<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!-- name="generator" content="blosxom/2.0" -->
<!DOCTYPE rss PUBLIC "-//Netscape Communications//DTD RSS 0.91//EN" "http://my.netscape.com/publish/formats/rss-0.91.dtd">

<rss version="0.91">
  <channel>
    <title>Notebooks   </title>
    <link>http://bactra.org/notebooks</link>
    <description>Cosma's Notebooks</description>
    <language>en</language>

  <item>
    <title>Renormalized Semiotics</title>
    <link>http://bactra.org/notebooks/1995/03/16#renormalized-signs</link>
    <description>

The post-structuralists talk about endless chains of signifiers floating loose
without connecting to signifieds.  As a physicist, I say just renormalize the
bastards, absorbing all those extra infinite terms into the ``dressed'' or
``physical'' or ``observed'' signifier, which then works just fine.  (Cf.
&lt;a href=&quot;wm-james.html&quot;&gt;James&lt;/a&gt; on the ``fringe.'')
&lt;P&gt;``Oh my God, it's full of signifiers!''
&lt;P&gt;(After a conversation with Jon Fetter, 21 February)
&lt;ul&gt;Recommended:
&lt;li&gt;Mattuck, &lt;cite&gt;A Guide to Feynman Diagrams in the Many-Body Problem&lt;/cite&gt;
[Since this undertakes --- successfully --- to explain Feynman Diagrams and
renormalization at what the author calls a ``pre-kindergarten level,'' it
should be quite accessible to the semioticians, especially those who speak so
learnedly of ``differential topology.'']
&lt;/ul&gt;
</description>
  </item>
  </channel>
</rss>