I naturally would imagine them having the same character and being bi-directional, but it's interesting to think they could be different: one-dimensional and even, as you suggest, existing for just some time. In a way, re-inscribing some sort of segmentarity into these "bridges" by limiting them, in time and extension. I think it could be a way to make these connections between the works more "perceptible".

Yes I think we could create these bridges, like a pipeline with certain rules (e.g. directions, time duration, filtering out, etc). Then it can contribute in creating a certain order between us. Or we could limit ourselves in order to fit our 'segmentations' -or whatever we would call our modules- into the brieges. Then we can 'organize' ourworks (not in the manner of cleaning up, but in creating a structure.)

How could we create this? Are we going to? Could each one of us make one for the connection to the next person?

Thinking about what Poz suggested, I think the audio channel can be a medium, but the bridge can be a module for the medium. I think the bridge can do a bit more than being a channel, or a pathway to a data (OSC), as written above.

{function: response, keywords: [bridges, rules, medium, module]}

Could you elaborate a bit more? Or even make an example of different kinds of counting?

-The counting idea came from how I personally relate myself to 'stairs.' I would always 'count' each  stair as a habit since I was a kid. Most of us have had this before. In particular I have a very special memory of a certain space. e.g.  my class in my 3rd year high school required 49 stairs from the entrance. This is a number that I remember after thirty something years and  is a unique type of memory, because in a way it always brings me back into the space.

It's a very simple way to drag a number out of a space like this (stairs, clear divisions, countable) but then we can perhaps play with it. Then I thought of jumping up few stairs at a time, so then for example the number 49 becomes 24*2 + 1. This extra +1 breaks the rhythm. When I think of walking up these stairs and if there is only one extra left, it would pain me that it was not an even number, and it would break the rhythm of my walking. 'Breaking rhythm' could mean something here. Although it wouldn't mean breaking the musical rhythm, it could contribute to creating asymmetry.

Basically I tried to stimulate playing with a number by asking the previous question, in a playful way.

{function: response, keywords: [counting, staircase]}

+ DP

On organic:
''a thing exists as a natural

and if it is both cause and effect of itself''

they constitute a primitive form of self-organization. As Kant writes: ''[N]ature, on the contrary, organizes itself, and does so, in each species of its organized products -- following a single pattern, certainly, as to general features, but nevertheless admitting  eviations calculated to secure self-preservation under particular circumstances"

-It reminds me of David Bohm's Holomovement theory with the Enfolding/Unfolding order. “everything is enfolded into everything.”

He also tallks about 'flow' :what seem like permanent structures are only relatively autonomous sub-entities which emerge from the whole of flowing movement and then dissolve back into it an unceasing process of becoming.

{function: Response, persons: David Bohm, keywords: [flow, emergence, self-organisation]}

JYK: Condensation Round 1

+ Poz

Regarding the nature of these bridges, my personal preference would go in the direction of what David proposed here - exchanging channels of sound. The reason behind my choice here is that I think there is quite a difference between exchanging something already existing inside one's own process (exchanging some intermediate stage of the synthesis, exchanging a part of the process) and creating a protocol on top of it that somehow abstracts some information (hey, I'm playing). I like the idea of having the possibility to embed part of your process into mine and viceversa.

since the idea of exchanging channels of sound could not be viable (we originally talked about OSC communication as a less complicated alternative) I shall think about what exchanging a part of the process would mean in a protocol that doesn't allow a 1:1 representation of that part

{kind: quote, persons: POZ}

those are  drafts yet

+ HHR

On Bridges:
Rather than a graph, perhaps it's better to think of the space of segments as a topology. Naturally, as a "space", you will always be able to get from one segment to the other, perhaps through a number of intermediaries. I have never worked with ⬀Petri nets. Bridges are called arcs here, vertices are called places (so quite literally the net is a topology). There is a direct notion of parallelism (concurrency) in petri nets. Similarly, in P-systems, segments would be membrane structures, and bridges could be the rules for objects to travel inwards or outwards, or to dissolve a membrane (a collapsing bridge).

{kind: quote, persons: HHR}

- I found this(Petri nets) very interesting/inspiring.

I wrote the text about bridges below the DP's text and then as I took a look at this, somehow what I've imagined was there. Can we (Would we) integrate this somehow? Not necessarily in its exact form, but we can take the idea, and modify the way we'd like?

{function: response, keywords: [bridges]}

{hhr, 200108}

that's very interesting; I don't recall particular ways of counting as a child (except when traveling in a car, I was perhaps counting all other cars of a particular colour). But I, too, was deciding whether I could take a stairs by always taking two steps at once, although I don't remember this being an issue when the number of steps is odd. Taking steps… one thing, though, that I still do today, is avoid stepping on the joints between stones (on a pavement), and it annoys me (sometimes) when I cannot walk with a gait that allows me to always land on the stones and not the joints.

{author: HHR, function: Comment, keywords: [counting, steps, staircase]}

---
meta: true
author: JYK
artwork: ThroughSegments
project: AlgorithmicSegments