f(x)=x(1-i)

[tamerlane]

Fractal images as produced by computers are simply graphs of functions 
containing an irrational number (where i = the square root of -1).  The 
variety of fractals (Julia set, Mandelbrot, etc.) are the result of 
different functions.  Scale is rendered irrelevant when viewing a fractal 
image precisely because of the self-replicating self-similiarity which 
makes every vantage point to infinity identical, yet infinitely complex.  
The idea that the graph of an absurdly simple function could produce 
endless variety and detail brings to mind DNA.  Chaos(theory) and entropy 
are indeed different from fractal mapping.  While fractals are born out 
of the realm of pure mathematics and presumably have no connection to the 
physical universe, entropy is the primary inescapable fact of the 
physical universe.  Modern chaos theory attempts to explain the 
decay/distortion/noise of the universe not as the rubbish left over in a 
world defined by linear physics, but as simple patterns possessing 
infinite complexity ala fractal geometry.  Maybe it has been mentioned 
here before, but James Gleick's book Chaos provides an excellent 
historical map of how these worlds of theoretical mathematics and applied 
physics collided simpatico.  When discussing the relative merits of COL 
49, it is important to note not only the the omnipresence of the entropy 
and chaos images, but the transformation they make.  Early on, entropy is 
described purely in the terms of decay and waste (witness Mucho's 
meditation as a used car salesman on the debris found within the used 
cars).  Throughout the work chaos becomes an organization, a conspiracy - 
in other words, a system with a pattern.  The ending of the work is 
significant in the same way an opening door is significant: the end 
essentially states that America, or, if you prefer, the American 
consciousness, has not run its course and fallen prey to entropy and 
decay, but that the elements of consciousness can and will be endlessly 
reconfigured, leading to new possibilities while never escaping the 
simple initial equation. Does the code begin with DNA? Yes, there is a 
fear of the unspoken possibility at the end of COL 49, just as the void 
of chaos in general generates fear - the fear of not so much the unknown 
as the uncontrollable in our consciousness.  If this is more than litcrit 
babble, if it is an inkling of the nature of both the physical universe 
and internal consciousness, then wouldn't this nature speak of itself in 
literature, the mind on paper?  And wouldn't it find itself most at home 
within the deconstructivist texts of a Pynchon?  Eventually all the 
equations will make themselves known.