PRINCIPLES AND ARTICLES (Published 2004)
- The prevailing definition of ‘Experiment’ as a repeatable recurring fixed event which gives rise to repeatable consistent reading (leading to truth) cannot take account for the variability of all events between the readings. The definition is therefore annulled as inconsistent (leading to non-truth).(a)
- The Office of Experiments ‘experimental’ logic will take account for events as affective on other events and therefore all knowledge, which in turn is continually in flux.
- The Office of Experiments will not produce data for analysis, but events are documented. To move to analysis of events developed through experiments is to perform or re-enact the mistakes of science.
- The method and research is based on action, and does not depend on the verbal idiom. In action there is the acceptance of the non-extended state as a part of the condition of the event.(b)
- The Office of Experiments is committed to the development of event-structures, based on evenometry as it describes the nature of events through time.
- The OFFICE of the The Office of Experiments itself can only occur as a manifestation of energy, is non-fixed and is a response to context. It is therefore not fixed in space, but is fluid in time.
- The Office of Experiments regards time as an event base that gives rise to and maintains all structures, objects, matter and systems. and also reclaims all structure, objects, matter and systems.
- There has been a shift.
- There is a void.
- a) Not to be confused with the Heisenberg principle, or observer/observed arguments.
- b) Spoken language is slippery too and other than an event in itself, is also almost always a shadow of the real event. As it always also in the now it also has no extended state (unlike the written word). See Flat Time Event Theory.
“.. the ‘modern’ kind of experimentation has been contrasted with ‘post-modern’ forms of experiment. The former, it is argued, relied on clear-cut separations between laboratory and society, facts and values, nature and culture. In contrast, the latter manifests itself as a “socio-technological experiment” (Latour) with no boundaries, ‘carried out in real time and in the scale of 1:1,’ thus retrospectively changing our perspective on the seemingly modern form of experiment.”
Introduction to ‘The Shape of Experiment’ by Hans Jorg Rheinberger of the Max Planck Institute, examining Mirko Grmek and the material logic of experiments.
Our approach to experimentality is shaped by the conceptual development of relations between forms of knowledge; from the specifics of a scientific rationale developed, to the material shape, systems and structures of experiments, including experimental representations and their role in culture and the public/social imagination.