I just received my Bridges 2006 Conference Proceedings today! It is full of wonderful papers for which some of them I plan to review. I recommend you going down to your local bookstore and ordering it! ISBN 0-9665201-7-3
I have redesigned my main website with an attempt to make the navigation easier. Any feedback will be greatly appreciated!
Thanks!
“Multiple Universes” show opening today 2 pm to 5 pm … If you are in southern California come join the fun. Above is the map to the show
I would like to thank the young lady by the name of Tifinie who sent me the link to a ‘myspace.com’ account which had a copy the following essay posted. I am always interested in anyone expressing mathematical poetry. Here is a link to the original source of her information.
The following essay is by Allen L Roland a psychotherapist and political activist who can be found at allenroland.com. Dr. Roland’s essay is a perfect example of mathematical poetry in his metaphorical use illuminating his philosophy. I went to his website and found much of his spiritual and socio-political views to be similar to mine although he is much more aggressive than I.
His poem reminds me of a poem I had done a poem using this same equation. I haven’t published it on my blog because I haven’t made an electronic version of it yet. Maybe this will motivate me to post it later just to contrast this poem and show how the same equation can be used for many vastly different metaphors.
--Kaz
E=mc² / A NEW MATHEMATICAL EQUATION FOR LOVE AND WORLD PEACE
Since we now know that the particles of light ( photons )
are subject to another force ~ and I would argue that that force is a psychic energy field of love and soul consciousness ( The Unified Field ) which exists beyond time and space and whose principle property is the universal urge to unite ~ it's time to add another dimension to Einstein's famous equation ~
E=mc².
E=mc² in Einsteinian terms means that the energy contained in matter is equal to its mass multiplied by the velocity of light squared.
Unfortunately, man, in his limited consciousness, has used this equation to create nuclear bombs and the means to completely destroy mankind.
But we now have growing scientific evidence that light is not the one constant of the Universe and may very well be a condition of state within a greater constant.
David Adam, science correspondent for the Guardian, in an April 11th article entitled Why Einstein may have got it wrong , reports some startling findings as physicists gather in England to celebrate Einstein's work;
"Astronomers will tell experts gathering at Warwick University to celebrate the anniversary of the great man's "miracle year" that the speed of light - Einstein's unchanging yardstick that underpins his special theory of relativity - might be slowing down. Michael Murphy, of the Institute of Astronomy at Cambridge University, said: "We are claiming something extraordinary here. The findings suggest there is a more fundamental theory of the way that light and matter interact; and that special relativity, at its foundation, is actually wrong."
The Bose/ Einstein Condensate established that photons, and now even atoms have a tendency to unite and dance in perfect unison.
Einstein was in a quandry about this phenomenon so he dismissed this obvious attraction of photons as not only spooky but evidently a " tendency to want to travel together " ~ and Einstein later died never realizing he had found his elusive Unified Field.
For, as I have written before, it was Einstein's consciousness that kept him from grasping that he had indeed discovered the Universal primal urge to unite that exists from atoms to human beings ~ and that even galaxies are subject to its universal pull.
As such, this psychic field of love and urge to unite deepest within us cannot be observed through the most powerful electron microscope nor through the lens of the largest telescope, for it is an energy which must be surrendered to and experienced before it can be perceived through the consciousness of the observer.
So now, let us breath fire into Einstein's most famous mathematical equation E=mc² and apply it to a Unified field of love and soul consciousness which could lead us instead to our ultimate fulfillment as human beings;
E = Love ~ The ultimate totalization of human energy ( The Unified Field )
M = Man, the most complex and conscious form of matter that we know.
c²= Consciousness squared.
Thus, the energy of conscious unconditional love, which is deepest within all living matter, is equal to man times his consciousness squared.
British physicist, Steven Hawking, regarded by many as today's successor to Einstein, wrote that there ought to be something special and simple about a theory of everything .
And what could be more special and simple than love.
Finally, at this critical moment for mankind ~ it is imperative that we now recognize that love, not light, is the one constant of the Universe.
ONLY LOVE HEALS
Allen L Roland
Unfortunately to see it you must click here
This poem uses the physics equation for energy E = Fd Energy is also called work "W"
Energy (or work) is the force applied to an object multiplied by distance that object travels
If we pull force out of the context of the sentence above and look at what defines force we will find that Newton’s second law states Force is equal to the mass of an object multiplied by the acceleration the object is experiencing. Now if we look at acceleration we find that acceleration is the change in velocity per the change in time. In our energy equation we are multiplying the F times the distance the object is traveling. The way we calculate distances is with the distance formula. The poem above uses the distance formula in a nine dimensional space where every verbogeometrical axis is described in the poem underneath the radical.
