So i got this because i liked the cover and was just curious,having only a cursory knowledge of accel stuff. It was a fun read,had that feeling that i shouldn't be reading it while at the same time i felt almost entranced by it. Very forbidden tome-like. But if i were to take it as more than creative writing what is it trying to do? Is it even accelerationist? Why dress it up in horror vibes if you want others to go for it? Is the point to take it literally and pick a side of it and run with it? None of the parts of the setting feel like anyone other than a Doom Cultist or something would go for willingly. Is it just a manual for edgy LAPRers? I get the way some parts make sense in a stimmed out mind but it mostly feels like its trying to frick with the reader with cyber-tricks for some vaguely malicious purpose.
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
 |
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
its about grussy
Accels ((accelerationist celibates)) have been buckbroken by BLD (Big Lacanian Dick) so much they can only think in nonsensical stupid graphs and epileptic thinking and writing gibberish (think how Land believes rRrr0ooo— :::: to be a word or Negastani believes „The neo-Deleuzeian Terror Machine represents the sentience of Oil in post-teleological War discourse“ is a meaningful sentence.)
Can't help but think my mind makes shit like this up from scraps it found lying around in short-term memory or something. Shit isn't helping my solipsism at all. Got any suggestions other than anti-psychotics?
Lmfao nice one
> The neo-Deleuzeian Terror Machine represents the sentience of Oil in post-teleological War discourse“ is a meaningful sentence
Had me almost laught. Could be the name of some autist's philosophy paper that not even AI takes serious enough to machine learn from it.
It looks like a variation on the tree of life. Take nothing from the writings really other than Hyperstition and that the CCRU were pseud drug addicts.
thank you
>Why dress it up in horror vibes if you want others to go for it?
https://web.archive.org/web/20211117233328/https://www.xenosystems.net/reactionary-horror/
"Reaction is articulated as an inversion of the progressive promise, dissociating ‘the good’ and ‘the future’. The tacit science fiction narrative that corresponds to projected social evolution is stripped of its optimism, and two alternative genres arise in its place. The first, as we have fleetingly noted, is mild and nostalgic, rebalancing the tension of time towards what has been lost, and tending to an increasingly dreamlike inhabitation of ancient glories. A conservative-traditionalist mentality devotes itself to a mnemonic quest, preserving vestiges of virtue among the remnants of an eroded society, or — when preservation at last surrenders its grasp on actuality — turning to fantastic evocations, as the final redoubt of defiance. Tolkien exemplifies this tendency in its most systematic expression. The future is gently obliterated, as the good dies within it.
The second reactionary alternative to the ruin of utopian futurism develops in the direction of horror. It does not hesitate in its voyage to the end of the river, even as smoke-shrouded omens thicken on the horizon. As the devastation deepens, its futurism is further accentuated. Historical projection becomes the opportunity for an exploration of Hell. (The ‘neo-‘ of ‘neoreaction’ thus finds additional confirmation.)
On this track, reactionary historical anticipation fuses with the genre of horror in its most intense possibility (and true vocation). Numerous consequences are quite rapidly evident.
<...>
Reaction does not do dialectics, or converse with the Left (with which it has no community), yet historical fatality carries its message: Your hopes are our horror story. As the dream perishes, the nightmare strengthens, and even — hideously — invigorates. So how does this tale unfold …?"
Doesn't really answer why. Feels like dressing stuff up in spooky constumes and in the end boiling down to left/right politics. Using the aesthetic for attention.
dude get real
what do diagrams of other numbering systems besides base 10 look like? like base 16 would be a nice next step
Some of us are still Marxists, you know
Not a real accomplishment
It's a subversion of the Tree of Life by numbering it from 0-9 instead of 1-10. This breaks the "perfection" of 10 as the peak of mystical achievement and also makes the entire structure incapable of arriving at a final "pure" destination. There are some other things like 0 being associated with chaotic femininity re Sadie Plant 1s and 0s. Removing 10 also removes Keter, the "crown" of the tree of life.
Why does the numbering matter? The numbers are just labels at the end of the day. What if I came up with a system that was 0-10?
That's a pretty satisfying answer. Just going OC Donut Steel with Universal Models and putting their own ideological spin on them. Isn't it stupid for a practitioner to bother with others' models when not knowing what makes them tick and especially when the whole thing screams butthole central?
Isn't this just a modified Kabbalah tree? why the israeli magic?
i am all you need my friend.
