From the Log24 search Form + MLA —
See . . .
as well as . . .
Monday, May 9, 2022
Form vs. Content
Comments Off on Form vs. Content
Thursday, April 26, 2018
Wednesday, April 25, 2018
Friday, January 16, 2015
A versus PA
"Reality is the beginning not the end,
Naked Alpha, not the hierophant Omega,
of dense investiture, with luminous vassals."
— “An Ordinary Evening in New Haven” VI
From the series of posts tagged "Defining Form" —
The 4-point affine plane A and
the 7-point projective plane PA —
The circle-in-triangle of Yale's Figure 30b (PA ) may,
if one likes, be seen as having an occult meaning.
For the mathematical meaning of the circle in PA
see a search for "line at infinity."
A different, cubic, model of PA is perhaps more perspicuous.
Comments Off on A versus PA
Sunday, July 29, 2012
The Galois Tesseract
The three parts of the figure in today's earlier post "Defining Form"—
— share the same vector-space structure:
| 0 | c | d | c + d |
| a | a + c | a + d | a + c + d |
| b | b + c | b + d | b + c + d |
| a + b | a + b + c | a + b + d | a + b + c + d |
(This vector-space a b c d diagram is from Chapter 11 of
Sphere Packings, Lattices and Groups , by John Horton
Conway and N. J. A. Sloane, first published by Springer
in 1988.)
The fact that any 4×4 array embodies such a structure was implicit in
the diamond theorem (February 1979). Any 4×4 array, regarded as
a model of the finite geometry AG(4, 2), may be called a Galois tesseract.
(So called because of the Galois geometry involved, and because the
16 cells of a 4×4 array with opposite edges identified have the same
adjacency pattern as the 16 vertices of a tesseract (see, for instance,
Coxeter's 1950 "Self-Dual Configurations and Regular Graphs," figures
5 and 6).)
A 1982 discussion of a more abstract form of AG(4, 2):
Source:
The above 1982 remarks by Brouwer may or may not have influenced
the drawing of the above 1988 Conway-Sloane diagram.
Comments Off on The Galois Tesseract
Defining Form
Background: Square-Triangle Theorem.
For a more literary approach, see "Defining Form" in this journal
and a bibliography from the University of Zaragoza.
Comments Off on Defining Form
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Defining Form (continued)
Detail of Sylvie Donmoyer picture discussed
here on January 10—
The "13" tile may refer to the 13 symmetry axes
in the 3x3x3 Galois cube, or the corresponding
13 planes through the center in that cube. (See
this morning's post and Cubist Geometries.)
Comments Off on Defining Form (continued)
Damnation Morning*
The following is adapted from a 2011 post—
* The title, that of a Fritz Leiber story, is suggested by
the above picture of the symmetry axes of the square.
Click "Continued" above for further details. See also
last Wednesday's Cuber.
Comments Off on Damnation Morning*
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Defining Form
(Continued from Epiphany and from yesterday.)
Detail from the current American Mathematical Society homepage—
Further detail, with a comparison to Dürer’s magic square—
 |
 |
The three interpenetrating planes in the foreground of Donmoyer‘s picture
provide a clue to the structure of the the magic square array behind them.
Group the 16 elements of Donmoyer’s array into four 4-sets corresponding to the
four rows of Dürer’s square, and apply the 4-color decomposition theorem.
Note the symmetry of the set of 3 line diagrams that result.
Now consider the 4-sets 1-4, 5-8, 9-12, and 13-16, and note that these
occupy the same positions in the Donmoyer square that 4-sets of
like elements occupy in the diamond-puzzle figure below—
Thus the Donmoyer array also enjoys the structural symmetry,
invariant under 322,560 transformations, of the diamond-puzzle figure.
Just as the decomposition theorem’s interpenetrating lines explain the structure
of a 4×4 square , the foreground’s interpenetrating planes explain the structure
of a 2x2x2 cube .
For an application to theology, recall that interpenetration is a technical term
in that field, and see the following post from last year—
| Saturday, June 25, 2011
— m759 @ 12:00 PM “… the formula ‘Three Hypostases in one Ousia ‘
Ousia
|
Comments Off on Defining Form
Friday, January 6, 2012
Defining Form
Some related resources from Malcolm Lowry—
"…his eyes ranged the Consul's books disposed quite neatly… on high shelves around the walls: Dogme et Ritual de la Haute Magie , Serpent and Siva Worship in Central America , there were two long shelves of this, together with the rusty leather bindings and frayed edges of the numerous cabbalistic and alchemical books, though some of them looked fairly new, like the Goetia of the Lemegaton of Solomon the King , probably they were treasures, but the rest were a heterogeneous collection…."
— Under the Volcano , Chapter VI
— and from Matilde Marcolli—
Seven books on analytical psychology
See also Marcolli in this morning's previous post, The Garden Path.
For the relevance of alchemy to form, see Alchemy in this journal.
Comments Off on Defining Form
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Getting with the Program
Stanley Fish in The New York Times yesterday evening—
From the MLA program Fish discussed—
Above: An MLA session, “Defining Form,” led
by Colleen Rosenfeld of Pomona College
An example from Pomona College in 1968—
The same underlying geometries (i.e., “form”) may be modeled with
a square figure and a cubical figure rather than with the triangular
figures of 1968 shown above.
See Finite Geometry of the Square and Cube.
Those who prefer a literary approach to form may enjoy the recent post As Is.
(For some context, see Game of Shadows.)
Comments Off on Getting with the Program