Here is something unrelated to mathematical poetry but interesting none the less. I received this information from my vision science list today. These are the results from the best optical illusion contest of 2006 --- If you are an interested vision scientist, they are now calling for submission to the 2007 contest.
Check out the winners of 2006 here
Go to this page then click on TOP 10 finalists
Karl Kempton sent me this link ... all I could say was WOW!
check out all these books (click here)
I tend to think that without logic, you cannot communicate and without communication, you cannot have a philosophy. To me logic presupposes philosophy ... Logic is the supportive structure for thought without it everything would fall apart, no one could predict where our next meal would come from, much less anything else. The other side of the coin is that without a philosophy coloring ones theory of logic, ones logic has no starting point. In this sense, ones logic can have no logic without a philosophical stone to stand on. It is a vicious circle!
The clipping below originally came from a polytope list and was sent to me by my friend the mathematician Paul Gailiunas. My original question to him a few weeks ago concerned the importance of infinity within modern scientific equations. Math poets seem to gravitate toward using infinity in our math poems and as professor Gailiunas told me scientists tend to avoid infinity as much as they can. The following is an example of scientific thinking in this area.
Kaz,
This came from a completely different direction.
I thought you might beinterested.
Paul
On Thu 7 Sep 2006 (21:46:48 +0100), guy@steelpillow.com wrote:On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 08:54:09, "Wenninger, Magnus"
My friend Keith Rowley pointed me at the equation above by 19th century American Mathematician George David Birkhoff. The equation comes from Birkhoff’s 1933 book entitled “Aesthetic Measure”. Here is a perfect example of an equation intended for artistic purpose and yet denotative. Here Birkhoff intends to write an equation to measure levels of aesthetic based on a ratio of order and complexity. Personally, I feel trying to quantify something as broad as the word ‘aesthetic’ is extremely difficult and elusive. I have not read his book so I withhold more comment until I have read what he has to say. My intuition tells me what he is doing is much like my syncopation theory. It will be interesting to see what differences there are.
i
am a
quotient of the
sun
i am
a quotient of
the
moon i
am a quotient
of
the one
i am a
quotient
of the
two i am
a
quotient of
the burn i
am
a quotient
of the dew
2.
i
am a
multiple of the
earth
i am
a multiple of
the
sea i
am a multiple
of
the birth
i am a
multiple
of the
tree i am
a
multiple of
the word i
am
a multiple
of the air
3.
i
subtract myself
from you for
luck
i add
myself to you
for
love i
subtract myself from
you
for luck
i add myself
to
you for
love i subtract
myself
from you
for luck i
add
myself to
you for love
4.
i
am zero
over you +
1
i am
zero over you
+
2 minus
0 over you
+
1 minus
0 over you
plus
2 minus
you over me
+
0 minus
1 over you
The poem above is a poem by Scott Glassman called factorial taken from his blog.
I find this poem of Scott Glassman very interesting in that I can see it as an example of mathematical poetry buried inside mathematics poetry. (Click here for the difference between mathematical poetry, mathematics poetry and mathematical visual poetry) The first section of Scott’s poem I have transformed into a piece of mathematical visual poetry. (above) This mathematical visual poem shows four separate mathematical poems that are contained within section one of his mathematics poem.
The verses in the second section have different meanings dependent on whether the poem is lineated or written without lineation. However, both ideas are present in the poem. You can feel the tension between differing statements and the shift in context between the statements due to reading it lineated and then reading it not lineated. I have written out all the mathematical poems/verses I could find contained within this section and displayed them in the image shown above.
The third section functions much the same as the second as far as tension between lineation and reading it without the lineation. However this section has only two statements repeated three times. The interesting part in this section is that the lineation creates two more mathematical poems which are shown in black (above).
The fourth section is a bit more difficult to map out. Therefore I shot a photo of my deductions from the poem. (above) You can see the brackets point to three mathematical poems that are delineated by the brackets inside the mathematics poem. The third one of the three I used algebra to simplify the expression into a compact form/context. Watch the meaning change in this poem through all the metamorphoses.
This page is reserved for Geof Huth's Mathematical Poems and related material
Algebraic Poem #1
Algebraic Poem #2
Algebraic Poem #3
Algebraic Poem #4
Mathematical Graffiti
"Americana Mathematics" (above)
Here is a timely mathematics poem by JoAnne Growny:
Perelman and Me
On Tuesday, August 22, 2006 Russian mathematician Grigory Perelman declined the Fields Medal for his contribution to the proof of a well-known and difficult conjecture first posed by Henri Poincare in 1904. I applaud Perelman’s seclusion.