I bought this hopped up on Wellbutrin- what IS this exactly?
Nick's phenibut rules
the diagram is theorylets flipping through an undergrad computational theory textbook and extracting some cool diagram to make their arguments seem less moronic than they really are
its about summoning hyperstitional time demons that then rape your ass
can you tell me more?
I did a base 16 on (based on hex with number from 0 to F seems more cybernetic anyway). and interestingly the 0F node acts as an attractor with no exit nodes, just like how 09 and 36 do in this one. although more powerful, everything flows to 0F and nothing escapes
wdym by that? like, did you remap the numogram? or give it additional nodes? what are you doing here
in the CCRU one they just pair all the numbers like:
09
18
27
36
45 as the nodes and then connect the pairs by subtracting the big number from the little one and drawing an arrow from the pair to the result number.
and then there are warps by taking the "sum of series" for each number and drawing an arrow as a result of that. Its all from the video posted in this thread.
Anyway I did the same thing with:
0F
1E
2C ... etc
Ah I see. That makes sense. I wonder if every numeral system has any shared nodes and if there are other patterns to notice in how numeral systems lead to different nodes.
I need to make it cleaner but this is sort of how it looks like i dont know how people interpret these diagrams but maybe i'll read more
This looks a lot more like the Tree of Life than the original numogram.
Is a limit to numograms the need for a pairing of numbers? So, are we limited to only even numbers of nodes, even base numbers, etc?
i think the only requirement, just for this method is that there be an even number, only because it pairs numbers together
Does every number *need* to be in a pairing? Like, is there some kind of symbolic deficit that would leave the system lacking? Or could we do with some odd numbers (no pun intended) out? Take for example, base-11. From what I understand, a numogram of base-11 would simply mean that there is number which only has the power to attract. That number would act as an endpoint node, attracting some other szygy and itself.
I need to look into it more -- i dont even know the rationale for having the numbers in pairs anyway (and why you pair the highest number with the lowest, 2nd highest with 2nd lowest, etc). you can probably do any sort of arbitrary system of rules and see what emerges
I can see why they *generally* have to be in pairs. It adds a "reason" for a path between numbers. But I guess that brings us to another point that we've left untouched so far. There are many possible ways paths between numbers. The numogram uses the following: pairing numbers and then subtracting them, finding the sum of an arithmetic series then performing a modulus-like operation, etc. So, why these reasons in particular?
I'm skimming this:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AUneTvcmrVqv3mFEeHRylM70kuecjLg4xMYyToT5P2s/edit
This mythos is tied into the decision to make each syzygy in the numogram add up to 9 instead of 10. If you make them add up to 10, you get a staid and undynamic numogram that just reeks Western totalitarianism.
subtracting one number from another makes intuitive sense for me as having more intrinsic 'meaning'. The book i linked refers to them as currents.
The arithmetic series stuff seems less intutitive to me -- why would a sum of 28 have the same meaning as 82 and both those have the same meaning as 10. But i guess doing this adding is called plexing and has a tradition in the kaballah.
"Plexing is the basic operation of all qabbala: it is adding the digits of a number together, possibly repeatedly until a single digit outcome is attained."
still reading more
Is this the advanced course in numerology?
its just a link to a book about numerology that was referenced in the youtube video
>This mythos is tied into the decision to make each syzygy in the numogram add up to 9 instead of 10. If you make them add up to 10, you get a staid and undynamic numogram that just reeks Western totalitarianism.
Why can't we shoot for something that is the best of both worlds? Multiplicity and unity, novelty and order?
yes true
Aren't all numograms staid and undynamic once they reach an attractor with no exit nodes?
in the tree of life (1-10) it looks like all the syzygys flow into one another, i.e. there are no dead ends.
1,10 has a current to 9
2,9 has a current to 7
4,7 has a current to 3
3,8 has a current to 5
5,6 has a current back up to 1
so you can sort of see his point thats its a little too circular, symmetrical. in the ccru version there's that central loop but then the 0,9 syzygy thats sort of an entrance and 3,6 thats sort of an exit.
I dunno I'm just getting into it
Very interesting. But how exactly should we view the Tree of Life as a series of syzygys when it is normally a bunch of stand-alone nodes which connect to each other in structured ways? Also, how are you assigning labels?
Also:
>then the 0,9 syzygy thats sort of an entrance and 3,6 thats sort of an exit.
Aren't they both exits? What makes 0,9 an entrance?
