People sometimes combine two fields of study to create something novel and intriguing. However, such combinations often fall short, failing to satisfy the standards of either field.
Unfortunately, the typical art audience rarely appreciates the elegance of mathematical theorems, especially when they deal with something as complex as, say, the Riemann hypothesis. Similarly, scientists often struggle to understand the appeal of performance art, where an artist might, for instance, stare at an apple for an hour.
It is one thing that there is not enough audience for a niche thing, but the lack of criticism is even worse in my opinion.
I'm probably being a bit too harsh here, and I'm probably just jealous, but it's something that keeps frustrating me. "Circuit-bending" [1] was a particular annoying crossover of art and electronics that still makes me shudder. Using the golden ratio for no good reason is also up there.
As one of my contributions to “failing to satisfy the standards of either field” (math, astrophysics, or fine art), I wonder whether you would love or hate https://www.ouruboroi.com
I like generative art! And that seems interesting! But it seems totally broken on my computer - it flashes with random frames at 6k jump days for a few seconds then stops. The stop button does nothing, there's no way to restart it, the cursor can't be modified, etc.
I assume it'd be a smoother animation at a smaller number of jump days, I'd like to see that.
Edit: I finally got it working by changing the parameters, going to the order page, then clicking on the qr link. I did it with 1 jump day. But it still flashes like crazy (colors inverting ever frame) and there's massive moire patterns, among the low resolution and other graphical glitches. I think the idea is cool so I'd like to see something more fleshed out. Is this something you could do on e.g. shadertoy?
A formal program with funding, faculty and grad students would greatly help to make something which is not superficial. (Although I don't know of how much making art is a university subject, art criticism seems to be more in vogue).
Currently, undergrads take double majors (Witten was a history grad!). But, this doesn't tend to happen at the graduate level. The obstacles can be getting funding(siloed into departments), and courses being demanding enough already for one subject.
Faculty sometimes do hold a side appointment in other departments. But, the main incentive emerging from the academic job system is to get specialized expertise and publish in high reputation journals.
Circuit bending is pretty neat from electronics designer perspective: given the current electronics design state-of-the-art (MCU all the things), how do you design the circuit which responses to the random poking in a most interesting way, without being damaged?
It really forces one to bring back that obscure subset of analog-era skills... "This oscillator is almost never used because of bad Vcc-related frequency drift and distorts output in presence of even slight parasitics? Great, let's put it into the design!"
(Note that making entire circuit out of DFN parts with 3 mil traces, and then leaving large prominent test points is considered cheating :) )
Unfortunately, the typical art audience rarely appreciates the elegance of mathematical theorems, especially when they deal with something as complex as, say, the Riemann hypothesis. Similarly, scientists often struggle to understand the appeal of performance art, where an artist might, for instance, stare at an apple for an hour.
It is one thing that there is not enough audience for a niche thing, but the lack of criticism is even worse in my opinion.
I'm probably being a bit too harsh here, and I'm probably just jealous, but it's something that keeps frustrating me. "Circuit-bending" [1] was a particular annoying crossover of art and electronics that still makes me shudder. Using the golden ratio for no good reason is also up there.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_bending