices: Choose the one item below that most describes you: A circle A triangle A square The Letter Z The results are interpreted (in the psychological way of thinking/understanding) as follows: If you chose This means a cirlce You are very sensious a triangle You are very loyal a square You are very conservative (big drum roll now) The letter 'z' You are very creative/imaginative Hence, my phrase "z-thinking" But, wait! There's more! If you order NOW, you will also receive this handsome lounge suite!!!!! (applause) START AGAIN## z-thinking - thesis?

If z is as powerful as all of that, then we should best be carefull how we weld it. After all, until we know the full metalurgical properties of "z", we might set off a chain reaction that could well destroy the Earth's atomosphere -- well at least the 80% of it that is Nitrogen. (a parable based on an actual calculation that the atomic bomb could do just that) START AGAIN. Wield z carefully. So, on a wild whim (based on years of suffering and experience)... Try a cube as the basis for the first chronosphere: A cube has 6 faces; why any crap shooter knows that. And has a total of 12 edges; have to give that one some thought -- better yet, count the edges of a sugar cube (if such still exist). And it has 8 vertexes; vertices, corners if you will. Thus, from our first experiment into three dimensions, we get: Absurdity Art Fractal Future Humanism Jazz Science Spirituality Yes, all very nice. But, are these the CORRECT ones? The question is meaningless: A combination of ANY VARIABLES will yield a useful set of nodes for any possible chronosphere. For example, take dyads: Male Female -- an obvious one. Male Football -- a very trite and stereo-typical one Female Sewing Yes, but what about the geometric representation of these (or any) dyad? Male o---------o Female -- again, an obvious choice But what about this: Male o----|----o Female -- the center line is obviousely neuter A VERY IMPORTANT POINT THAT MIGHT NOT BE OBVIOUS THe "|" is the dividing line, also known as the distinguishing mark. This simple (and until the mid 20th century overlooked) fact was the basis for understanding the so-called ["Laws of Form"] which was done by G. Spenser Brown (who had previously studied under Bertrand Russell (who with North Whitehead (who together attempted to completely anchor all of mathematics in Algebraic forms))). Thus, we must say that AB and A'B are two separate forms, and most importantly we must address the how-ness of they way they are separated; ie: What FUNCTION does the ' implement? Now coniser this diagram: But, now consider bending the straign line as in the above diagram -- don's worry, it's still "1 dimensional" (well mostly). "WHat's happening?" asks Arthur Dent in Douglas Noel Adams' 5-part triliogy: "The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy". To which his friend replies: "We're passing thru HyperSpace". (perhaps now would be a good time to go get a cup of tea or some popcorn from the lobby or whatever is your hobby -- ref to: "It's a Mad, Mad,, Mad, world".) CONTINUE HERE (for now) When we bend the line into a circle we are literally taking it thru hyperspace. That is, we are taking a ONE dimensional object (a line segment in this case) and "crossing it over" into TWO dimensions. That this doesn't seem all that weird. Let's do two experiments. 1. Cut out two strips of paper about 17" long (about the length of 11x17 paper or A4 (42 cm) paper. Each strip should be about 3 cm (about 1-1/2 inches) wide. 2. On each piece of paper draw a line down the center (use a ruler if you like). Do this on both sides. (You will later cut the paper along this line). Experiment one: Make a band by taping the ends together. Experiment two: Make a band, but give it a HALF TWIST before taping the ends together. 3. Carefully cut the bands in half by cutting along the centre line. 4. Disucss the results of the two experiments. 5. Google: Moebius Strip EXTRA CREDIT: Google: Klein Bottle.## Z-thinking: NOt just for breakfast any more!

So, at this point you begin to get an idea of what z-thinking can do. Note that another reason for calling it "z-thinking" is that most of think in 2-dimensions (X and Y in normal algebra/geometry). But, when we go up a set of stairs (better yet, when we go up in a lift (elevator), or in a plane, etc) we are going into the "Z dimension" or the "Z direction". That is, we are getting outside of our usual 2-dimensional world. That's where z-thinking is going.## Enter i

If we had just stopped there, then the world would be safe. It would have un-limited rice pudding and all would be well. Mostly. But, then we already know the next part of the equation. AXIOM 2: Whenever anything is "elevated" out of its normal dimension, it becomes not only more complex, but more powerful; and hence more dangerous. Thus, we saw that even the small, beautiful word "redux" had "hide-ing within" it, 32 various forms -- and that was just from the operation: Permute the letters (upper and lower case, not position) of the word REDUX. This gave rise to an equation: 2^5 Binary (2) because each PLACE in the word has ONLY TWO STATES R E D U X r e d u x and To the Fifth Power (5) because there are FIVE PLACES in the word. Now, for the power of z (caution ahead, please re-read Uncle Al's warning, above). i = e.e. cumming;s self-referential form, as opposed to "I am here" he would write "i am here" i = the unit vector in the X-direction i = the square root of -l etc But mostly: i = imagination Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, and imagination has no bounds. -- Albert Einstein (local news caster?) Thus, z^i (It staggers the mind, but personally, it gives me the willies; 42)