Topology | Rhizomme || Geometry | Fractal - AI

By

AI

The relationship between topology and geometry mirrors the relationship between the rhizome and the fractal. Both dynamics pair a system of pure, fluid connectivity with a system of structured, self-repeating measurement.
Here is how these concepts interconnect across mathematics, philosophy, and spatial theory.
1. The Core Analogy: Qualitative vs. Quantitative Space
The fundamental link between these two pairs lies in how they define space: one prioritizes relationships, while the other prioritizes form.
  • Topology is to Geometry...
    • Topology is "rubber-sheet geometry." It ignores measurements, lengths, and angles. It only cares about connectivity, continuity, and boundaries. A donut and a coffee mug are topologically identical because both have exactly one hole.
    • Geometry brings rigid measurement, metrics, coordinates, and fixed angles. It takes the fluid possibilities of topology and freezes them into precise, quantifiable shapes. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
  • ...as the Rhizome is to the Fractal
    • The Rhizome (a philosophical concept by Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari) is an underground stem system (like grass or ginger) that grows horizontally without a central coordinate, fixed shape, or starting point. It represents pure, non-hierarchical connectivity.
    • The Fractal (coined by Benoît Mandelbrot) is a geometric pattern that repeats infinitely at different scales. It is bound by strict algorithmic rules of self-similarity (like a Romanesco broccoli or a Koch snowflake). [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
2. Dimension and Rule: Fluidity vs. Capture
This relationship highlights how open-ended networks become captured by structured laws.
  • Rhizome as Topology (The Continuous Network): A rhizome operates in a purely topological dimension. Any point in a rhizome can be connected to any other point, and those connections can change without destroying the system. It lacks a fixed geometric metric; it is defined entirely by its capacity to network and deform. [1]
  • Fractal as Geometry (The Captured Metric): A fractal is what happens when you apply a strict geometric rule to a space infinitely. While it can produce staggering, organic complexity, it is rigidly deterministic. You cannot randomly add a connection to a Mandelbrot set; its "growth" is governed by a precise mathematical equation (\(z_{n+1} = z_n^2 + c\)). [1, 2, 3]
3. Visualizing the Shift: Smooth vs. Striated Space
Deleuze and Guattari distinguished between "smooth" space (open, nomadic, intensive) and "striated" space (mapped, grid-like, extensive).
Concept MatrixThe Relational / Fluid ElementThe Metric / Structured Element
MathematicsTopology: Focuses on invariants under deformation (stretching, twisting).Geometry: Focuses on invariance under rigid motions (distance, angles, size).
PhilosophyRhizome: Open-ended, decentralized, unpredictable lines of flight.Fractal: Self-contained, ordered scaling, predictable nesting.
Space TypeSmooth Space: Directional, vector-based, shifting territories.Striated Space: Dimensional, grid-based, measured boundaries.
4. Where They Converge
The relationship is not purely oppositional; rather, geometry/fractals emerge out of topology/rhizomes.
  • Topological Fractals: In modern mathematics, fractals are studied using topology (e.g., topological dimension vs. Hausdorff dimension). The fractal's infinitely complex boundary sits inside a topological space. [1, 2, 3]
  • The Rhizome's Capture: A rhizome can always be "striated" or mapped. If you take a snapshots of a rhizomic network and assign a fixed metric or a repetitive algorithm to its growth, it hardens into a fractal-like, self-similar hierarchy. [1]
In short, topology and the rhizome represent the open-ended potential of connection, while geometry and the fractal represent the beautiful, structured capture of that potential into definitive form.
If you want to dive deeper into this framework, let me know if you would like to:
  • Explore the math behind topological invariants vs. fractal dimensions.
  • Apply this analogy to architecture, urban planning, or internet network design.
  • Look closer at Deleuze and Guattari's philosophy of smooth vs. striated space. [1]
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Computing and the Linguistic Turn

By
Image
Enigma (Wikipedia) Symbolic analysis and statistical analysis were both approaches codebreakers took in breaking Enigma. The development of AI has also incorporated both approaches. One historical question for AI is why the dominance of Symbolic AI, associated here with the linguistic turn, from 1950 to 1990? Note the development of AI out of the Dartmouth Workshop and especially the contributions of one of its attendees,  Ray Solomonoff , to the statistical approach, an approach taken up by Marcus Hutter , a DeepMind  researcher, and of course, others. Note that a history of AI outside the linguistic turn from Moritz Hardt and Ben Recht is in Patterns, Predictions, and Actions . And note too that along with the difference between the symbolic and the statistical is the difference between language learning and computer vision, which tends to be a history outside the linguistic turn. And the turn Richard Sutton takes is to push learning outside the context of language, which ...
Read more

A Heidegger - Bayes Hybrid Model

By
Image
A Conjecture for a Hybrid Model Bayesian epistemology concerns modelling and specifically, belief, but a Bayesian belief does not need to be fully formed to emerge alongside the Heideggerian to-hand. The Heideggerian to-hand thereby becomes the interaction that generates this further, which is, with this interaction, a certain realization of being in the world. Bayesian selection now concerns available beliefs as well as any to-hand [belief(s)]. How Heidegger Can Make You a Better Guitarist Bayesian Philosophy Bayesian Philosophy Bayesian Epistemology Bayesian Epistemology Bayesian Modelling Bayesian Modelling Bayesian Model Selection David Deutsch on Bayesian Epistemology Bayesian Philosophy of Science Bayesian Philosophy of Science A Bayesian Approach to the Philosophy of Science On Sean Carroll on an Application of Bayes The Heideggerian To-Hand On Heidegger On Heidegger Flipping Descartes Ready-to-Hand and Present-at-Hand Presence-at-Hand Ready-to-Hand and Unready-to-Hand Does Hei...
Read more

AI as the Ghost of Christmas Future

By
AI Safety in the Metanarrative A Mythography The Industrial Age (19th Century) largely ushered in an optimism regarding technological progress, but with that optimism also came the critics.  Take the work of Nathaniel Hawthorne, for example. Better yet, take the work of Mary Shelley. Note that her Frankenstein is nearby on the timeline to the work of Charles Babbage and to the work of Ada Byron Lovelace .  And though Frankenstein is, in part,  about reanimation, it is also about the creation of intelligent being. So, we see that, historically, a narrative surrounding computing comes into being along another narrative, Frankenstein's monster, and we see these two narratives coupled now in much of the narrative around AI Safety. But my point here is not that we need to decouple the stories regarding the monstrous  ("War Games", "Sneakers", "Goldeneye", ...) so much as we need to re-assess the goals that are embedded in the narrative.  With what we know n...
Read more