What's the most complex and difficult book ever written?
petersburg, zettel's traum or finnegans wake.
or if you want to go off literary, probably some deconstructionist stuff. they're pretty logorrheic. maybe some lacan even?
>>7425258
Chinese Oracle Bones
Green Eggs and Ham
>>7425258
Some mathematics texts
>>7425286
Which ones.
>>7425258
of grammatology, voynich manuscript, fucking tristram shandy, a tale of a tub...
>>7425258
my diary tbbh
>>7425258
Russel brand's "Booky book 2" is basically like someone murdered a thesaurus and it's innards spilled all over the pages of russel talking about himself.
Women and Men has angels and birds narrating and talks about rocks
>>7425280
fuckkkkk
>>7425258
Finnegan's Wake
>>7425353
>Finnegan's
>>7425347
>he thinks that makes it complicated
>>7425357
Oh no he ruined my meme book by including an apostrophe :((((
Get your autism checked out champ
the wealth of nations
>>7425258
the Bible
>>7425258
this desu or something similar. there are more esoteric textbooks but it would be reaching wrt 'book'
an ignorant but intelligent pleb could, starting with the greeks, within a few years plod through finnegans wake and understand it with secondary sources. pic related would require an order of magnitude more rigorous study
>>7425406
how about you smear the back of this book with glue and the front of IJ with glue too and glue them together?
Add Finnegan Wakes and the voynich manuscript and you have a very complicated book.
You could also rent an airstrip and glue a whole library together.
>>7425359
It's just the easiest way of knowing someone has never even looked at a copy of Finnegans Wake.
>>7425406
I think you're underestimating the complexities of language and abstract symbolism.
>>7425406
quantum theory being the most difficult thing ever is a meme perpetuated by physicists because of their obsession with thinking of their maths in physical terms
if you ignore the implications and fuzzyness, and have the appropiate maths background, it's not particularly hard.
there are issues many magnitudes more complicated in maths. some papers can't even be understood by any one person except (maybeee) the one who wrote it, so when it comes to peer review you need a couple of teams.
>>7425406
>"What's the most complex and difficult book ever written?"
>posts an introductory quantum mechanics book
I think it's hilarious how hard /lit/ struggles with mathematics and physics.
>>7425309
He wouldn't know. He's never read one.
>>7425432
i posit that the less complex a book is, the better it is? maybe aesthetically not so much?
>>7425258
Some Freud's text about the psychology of the masses. But it was hard because of the shitty translation.
>>7425258
>>7425491
>proddies
>>7425424
You're onto something here.
What if we hit it Burroughs style and made a cutup of all three.or the whole canon, even
>>7425491
Nice
I'm sure we've all heard of that one Japanese mathematician in the news by now. It's the dude whose new theories can't be confirmed because almost no one can understand the papers.
Can any crossboarding math nerds from /sci/ confirm that this shit is legit and not just the guy having a laff?
>>7425432
I would argue argue that since think in language, that it's used to represent and organize percepts within an abstract space, and that in a sense the capacity is hard coded into our brain (generative grammar) that it is inherently less complex. some advanced concepts in mathematics (particularly algebraic geometry) exist within a layered abyss of abstraction so vast that to even begin to navigate it requires an immense prerequisite knowledge of simpler concepts with no analogue in perceived experience
>>7425455
fuck off /sci/ no bully
>>7425551
it's not like a new thing. the same happened with Wiles' proof of fermat's last theorem.
>>7425504
or maybe stick several really thick dictionnary-type blank books back to back so that they make a circle and hire a bunch of homeless people and whores and madmen to write and rewrite over the pages so it ends up being a never-ending spinning on an axle book about life in the street from the perspective of a collective of deranged misfits, stream of consciousness style.
you could even get anons in on it.
>>7425449
>>7425455
i agree with you, I chose it mainly because I knew it would still be somewhat familiar to /lit/ and that it is an actual book intended for learning rather than purely academic pushing the boundary's of knowledge. this particular book goes well beyond basic quantum mechanics though. it's not like there are any books on inter-universal teichmuller theory
>>7425491
is sin just like, a symbol for the inherent suffering of man? and hells just totally like, the idea of the consequence of a life lived bound to it?
