Nothing would happen. Nothing would become of it.

We pass through spacetime at the speed of light, and it passes through us at the surface.

But what if there were no limit to our speed through space and our speed through time?

The view from nowhere looks like a trajectory in 4D. The view from here? Well, that one we're familiar with. And at the intersection of these two lines, we are the passage that traces these lines out.

Lewis Carroll Epstein: physicist of difference and philosopher of change. Lewis Carroll Epstein, truly a monstrous assemblage, one that Deleuze would've loved to be related to, or even produce, as one of his offspings.

We move in 4 dimensions; we move in 3. But that depends on the perspective we adopt, just as so much else.

Lewis Carroll Epstein: a monstrous name that forces me to say "not that one" twice over.

I would've settled for "coincidence" if it wasn't for my awareness of the fact that the book that Deleuze develops his concept of the Surface in (Logique du Sens) begins with a preface titled "Lewis Carroll and the Stoics."

This encounter could not be anything but divine.

Lewis Carroll Epstein told me that there is a deep and extensive space, that of space-time, and the intensive space onto which it is projected, where flows flow through time. We move, at once, on the depth and the surface.

Time is relative to the position you take. In so many ways.

Those who pointed to deep time within the geological may not have been aware of the shear depths of the their discovery, indeed, another dimension of it.

To be clear: I'm thinking here of Lewis Carroll Epstein's myth of "Epstein's Myth" of time. I'm thinking here of Gilles Deleuze's myth of the Surface.

Well, I suppose in this case, the theory already exists, and it already works. This is... an interpretation is too strong. Perhaps a (mere) restatement?

(or is it lazy philosophy to proceed poetically?)

Voici les principes:
- N'demandez que « ça fait quoi? »
- Le peuple manque; mais on fait la politique du flux.
- Faites une carte. Identifiez les vulnérabilités. Agissez là.
- Expérimentez. Trouvez les lignes de fuites.
- Faites des amis.
- Devenez-minor. Travaillez les marges.

Si on fait une « synthèse disjonctive » de ces deux idées, on peut articuler le concept de « la révolution pratique » chez Deleuze et Guattari: un guide pratique pour faire la révolution.

La philosophie doit poser les problèmes pratiques. Il ne s'agit pas de demander « c'est quoi », mais plutôt de demander « ça fait quoi » ?

So, I claim, if Marxist theory-practice were to be re-imagined through a Spinozist relationality (instead of a Hegelian dialectic) class-caste would have to become the centerpiece as a singular dynamic with inter-acting two poles (like body-mind or subject-object).