TERRIBLENESS

Essay by PI O (in another nomenclature)

The mad rush to move information from the margins (of society) to the

centers (of power) are predominantly done through numbers now. Once,
we

knew

how to manipulate most if not all the numbers we needed, cos they were

relatively small. We use functions like x, ÷, +, -, etc, then
more

complex

functions such as integration, logs, slide-rules, hand-calculators,
and

finally computers. The end result seems to be that we have became

increasingly disenfranchised from the seats of power and influence.
To

navigate our way through the complex labyrinth of numbers we mortals

need

sign-posts and monuments to help us recognize our location. Examples
of

such

numbers are, "e", "i", and "pi". These "symbols" short-cut the

writing-out

of all the digits in their proper order and allowed us to move and

manipulate them as units or aggregates of quanta. So what do we call
a

number that is so large and complex it is impossible to find a formula

for

its sequence of digits? Writing out all the digits each time you want

to

refer to it seems inadequate and inefficient to us (if not to a

computer (or

another storage) technology). So do we let the number-crunching power

of the

computer do all the work, or do we invent our own strategies that can

help

us "own" those large numbers? If computers are good at holding-numbers,

and

we are good at being emotional then perhaps an ability to hold the

digits of

an array in an emotional complex that we (if not the computer) can

read,

will hold us in good stead. Perhaps the rise of numerology in ancient

Greece

was directly related to a complex society that was an emotional

turmoil;

paralleling our own culture directly. Can the digits of a number be

held as

an emotional complex of sorts, and is thinking in itself an emotional

act?

Can an emotion like a hologram regurgitate the sequence of digits in
an

array or number, and if so how? A formalist would state unequivocally

that

"7" is neither luck nor unlucky, whist a sociologist could point out

that it

is the number "8" in many Asian cultures that is lucky not "7". Perhaps

it

is the exactitude of mathematics that will in time be under siege,
and

not

the emotions.

What does it mean for Smarandache to draw an array in the shape of
a

car?

...000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.

...000000000000000000111111111111111111111111100000000000000000000000.

...000000000000000001111111111111111111111111110000000000000000000000.

...000000000000000011000000000000000000000000011000000000000000000000.

...000000000000000110000000000000000000000000001100000000000000000000.

...000000011111111100000000000000000000000000000111111111111110000000.

...000000111111111000000000000000000000000000000011111111111111000000.

...000000110000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000011200000.

...000000110000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000011000000.

...000000110000044400000000000000000000000000000000000044400011000000.

...000000111111444441111111111111111111111111111111111444441111200000...

...000000011114444444111111111111111111111111111111114444444110000000.

...000000000000444440000000000000000000000000000000000444440000000000.

...000000000000044400000000000000000000000000000000000044400000000000.

...000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.

It is a number to be sure, and perhaps the number "4" in the array is

significant cos a car has "4" wheels, and the "1" is a unit meaning

only "1"

car is involved whilst the "2" represents the number of headlights
the

car

has, but what of the "noughts" INSIDE the car? Or for that matter

outside

it. Smarandache tells us that the zeroes outside the car indicate that

the

number is "finite". Perhaps the zeroes in the car mean no-one can or
is

driving it. If we presume that this "number" can be called "Car" then

what

does it mean to multiply it with a number called "Lattice"

...111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.

...177711111111111711111117777777711777777771177117777777711777777771.

...177711111111117771111117777777711777777771177117777777711777777771.

...177711111111177177111111117711111111771111177117771111111771111111.

...177711111111771117711111117711111111771111177117771111111777771111.

...177711111117777777711111117711111111771111177117771111111771111111.

...177777711177111111177111117711111111771111177117777777711777777771.

...177777711771111111117711117711111111771111177117777777711777777771.

...111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.

What pattern does it assume? What happens if we subtract it, or divide

them

together? I don't know cos I haven't got a big enough calculator to
do

it

with. Whatever the result the new number would assume a "complex",
in

much

the same way as a vocabulary held together by a grammar results in
a

new

number (or thought or word, to stay with the analogy). But is the

resulting

pattern significant (visually)? Perhaps not. But what if (visually)
it

turns out to look like a birthday cake (say), what then? Car x Lattice

=

Cake???? It may of course be irrelevant or unrelated to mathematics

proper,

but what is mathematics proper? Perhaps it is poetry only. This

"terribleness" as Smarandache would say is what attracts me, and like

him

"Working simultaneously with literature and mathematics, I feel like
a

man

who knows two languages"