>>7425426
Man you must feel so good about yourself because you've looked at a copy of Finnegans Wake
>>7425716
not that guy, but it isn't looking at finnegans wake that feels good, it's the calling out of plebs that does
>>7425593
I see. Was it really just as bad though? Just read through an article which describes Mochizuki's complete indifference to the math community's puzzlement and frustration.
Guy spends a decade stringing together his theory, alone. Then he refuses to explain anything in person, saying he wouldn't be able to get it across that way even after months of lecturing. So now he's just talking to himself on his website, drifting off into his own world. Feels like I'm reading about a character invented by Borges.
>>7425721
someone is a pleb because they've never picked up a copy of a certain book?
>>7425726
*I just finished reading through an article (...)
Gotta make sure the /lit/ community understand me!
>>7425731
No anon, you're a pleb when you talk about something you know nothing of, pleb.
>>7425465
>the less complex a book is, the better it is
explain yourself
My diary, h (honestly).
>>7425646
What inherent suffering? I can assure you sin is not a symbol, and that hell is not an idea, but I'm still not sure what you mean.
>>7425601
Damn Jackson Browne fell off
>>7425455
i haven't been to lit in months - i've been on infinity pol for too long
and this made me giggle
>>7425773
pls leave
>>7425314
>Voynich Manuscript
>"difficult to read"
It can't be read at all since the cipher hasn't been broken. That doesn't make it a difficult read, though, and 90% of the supposed information can be derived from the illustrations.
It's a meme book and a great hoax, though.
>>7425831
i include the cipher requirement into difficulty.
>>7425831
>the cipher hasn't been broken
Because it's code of a few different languages, same with the Zodiac Killer's letters. People think it's all from 1 language and that's why they can't break it.
>finnegans wake
>>7425853
wow you seem so smart. you should do it!
>>7425860
I have for some of it, but there's a third language I don't know.
>>7425309
http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/Inter-universal%20Teichmuller%20Theory%20I.pdf
Something dependant on knowledge of other books, thus compounding its complexity, and is also complex on its own merit.
>>7425893
>http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/Inter-universal%20Teichmuller%20Theory%20I.pdf
jesus fucking christ
>>7425893
symbols errywhere
>>7425773
You should probably stop going to infinity pol.
>tell old steam friend he should stop going to infinity because it can't be healthy to be submerged in all that paranoid anger all the time
"WHAT? FUCK YOU FUCKING CUNT YOUR OFF YOU'RE ROCKER HAAAA YOU'RE FLIPPING OUT OR SOMETHING HAHA DON'T GO SHOOTING UP ANY SCHOOLS NOW ANON HRRRRJJLKalkzjldkf"
True story.
>>7425258
pic very much related
>>7426039
>muh autism
>>7425893
>http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/Inter-universal%20Teichmuller%20Theory%20I.pdf
ding ding ding- understanding this requires you to be an genuine expert in this niche (so 7-8 years of intense study MINIMUM) and then like half a year or maybe more devoted just to this piece.
If this gets confirmed itll be a big buzz in the math world tho
>>7425406
One can spend as much time learning math and science as anything in the humanities, and their knowledge will be of equal magnitude about different things.
Don't fall for the scientists-could-be-better-philosophers-if-they-wanted-to meme. The difference is interest, that's all, not time spent studying or discipline.
>>7426385
this desu
how has no one posted phenomenology of spirit yet
what the fuck
>>7425263
>Zettel's Traum
This tbqh.
>>7425566
Hmmmm, good point. Everything human beings can comprehend and analyze is technically innate, though, so it doesn't really require anything greater in mathematics, since all you're doing is mentally connecting abstract puzzle pieces.
Reading good literature is on the same level as creating mathematical concepts from scratch.
Also, something like Finnegans Wake requires a much larger bank of knowledge from human history and experience, and not to mention a greater ability to put together 2 and 2 (or 2 and 20, given its metaphysical complexity) than most of math, since an equation will usually only have you finding which rules and which theorems to use at which spot.
