I tried to explain art to an engineer once.

 

A triple integral came in handy to outline the four-dimensional space populated by the products of the factors x, y and z belonging to the Natural (N), Imaginary (iR) and Rational (Q) sets, respectively. While formally referring to number sets, they symbolically invoke the actual manifestations of the world, the creative interpretations surpassing the actual and our rationalising attempts to impose meaningfulness. Multiplication of the three ensures that none of the factors is dominant. However, any operation involving imaginary numbers results in an imaginary outcome by definition - but that’s how our perception works, too. The natural logarithm brings the notion of power and the transcendental constant into the equation (the logarithm is a quantity representing the power to which the base must be raised to produce a given number, and for the natural logarithm the base is the transcendental constant e ≈ 2.71828, thus ln x = loge x). I let it represent the power struggle between different perceptions of the world and the constant transcendence of the horizon of perception.

​

So here we have it, the space of aesthetic possibility in mathematical notation that is natural, imaginary and rational to different extents. Strictly mathematically, it is likely nonsensical and yet not meaningless, and I would say, aesthetically quite appealing in its simplicity that is as reductive as it is endless.

 

“…the integration symbol looks like a modernist structure … 3 is also a wonderful prime and may symbolise your third eye”, replied the engineer, seamlessly transcending from science into art.