An Infinite Expanse Of Depth And Distance

Reminds me of a kind of inversion of Borges' "The Aleph": Instead of a clear cross-section of the infinite, a blurring of its crucial elements into a seamless whole of distance without depth and depth without distance.

In a similar vein, it is worth noting that, when moving at a certain speed, the eye does not directly process visual information. One wonders if this is what one sees...
 
An interesting proposition. I'd never previously considered the similarity of name between Cantor's transfinite sets and Borges' transfinite nexus, but now it seems perfectly clear and strangely obvious. Thank you for that!

But to continue with the non-denumerable: This is perhaps the essential difference between what constitutes perception and being, in that one may perceive the incalculable only so much as the parameters of the organs and conduits of perception may allow, whereas to be something is to not negate the infinitesimal that lies within the gaps of the selected set.

(I hope that that statement makes at least some sense.)
 
Back
Top