Math is difficult, a priori. But literature is the most difficult, a priori and a posteriori, in the respect that it can contain the entirety of human experience.
>>7425280
Dam
>>7425455
I'm minoring in math, it's ight
First love is literature
Finnegans Wake is much tougher than say for example, algebraic geometry
But math is also very abstract and is tough to understand through letter And words. English is limited to letters and words so what I'm trying to say is who gives a FUCK Desu senpai
>>7425893
Was looking to see if anyone posted this. GG
>>7425406
group representation theory is L I T T E R A L L Y first year grad school math
>>7425263
I've read Petersburg, albeit in English, and didn't find it that difficult of a read. I've heard that it is a much, much harder read in Russian.
>>7426560
read it when I was 14
Canterbury tales
>>7426560
Damnit, I was just about to post that.
>>7425893
>>7426720
>it can contain the entirety of human experience.
Linguist here.
No, you dumb nigger.
Literature does not contain anything like the 'entirety of human experience'. It contains what can be inscribed in ink on a page.
>>7425263
>lacan
nonsense isn't complex
I'd just get a monkey to whack the keys on a keyboard if that was the case
>>7428093
>implying being a linguist gives you any insight into how language interacts with phenomenology
stick to your frequency charts
>>7426621
BUTT
>>7428124
In "Abend mit Goldrand" there are sexual innuendos and wordplays all the time. My favorite is the name "Anne Wulf" written as "Ah! 'Ne Vulv'!" (Ah! A vagina!).
>>7425314
>tristram shandy
I literally read it after slaughterhouse five, its not hard
>>7425258
Depends if the book is justifiably difficult or artificially difficult or incompetently difficult.
>>7425893
is this math?
>>7425258
Beelzebub's Tales to his Grandson
>>7428485
Yes. Google commutative diagram. It's from the field of commutative diagram.
There are estimated to be 10 people in the world who understand Mochizuki's work. For example, a student of his from 10 years ago. That's how long it takes people with PhDs in math to understand that shit.
>>7428875
God lol, I meant the field of commutative algebra...
>>7425263
it's Zettels tho
>>7426385
>knowledge will be of equal magnitude
But there's a big difference though.
The literature student will spend his career acquiring a lot of easily-accessible knowledge. He will be about as well equipped to read a new paper in the field when he is 35 as he was when he was 24.
A student of mathematics or theoretical physics on the other hand is spending his life acquiring knowledge that is not universally accessible to anyone who is speaks English. The knowledge he will be acquiring will generally be impossible to use and understand without first understanding a great body of research that came before it.
You can make the claim that the same is true for how some literary critic's writings refer to other critics writings so you need to read those critics first, but it is true to a much lesser degree.
the extreme example is >>7425893
Basically the humanities dump knowledge laterally into a big, broad puddle, so it's basically just as easy to access any part of the puddle as a 24 year old PhD student as a 30 year old postdoc. While maths and physics build the body of human knowledge as a very tall tower or series of power that you need to climb arduously to the top of in order to build them further.
>>7428986
Making knowledge easily accessible is a good thing.
>>7429833
but thats how plebs get ahold of it
>>7429952
good point
>>7425280
I was gonna say the Cat in the Hat
>>7429952
doesn't mean a pleb will understand it tho
>>7428875
Do you have a source on that 10 people in the world part? I'd like to see more of that.
>>7429833
I'm sorry I was not clear.
The tower puddle analogy makes it seem as though literature and science academics have a choice in the matter. They do not.
Scientific and mathematical understanding necessarily builds on prior discoveries and theorems.
And literature is necessarily a big , broad, shallow puddle. Knowledge about literature may as well be encyclopaedic knowledge about Pokemon in this respect. Of course more careful consideration goes into reading Pynchon or whatever than pokemon
>>7429952
plato/kant/strauss pls go
>>7432705
By worst you mean difficult or what?
>>7432722
Yeah, as in complex language.
>>7428079
died
>>7425258
my dick
The legacy of totalitarianism in a tundra
The Scientology Opus
http://flavorwire.com/423424/50-incredibly-tough-books-for-extreme-readers
>>7425893
Can someone explain to me in a nutshell what this paper is about?