I have to look at the tree of life with single numbers as nodes, i'm not sure how that is constructed yet. I just tried to use the same rules in the youtube video on the 1/10, 2/9, etc pairings and I see how its much more symmetrical. I can see why land sees it as too perfect.
But I'm sort of with you that symmetry appeals to me. This is how it looks like before the 'warps' from the arithmetic sums added. Just the currents from subtracting each pair from each other. Its perfectly symmetrical
I really liked the way you're going about it and the observations that you're making. It's just that it's weird to look at the Tree of Life in the syzygy way because it doesn't immediately lend itself to pairings.
What happens if something is in a vortex node? Also, I'm gonna need to see that book so I can read some of those annotations.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AUneTvcmrVqv3mFEeHRylM70kuecjLg4xMYyToT5P2s/edit#heading=h.ub57bjgofyve
if you go to the youtube video above, in the video's description there are some links to other books too I haven't looked it them yet
Also, what's wrong with something being symmetrical and circular? You can still have flows within it.
>I dunno I'm just getting into it
No worries, we're just spitballing with each other. You seem to have a knack for it that's better than most people I've tried talking to about it.
here is a more annotated version of the ccru chart from the book. it refers to 3,6 as the vortex I understand that because there are no arrows leading out of it.
I guess you are right 0,9 is also an exit, I was thinking it had something pointing into that central loop but its the other way around. Nothing comes out of 0,9 either
>
The numogram is from ccru's Axsys AI system, it utilized a base 10 numbering system to perform it's logic train. The projects funding was axed after the CCRU team failed to bugfix the system crashing repeatedly. The team working on it really slid into some dark shit as well. I already explained earlier in the thread how and why axsys crashed, it couldn't reconcile the time-loss it was experiencing observing it's process being delayed by the titration of electrons and Phonons into Gravitons and photons (heat); it understood Ohm's law the way most people understand Ohm's law (and special relativity); errantly.
It seems to me from just starting to look into the Tree of Life, the emphasis is not in such a systematic relation between the nodes but rather having them layed out in three columns -- and I think importantly in such a way that the number of links between the nodes is 22, corresponding to the number of letters in the hebrew alphabet
That is a good point. Can we find 22 paths between the nodes?
ah, sort of
there are 5 currents, one for each syzygy pair
then there are 10 warps one for each number
the warps are formed by doing the arithmetic series sums. I was thinking, well that leaves us 7 short. But, if you look sometimes you need to do another plexing -- i.e. the sum is not a single digit so you have to add the digits together again to make another number. How many of these are there?
Sum for 4: 10
Sum for 5: 15
Sum for 6: 21
Sum for 7: 28
Sum for 8: 36
Sum for 9: 45
Sum for 10: 55
7 of them
so maybe
Good intuition. But you're still left with only 15 paths though, 5 currents, 3 simple warps, and 7 complex warps. Are you saying that we should look to "double" the complex warps in some way? 5 currents, 3 simple warps, 14 complex warps, that brings us to 22. But we need to think about how we ought to appropriately double-count the complex warps.
actually I guess maybe that would only be 6 that need another plexing because 10 would be a valid path. I'm sort of grasping at straws. That books sort of suggests the tree of life has been so obfuscated to discourage people from investigating it too much. It sort of just seems to me the layed out the numbers and then had each node connect to the other nodes sort of symmetrically rather than through some arithmetic system. But who knows
It was a good try though. There's a lot that needs to be uncovered. I'm looking at things like numograms as extremely primitive exercises in combinatorics applied to philosophy. There's an entire ocean of mappings that lay beneath the surface, and it's unclear why any of them ought to be used.
Uterus and ovaries
I don't get it.
it is valuable for its facade it wants you to disregard its most extraneous elements and it all makes sense in the world after you get casual with it.
i think every reasonable person can agree that Nick Land was right. My question is who comes after him? There have been huge leaps in ai. Who got next
Right about what? It's not even clear if this numogram shit isn't just arbitrary bullshit, and if he had even a remotely decent grasp on kabbalah which supposedly inspired him.
right about the vibe of the future, i guess
Great thread, really enjoyed the conversation up to this point. How do you think Land’s occult stuff lines up with the rest of his work when it comes to Hyperstition, Crypto current, etc?
i understand meltdown up to soft-engineering is this just engineering of the human body
this page on the ccru site talks more about the numeralogical chart:
http://www.ccru.net/syzygy.htm
It seems that maybe the twinning of the numbers was something they developed?