.

And by a prudent flight and cunning save A life which valour could not, from the grave. A better buckler I can soon regain, But who can get another life again? Archilochus

Sunday, September 27, 2026

Common Sense: The Tessellated Fractal Stitching of My Markov Blanket....

from Google AI:
The main difference between shape and form is dimensionality: a shape is flat and two-dimensional, while a form is solid and three-dimensional. [1]
Shape
  • Dimensions: Two dimensions (length and width).
  • Appearance: Flat, like a drawing on paper or a painted square.
  • Definition: Bounded by lines, colors, or edges.
  • Examples: A drawn circle, a flat square, or an organic puddle outline. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
Form
  • Dimensions: Three dimensions (length, width, and depth/volume). [1, 2, 3]
  • Appearance: Solid or tactile, like a sculpture or an object you can hold. [1, 2]
  • Definition: Can be real (3D objects) or implied in 2D art through light, shadow, and perspective. [1, 2, 3]
  • Examples: A sphere, a cube, a clay pot, or a real-life human body. [1, 2, 3]
Both shape and form share similar style categories—they can be geometric (squares, cubes, cylinders) or organic (irregular, natural curves found in leaves). [1, 2]
If you'd like, I can give you examples of how to turn a flat shape into a 3D form using shading and perspective.
To turn a flat 2D shape into a 3D form, you need to simulate depth. Artists do this by adding light, shadow, and perspective.
Here is how you can transform basic geometric shapes into forms, followed by a visual breakdown:
  • Circle to Sphere: Add a curved gradient of shadow (core shadow) and a soft cast shadow on the ground to give it volume.
  • Square to Cube: Add extra lines extending backward at an angle (perspective lines), connect them, and shade the sides with different values based on where the light hits.
  • Triangle to Cone or Pyramid: Add angled or curved bases and a sharp gradient shadow that tapers toward the top point.
More from Google AI:
When Gilles Deleuze discusses adding a fourth dimension—which expands beyond traditional spatial dimensions (length, width, depth) by incorporating time—the concept is referred to as Sense (in language/logic) or a Time-Crystal / Chronosign (in art, form, and cinema). [1, 2, 3, 4]
Depending on whether you are looking at this from the perspective of linguistic form or visual/artistic form, Deleuze approaches this fourth dimension in two specific ways:
1. In Language: "Sense" (Le Sens)
In his foundational work The Logic of Sense, Deleuze explicitly states that "Sense is the fourth dimension of the proposition". [1, 2]
  • Traditional linguistics breaks a statement into three dimensions: denotation (what it points to), manifestation (the speaker's state), and signification (the logical definition). [1]
  • Deleuze adds Sense as the fourth dimension. He defines it as the pure event or "unlimited becoming"—the layer of pure time and action that exists inside language. [1, 2, 3]
2. In Art and Form: The "Time-Image" or "Time-Crystal"
When discussing physical, visual forms changing over time (specifically in his books on Cinema), Deleuze argues that adding time transforms a static, physical "movement-image" into a direct time-image. [1, 2]
  • He introduces the concept of the Time-Crystal (cristal de temps).
  • A regular 3D crystal has physical geometric faces. A "Time-Crystal" is a form where you see the past and the present coexisting in the same space. The form is no longer just a shape in space; it is a visible structure of time itself. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Deleuze also heavily borrows from the philosopher Henri Bergson, warning against "spatializing time"—meaning we shouldn't just treat time as a cheap, static 4th coordinate on a map, but rather as an active, changing force of continuous evolution (duration).

Saturday, September 26, 2026

The University/ Analyst Discourses: The Ideological Rear-Guard Power Seeking & Preservation Options of the Elites (Lions) & Counter-Elites (Foxes)

Organizing Hysteria via Ideology:

"A Cynical Justification of the Master Discourse (Right-Knavery)
vs.
A Cynical Justification of the Analyst Discourse (Left-Foolishness)
Meden Agan!