>>7425455
Not understanding memes like math and science is a good thing. It shows you aren't autistic.
>>7434613
You'd be in the dark ages if it wasn't for our wonderful scientists, you ungrateful pleb.
>>7428875
Truly the patricianest document ever.
>>7425309
oh you know, just some of them
>>7425893
What is more interesting about Mochizuki papers is that he claimed to have proven the ABC conjecture, but nobody can fully understand his papers, and he isn't willing to explain them (in conferences for example) so nobody knows if he did it or not.
Does anyone have any experience writing something difficult to understand?
Usually in a large university paper I'd throw in 1 sentence that read liek it was from derrida or lacan or something. Without fail the TA or prof would circle it and write a question mark. The sentence was never nonsense, it was only ever just telling an idea with very exact language and too many big words. I could have wrote the whole paper that way saying the same things.
I was always disappointed with the question mark, I figured they might have a bit of fun reading a three line sentence or w.e
>>7425764
he gets laid all the time now though
>>7435208
Reading that reminds me of time cube
http://www.timecube.com/
>>7434863
>the dark ages
>this is what reddit actually believes
>>7435208
>math so abstract numbers are barely used anymore
>>7425449
>perpetuated by physicists
Wrong
It's perpetuated by clueless pseuds who don't know any physics at all and frequently 'like' posts from ilovescience.
Actual physicists know that the observable can be studied, and from that models can be created and and be learned by others.
>>7434613
Only plebs don't want to be a modern Renaissance man.
Continue with your specialization though, the market couldn't survive without it, drone.
>>7425258
Your mother's birth certificate.
>>7435314
Reading that reminds me of reddit
www.reddit.com/r/funny
>>7425258
every book, because im a nigger
>>7435228
I did that literally in Sophmore year of High School. They're not circling it because they're below your extreme intelligence, they're circling it because you're suddenly shifting your prose into some wildly different and needlessly pretentious format for no reason.
Also, a three lines for a sentence isn't a notable amount. You're probably running on your sentences but theres nothing special to it.
Do you actually have aspergers or are you 15?
>>7435324
bud math stops being about numbers somewhere in 2nd year of university (pure math at least).
>>7435374
Avoiding the sperg fields =/= specialization. There are many things to learn outside of 'le moving numbers around xD'
>>7434863
Did daddy Dawkins tell you that?
>>7425258
the cantos by pound of course
how do I get into hardcore mathematics if I dont know the basics, /lit/? I want to be a patrician and be able to understand >>7435208
>>7435208
>he isn't willing to explain them
FRAUD
>>7435794
this
maths confirmed for being as full of sophistry as continental philosophy
>>7425258
The thing I wrote last month is pretty complex and difficult 2th.
>http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/top-english.html
stemfags lack aesthetic sense so much
>>7435596
The true marking of a pseud
>>7429955
The Science of Logic is much, much more complex.
>>7425258
>>7428511
this tbhf
Fight Club
Tripp Naim
>>7435208
>the fucking circle
oh my god how adorable
Well I'm probably light-weight class but I've found Marx's Capital I and II very hard to read (least understand)
>>7429955
where do you even find this
my uni library has like 20 different reader's guides and disputations about the PoS, but not the book itself
>>7438224
You'd be best to purchase a copy online. My library only has his lectures.
>>7428922
can be either
House of Leaves
>>7425258
Phenomenology of spirit
>>7425893
not even best Shinichi t b h
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuyrzxJQd9c
>>7439274
>>7435867
While sure the PoS is pretty opaque, the Logic is much more considering it treats self-differentiating thought in its pure medium. On the Phenomenology there is, specially in 'Spirit' and 'Religion', the consciousness of a concrete and objective world which we call relate in some way or another at least.
>>7439656
Even if you could it wouldn't make it easier.
>>7439656
pleb
>>7439665
>he doesn't only know English
unamerican. probably a terrorist desu
>>7439684
drittes Weltkreig bald Anonuemus!
>>7439684
How the hell do you go through life knowing ONE language?