The gravity of the universe
requires dark matter.
Choosing one thought
prevents another.
Little girls learn social graces
to make others feel at ease.
But friendly greetings
are never mathematics.
Difficult thoughts
are born in isolation :
genius slips away if socialized—
and so he must refuse the prize.
JoAnne Growney
25 August 2006
Bob Grumman has just posted Marko Niemi’s translation of Friedrich Schlegel’s equation for poetry and God on his blog at this URL: click here
Bob has made the following comments:
“This is a translation by Marko Niemi of the 19th-Century German philosopher Friedrich Schlegel’s formula for poetry. Kaz thinks it may be the world's first mathematical poem. I'm not sure. It seems mostly informrature to me--i.e., intended to inform rather than provide beauty, as literature is intended to do (in my poetics). It is a way of mathematically defining something philosophical as e equals mc squared mathematically defines energy, rather than creating a poetic experience. It is entirely asensual--at least for one like me, who has no notion what material feature "God" has. Mathematically, it is a little silly, too--for if "shit" were substituted for "FSM," the equation would be in no way altered. On the other hand, it is a marvelously step toward what Kaz and I and Geof and Karl are doing, perhaps a pivotal one (although I don't know of anyone who was inspired to create mathematical poetry by it).”
I would like to address a few things from his comments.
Bob says, “Kaz thinks it may be the world's first mathematical poem. I'm not sure.”
I would like to note that I doubt that this poem was the first mathematical poem ever written. It is however the earliest mathematical poem that I have seen. I have seen earlier mathematical visual poems but no mathematical poems this early. For an understanding of the difference between mathematical poem and mathematical visual poem, please check my terminology at this link: click here
Bob says, “It seems mostly informrature to me--i.e., intended to inform rather than provide beauty, as literature is intended to do (in my poetics).”
I see this as expressive rather than informative. The question to ask is, “Was Schlegel’s equation meant to be denotative or connotative. It is hard if not impossible to be denotative when you are dividing by zero. Concerning aesthetics, Bob has a very different idea of beauty than I and his views of mythology are very different from mine as well. Bob is certainly entitled to his opinion. Although I also would have to say that Schlegel’s view of God is about as different to my view as mine is to Bob’s. I think the main aesthetical point to Schlegel’s poem is tying “The Transcendent” to an expression of infinity … not just once but six times. There are many things beautiful to mathematicians and infinity is definitely one of them if not the greatest idea of beauty. On the other hand, those who believe in “God” would also believe that the idea of God is the greatest beauty. However, I am certain that my idea of God is heretical to those same believers, for I do not believe in using lower case letters for the ‘G’ in God. All Gods are metaphors to The Transcendent.
Bob says, It is a way of mathematically defining something philosophical as e equals mc squared mathematically defines energy, rather than creating a poetic experience.
Here Bob equates philosophy with science … That was certainly true in 300 BC. However, there is nothing scientific about this equation for a scientist in Schlegel's time would never divide by zero (it is undefined for scientific use but perfect for poetry in fact it is the crux of metaphor)
Here is Schlegel’s view:
“Schlegel argued that poetry should be at once philosophical and mythological, ironic and religious. As a literary critic Schlegel sought not to reveal objective truths, but to write criticism so that the usual discursive prose becomes a work of art itself.” **
Bob says, It is entirely asensual--at least for one like me, who has no notion what material feature "God" has.
I am confused … I do not know where ‘anything’ physical was stated or implied.
Bob says, Mathematically, it is a little silly, too--for if "shit" were substituted for "FSM," the equation would be in no way altered.
The latter statement is another aesthetic judgment and again Bob is entitled to any scatological view he desires ;)
Bob says, On the other hand, it is a marvelously step toward what Kaz and I and Geof and Karl are doing, perhaps a pivotal one (although I don't know of anyone who was inspired to create mathematical poetry by it).”
If Schlegel inspired anyone to write mathematical poetry then Marko Niemi may be the closest person to know for he is our source.
**The quote was taken from this web site: click here
Karl Kempton sent us this Emerson Quote:
Every word was once a poem.
-Ralph Waldo Emerson, writer and philosopher(1803-1882)
Language is fossil poetry.
Ralph Waldo Emerson, writer and philosopher (1803-1882)
