File deleuze-guattari/deleuze-guattari.0512, message 25

Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 13:20:12 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: [D-G] maths.

<<<You may find this boring, but it is also used in Deleuze: The Euclidean
<<<a little bit puzzled, being the mathematical represent ant of the state.
  in the book by newmand nagel on g=F6del there is euclide speaking, and an analysis by logic symbols like you know p and q etc, of the euclidian presupose, and this gives the opportunity for euclide to expose its method b4 it was argued to be self contradicted by logicians of 20th century like Frege or Russel, then G=F6del. And Euclide to me is not boring when he speaks. I think it's like Deleuze said about Plato, he constructed something, i find mathematics of Euclide close to concepts, something of greek philosophy, eg. theorem of infinite, the infinite is invented by the need of mathematic, and this is a fasinating momentum in mankinds history. 
  so what you describe is boring only because its not creation, its what we mostly all have learned in school, its a summary of the activity of maths, not the real practice/creation, invention. what i think and why i ask you, here is since you say your a mathematician, is to be capable to address the non mathematician, not in making summaries as you just did, but by constructing. and rhizomize. instead of talking by words, and expressing your lack of faith in the artist, a kind of blindness, we would meet where we can, in creating something. you yourself were interested last year by proposal i adline did on the rhizomes movement. so in this way, it could be possible, to have you, and since you said it in one of your last mails, the expression/content abstract machine of function and matter non formed, tensors etc, you said we had a common ground, let's ex^ploit it. send emails with writing maths formulas, don't get shy. nietzsche said it, its the humility of the scientistis, so
 characteristic, you've read these Nietzsche passage, laboriously, the gravitas of working for the state apparatus. but every creator in maths, in science escapes from that, invents a war machine. i guess euclidian mathematics itself, before it became an apparatus part of the schools and universities and the discipline of thought, was a war machine, or very very close to it. if its not the case let's make it become so. so send emails with formulas. what do you need. what is wrong with this lsit for you? what do you need so you become creative, and the best part of you becomes active on this list? so that you and the others can be their best part, and relate to each others by best parts, by their perfecthood.
  <<If you need the topological definition,
<<broadly speaking the border of a
<<set of the power of a continuum is one dimension less than the
<<original set, you can look on a book on topology,
<<for example Whyburn, Analytical Topology.
  What is Philosophy as a chapter on science starting with Cantor theory of set, have a look at it. it's passionating yet very harsh to try and get it. what original set. is it the border forming a new set by being defined and created, did you speak of an original set. i had the same problem reading guattari's theory on Cantor, very difficult. i managed to get a decipherment 4 myself, but here come again the orginal set, about which noone has talked b4, can you clarify?

<In this way it is done in Euclidean spaces.

<Now string theory, a little bit popular by Stephen Hawkings book
<on a short history of time:
<The ground idea is, that instead of points without any
<dimension and extension as in normal as Newtonian mechanics,
<one puts a closed curve - the string - as starting point for describing the
<movement of particles and bodies.
<Sometimes it gives some troubles therefore.
<Now, in the development of the formulas
<describing the tubes of the movement of the string, the energies and the
<there is one point, where we have an equation which holds
<only if the dimension is taken to be ten.
<This is then satisfactory from a mathematical point of view,
<but physically everyone asks: Where are the left seven dimensions?
<As far as I know this question has not be answered in a
<sound way - also in regard to experimental data.
  you say there is one point. how is discovered this point. is it a given? why is this point needed? is it discovered, or created for an other purpose? how does it work? why would they choose to have closed curves, and for instance not open curves. because points become closed curves, so its an evolution of "classical" previous dimensional space.? something interesting why always vectorial space is represented in a fixed geometry, why is it never moving, movements. more esay probably.but since it is about physic, then the figures of the geometry could be moving themselves, no?
  ok tell me about how are these notions introduced. how rhiemann for example argues for the necessity of these notion to modify classical mathematics, euclidian ones, cartesians space? what is the genesis, the exteriority? ok greetings. Liz


I think that maybe enough for now.

Greetings Harald Wenk

-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of Liza
Sent: Freitag, 2. Dezember 2005 20:40
Subject: Re: [D-G] malgosia, Virginia, please your turn to speak.

it's not a phantasm. if you think by common notion, outside of the
imagination, you can learn to see how it works, not only the ideas that are
anchored by intellectual discourse, but and thus out of anykind of
interpretation, propaganda, you see how it works, how wee have or are being
asked to surrender some part of ourselves for the highest powers of society.
it's really not a phantasm. it's not immediately visible. you could get
hallucination, see subliminal message and want to destroy your clock, your
tv as a mystic. but what is important is to resist, to fight, not only to
love God. it's the way of Abraham, to disobey, to turn the face away from
God as God turns his face the other way. so it's not the discourse of
imagination, of interpretation, of signs, is the discourse of analysis,
instead than being analysed, you give the power to your body, to other
people's body. much interested by artaud at the moment, when speaking about
stage. in a world of Elie Faure's Indians
in a mountain, people have lost, been stolen, either it is by capitalist
war machines either by the state, i am trying to make the analysis, what is
this, what is that, the proportions in the mixture, every elements, so
there's analysis, but yet i (and thus it's virtualities, none less real!)
and i want to work my mind in this direction at the moment.

for what you say on not being proud. i think it's related because i don't
line up to the vanities of human's celebration, there search for happyness.
i think its part of class. classes who belong to the Image of Thought of the
State or Capitalism, the Upper Classes, or the Upper Men, want to have
standards, and i think, your judgment stems out from that, it's a Upper
Class standard that drives you to tell me I am not proud.
Pride is actually a matter of solitude, it's alone that you find pride,
you have to invent your own values. It's not that there is no pride, but
it's a virtue, not a moral, social jugment. ok?

hwenk wrote:
Hello Liza,

it looks like you are not very proud of yourself.

Sometimes the machinery and the world which is about to
swallow one up or deform one is only a little bit
a phantasm. As in Deleuze there is no phantasms, as far as I know, it may be
a thinking with its affects almost on the whole to the own mind.

Often the world does not know anything about the cruelties she does to
people thinking to be a victim of her.

As my advices do not end, this time I give a
appraisal of self-content happiness.
As we say in mathematics: "The details are left to the reader."

greetings Harald Wenk

-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of Liza
Sent: Donnerstag, 1. Dezember 2005 05:24
Subject: Re: [D-G] malgosia, Virginia, please your turn to speak.

Ok, i have just made this decision. Let's keep merry. Let's not debate.
Let's just keep everything as usual.

I am sorry if we have to be resigned, if we have to be little worms. It's
the world, the arrangements who want it. Let'us be dashes of vanishing
non-dimensional point, particles in chaotic fusion. Actualities disappearing
with not awareness of the speed at which they are vanishing.

And the example of mathematics? Well, it's good. Let's keep this aswell.
Part of the sum. We're part of the sum. Living in the imaginating
phantasmatic procession of algebraic numbers.

I am rotten. It's michievous. I at least voice my truth. Not a Maria
Bellen, saying, singing creativity and keeping silent. I am a worm which
speaks. It speaks on a list which is good as an absurdity. We're working for
the memory of a guy who decided there would be a list or lists.

So let's avoid my proposition for a debate. It's absurd as well. This is
absurd aswell. I like the way I am advancing, in the walls. My had crashes
and i go up up up in the realm of vanishing words, words with no meanings.
Like a snake I am growing.

To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo!
Security Centre.
List address:

List address:

How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE
with Yahoo! Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos
List address:

List address:

How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos
List address:


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005