This blog hosts comments on select papers that could be relevant to the Kutachi Project. Most of the papers — at least as we start the blog — are from those we have scanned and indexed for the International Society for the Interdisciplinary Study of Symmetry.
Each small post here links to both the relevant essay and the on-line paper. The post serves as an intermediary between on-line papers and the Kutachi Essays, which form the core of the Kutachi Project.
The collaborative nature of the Kutachi Project is supported through comments on the essays, so please link through to contribute or comment on a post here. While the essays are intended to reflect a consensus of the participating community, the posts here are somewhat different.
• They represent a single personal view, mine.
• They are not written to be source documents but serve as a sort of annotated bibliography.
• The referenced papers are selected for possible applicability rather than merit. Many excellent papers are not noted. Instead, the papers are selected only for their potential to inform the Kutachi Project.
About the Original Authors’ Intent
This is an odd sort of annotated bibliography. In every case, we are not remarking on what the author of each paper intended, but on what we can extract and extrapolate for our rather unique use. I can fairly say that in no case does any of these authors intend for their work to be adapted for the purposes we describe in the Project. Often the value is merely in the metaphor. For example, our comments on origami papers are first on the general appeal of origami for our use, and secondly on specific folds or theories that could help how we implement it.
In some cases it is likely that the authors will object to how their work is presented here. I apologize in advance. Descriptions of your work will be terse and incomplete. We will certainly take some points out of context.
Needless to say, no author is responsible for any of the speculations we make here or in the Kutachi Essays, nor how we characterize their work. All errors are mine.
About Abstracts versus Full Papers
Reviewing the Society Journals is a bit maddening.
Many volumes are not of full length scholarly papers, as we would wish, but instead are abstracts of talks given at the extraordinary meetings. Because of space constraints, some impressive images (or even relevant insights) will not be in the printed artifact. I have attended each meeting though and in these posts, I report less on the paper than on ideas gleaned from the presentations and personal interactions with the authors.
About Images
Some of the earlier Journal volumes were printed poorly and/or scanned imperfectly. All the pages are in black and white, so often the images are less impressive than they could be.
But the project is all about the visuals!
The way I expect to handle this is to let the papers speak for themselves, omit any image from this blog and try in the essays to have wholly original images where possible, even if traced from or inspired by those in papers. (With credit of course.)
Search Tips
The search box at the upper right of the main page searches over the posts on this site, not the original papers. You can search on… (to come).