Art in science
Because for some papers, reading time approaches zero, just show the pictures. Bringing art to science gives you a good chance of having neither.
Because for some papers, reading time approaches zero, just show the pictures. Bringing art to science gives you a good chance of having neither.
Nothing is less clear than geometry.
Willem de Kooning
Science stopped being a way of asking questions and morphed into a body of knowledge. As Feynman always said, that’s been a disaster.
Knowing that the scientific advancement may ultimately be a messier and more subjective process than we thought. In this messy picture, you may come across some cool tangents that are artsy but don't belong in the academic world.
The artist is his own real model, which is not computationally trivial.
What is the future of the past?
.gif)
Not thought boundaries artwork however blurring the boundaries between outrageous absurdity and contemporary life. In order to achieve popularity, the weird artist must cater to the interests and intellect of the lowest common denominator, except for math art where denominators are to be cherished.
What man feels is art, but we are confident the model to be plausible because what man knows concerns mostly science.
"On balance, they are more intrigued by the questions and contradictions in art than by any definitive answers it might provide."
The new casualists
Dare to be wrong, or you may never be right. We learn who we are by testing reality. Bad art are unstable, suffering from critical bugs provoking kernel panics and corrupting images. When art meets science, truth makes utility useful.
The arts stand without defence in a world where what cannot be measured is not valued.
John Tusa, Engaged with the arts
A lie stands on one leg, the truth on two. The intersection of science and art has been instrumental in our understanding of the natural world and continues to evolve today.
If science is a difficult process requiring perseverance and a thick skin, elephants are perfect scientists.
"Institutionally, at least, scientists and artists still swim in different seas."
David Edwards
Of course Academia is a lousy place to do novel research.
It's fine to go looking for a difference between art and science but do not worry if you don't find it. Whatever the artist makes is always some kind of some interdisciplinary drawing.
Hans Ulrich Obrist
Art in Science stems from an irresistible need for visualization. Explaining contemporary artworks requires selecting mathematical models that best capture the data regularities.
Algebraic art addressing the elephant in the corner.
If science is a difficult process requiring perseverance and a thick skin, elephants are perfect scientists.
Growing empirical evidence suggests we lack a coherent understanding of the decision rules governing picture choice. Ironic art is a genre of science that must also have an artistic content. Competition is fierce and every image is taking something to gain an edge.
How can you distinguish the legitimate concerns of a good picture from the folklore and superstitions? The human figure is the genetic basis for all concepts of beauty.
It follows that only artists can answer our instinctive needs, especially when the excess enthusiasm driven by math pictures ran beyond reason. No one seems to care about how anything looks or feels.
Photography killed the ancient species of realist illustrations, but didn't killed drawings as representation of mental imagery. Photo are always wrong, unless they appear drawn as humor in contemporary art by an artist. When pictures don't create a consistent narrative with their viewers they loose out, leaving these viewers to dine on a stew of ambiguity.
Evolution sometimes reuses the same answer to address similar problems. What we need is more people who specialize in the impossible.
Generally it’s the bears that suffer in the end.
____