From: Paul Bains <P.Bains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 10:57:14 +0800
Thanks, now i'm with you - i didn't get the beginning of this thread...or
the context. When you talk about 'attractors' and 'reverse causality' etc. i
wasn't sure whether you were using them in a technical scientific sense (for
attractors - the mathematical description of the activity of certain
parameters of a system) or more poetically ('attractors' as scientific
constructs don't attract anything to them).
I'm not sure what 'reverse causality' is, but i have no scientific or
sorry for interrupting. 'sometimes one overdoes it.'
ps. an extracting machine is another way of talking about abstract machines.
guattari uses this term in chaosmosis (p.35). 'An abstract machine or
machinic assemblage or bwo 'doesn't imply any notion of bond, passage, or
anastomosis betwn its components. It is an assemblage of possible fields, of
virtual as much as constituted elements.'
At 11:19 PM 1/7/98 +0000, steve wrote:
>>What is 'polymetric visual
>best example in terms of mass immersion is MTV but i'm specifically
>talking about strobes and lazer shows in clubs synchronized to rhythmic
>>and sonic in(s)tensity?
>sorry bad spelling- sonic intensity
>> Or is this a pathic/poetic thing.
>what do you mean?
>>'extracting' machine (Chaosmosis, p.35)
>By assembling modules, source elements and elements for treating sound
>(oscillators, generators and transformers)by arranging microintervals,
>the synthesizer makes audible the sound process itself, the production
>of that process, and puts us in contact with still other elements beyond
>sound matter. . . Philosophy is no longer synthetic judgement; it is
>like a thought synthesizer functioning to make thought travels, make it
>mobile, make it a foce of the Cosmos ( in the same way as one makes
>sound travel)"(ATP 343)
>>best wishes for the new year