hwenk at web.de
Fri Dec 2 09:57:00 PST 2005
it is a little bit funny, but the quote of Deleuze concerning
the most accelerated conjunction of particles and signs
gives us a good common ground.
Let us for fun think, that deliric poetry or
thinking leaving as much as possible a
narrative or otherwise organized social code
were the most deterriolized and, in a way, the most powerful, expressing and
having the highest degree of freedom.
The subjective fallacy of that is that one has to be used to
handle such high energetic signs.
There you have to be in a very healthy, more Olympic, state, both bodily
and in regard of faculty of thinking.
A lot of critic people are inclined to drink a lot and move little or sleep
to little or have to much stress, weakening their body and mind.
The advantage of mathematics in this regard is the high degree of
Not everything in mathematics is correct, so you have to be very
strenghtfull in thinking, for things get very soon very complicated.
This is not the case in poetry or political discourses, where the danger to
go astray without
noticing it is very high.
This gives a feeling of freedom, not related to any greater outward, not
real freedom itself.
But in reality, technology is highly based on physics, which in turn is
highly based on
mathematics - especially differential equations and calculus, where tensors
a multi dimensional example, mostly matrices of the first or second
Originally there where stress tensors, describing the movement and forces
acting on a body or a flow
What book of maths would be favourable to read depends on the knowledge
which is already there.
The list of authors given have written a lot.
Spivak and Stoker wrote good and exhaustive books about riemmanian
The work of Gödel is to mathematics a little bit strange, it doesn't play
any role in
research praxis, except mathematical logic.
The best would be, to r ead the article of Gödel himself.
I think it is in the annals of mathematics from the year 1931.
But there are no constrains from Gödel for mathematics,
for to decide for every sentence if it is derivable from a given sysrem of
axioms is not a feature demanded and to
produce by adding new axioms if needed - by Deleuze also puttiong as a place
of political battle.
Lewis Carroll was a founder of mathematical logic, the stories about a Alice
a very funny.
The best quote is
"Paperlapap - the question is, who has the power" . from Alice behind the
I think this is a deep rooted thinking, even inspiring Deleuze, especially
by poltical oriented people.
As you know, the idea of essences is, that they don't exclude one another as
Therefore their combination is the dream and model of a joyful and peaceful
synergetic world of the mind.
In practice this means, that the academic world maybe world with the highest
being less competitive, with most respect and at least cruel and not
dominated by narcism.
Narcism is also a danger of poetry and political discourses.
To put it short for you, mathematics is a way of thinking in contact with
something real and social
guaranteed too, as being plain understandable - which is not the case for
poetry and politics.
Deleuze himself reminds the role statistics play
in social science, as reasearch of mass processes in his (and my) opinion
with full right.
Maybe not in the form as it is practiced now, but looking at six billion
without the aid of statistics and probability theory looks not very at the
height of the problems.
Best wishes (who are acting always in the near As Deleuze and Guattari say
Dr. Harald Wenk
From: deleuze-guattari-bounces at lists.driftline.org
[mailto:deleuze-guattari-bounces at lists.driftline.org]On Behalf Of Liza
Sent: Dienstag, 29. November 2005 15:33
To: deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org
Subject: Re: [D-G] maths.
That's cool of you. I am fine you know. My deliriums are real, but i don't
have to suffer, so I don't have to "think" they are false. I don't need to
put them into question. I know and see it's the choice between accepting the
capitalist infantilisation, the propaganda and their benefactors will to
power. And delirium is a possibility for something else, a kind of first
step towards a healthy life. Because people need to rely on principles
corrected constantly by the propagand of the real which is signifiant today,
they would think, ho, at contrary, I cannot, for myself, submit to delirium.
Well you are born an idiot you remain one all of your life, that's what
Nevertheless I must admit math study is capable to play a good influence
on us here, especially what I liked was Lewis Carol logic. But even logic,
such as Godel Theorem explained by Newman, the famous little book, it offers
a view of history of the theory of consistency in maths, and I still have to
carry on the reading, so because I know of Deleuze ideas on words of orders,
for example, I could make a rhizome there between maths and politics of
arrangements in matter, which made the book even more interesting.
Do you know a book which is easy learning, in american english, which
accepts both classical, euclidian maths, and recent, 20th century maths, as
rhiemann, carol, or gödel? I think maths is not less or more exact than
working with percepts, affects, audiovisual, poetry, the two group do not
necessarily oppose, and the connection, since we read Deleuze here, could be
an adventure. I don't think it has been done yet.
If you see ATP there a page on tensors in chapter on signs, talking about
the abstract machine, doesn't know anumore the strat, the distinction
between expression and content, but only tensors, when a sign and a
particle, we don't know anymore how to defferentiate one from the other.
Also if you want to talk on your impression in Spinoza Critic and Clinic,
last chapter talks about mathematics in relation to book V of Ethics,
essences. Desargues, the short cuts used by some type of mathematicians as
Desargues, or Gallois, was interesting. Do you know a book which would
enable me to read such mathematical prose? It doesn't have to be
contemporary, but preferrably it would be not too scholar, something which
preserves ludism, like Carol essay on Logic w<hy I mentioned it.
hwenk <hwenk at web.de> wrote:
after my appraisal of yoga as exercises in regard to perfect the body, I
come to advise sober and thorough thinking as such as healthy for the mind
- especially for psychic sensible people. Most of them have a strong
inclination to a very poetic way of feeling and thinking.
This is combined or also expressed in a very high sensibility in regard of
personal or social conflicts.
Now strong thinking in form of long and complicated reasoning, as done on
mathematics, gives inner stability and opens the way
of a self guided subjectivation - not always torn and pushed by stimulus
As Deleuze had put it:
"It is not the lack of intelligence, but our interests, that divides us from
In thinking, mathematics is invaluable, for it has all of the mentioned
thorough, fine and leaving no rest of unexplained - in this sense almost the
only example of
complete thinking - giving answers to the question of the child: "Why"?
I think, this is why Spinoza and science in general took it as a model and
in case of Spinoza, being
very consequent, it is a kind of answering the Why as far as possible at
Fortunately the American culture of books on mathematics is much more easier
to comprehend than here in Europe - I think it is
because the students pay in America, what is mostly not the case in Europe.
the books, coming from lectures, are much more written under the regard of
You have Milnor, Spivak, Lang, Feller, Stoker and a lot of other
Greetings Harald Wenk
List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
Yahoo! Model Search - Could you be the next catwalk superstar? Check out
the competition now
List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
More information about the Deleuze-Guattari