Giorgio Careri

Physicists and Painters: The Similar Search for Meaning

It is hard to find common threads in the arts and sciences if we consider these two fields on the grounds of their accomplished works, which are quite different. A deep parallelism instead can be detected if we focus on the process by which such works are produced. In both the painter’s studio and the physicist’s laboratory, this process appears to be the progressive recognition of a ‘sense’ in an ensemble of perceived signs, be they brushstrokes or numbers. Both artists and scientists refine this ordering process in their work, by repeatedly comparing the evolving form with spontaneous or intentionally generated sensorial data, until a meaning is felt. The author expands this viewpoint with particular reference to the visual arts and the experimental sciences, for both of these aim to extend human vision beyond ordinary realism, by imagining new worlds, each standing on the meaning of its own signs.

Discovering by Perceiving in Art and in Science

Deep analogies are displayed between the working processes of experimental scientists and visual artists, craftspersons who detect new fragments of reality through the perception of their own data. In this process similar roles are played by active perception and imagination, guided by a tacit sense that the discovered fragment had always been there.

From Art and Science to Perception: The Role of Aesthetics

At a first glance, art and science seem to occupy separate worlds. However, a closer examination of these disciplines reveals a meaningful similarity between them. This is manifested by basic perceptive and creative acts of the mind and is apparent through a unique experience: the aesthetic appreciation of structures in these disciplines. A notable outcome of this feature is its compatibility with the Gestalt approach to the functioning of the mind.

Art and Visual Mathematics

The author takes a look at the recent explosion in collaborations between artists and scientists, largely resulting from the graphics capabilities of recent computers. Quoting from mathematicians and thinkers about the relationship between art and science, he comments on possible connections between some of the most recent mathematical research and the work of artists using visual techniques influenced by mathematical ideas.

Artists and Scientists: Open and Hidden Connections

��� In this text I inquire into the existence of an essential connection between art and science. I believe that this connection can be found not between these two fi elds, different and self-consistent as they are, but among scholars motivated by a common desire: to detect a world beyond appearances, a world to be achieved by solitary effort. This opinion can be supported by testimonials from major authors in both fi elds and by the experience of our life. It seems unlikely that this opinion can be shared by those who have not had the scholar’s experience, or even by authors driven by different motivations [1]. It is a current commonplace to say that reproducible events require scientifi c treatment, while impressions and emotions suggest artistic imaginations. This viewpoint ignores desires and considers scientifi c work to be objective knowledge and artistic work, subjective intuition. Instead, it is possible to detect this desire in the active life of certain major artists and scientists. Let us start by comparing the work processes of physicists and painters and proceed to a generalization. If we look at a modern painter’s studio and a physicist’s laboratory, we can easily detect several analogies between the activities within each. Both authors perceive a limited whole of signs, such as colors or