拉康:RSI 30

拉康:RSI 30
真实界,象征界,与想象界

Seminar of April 8, 1975

But, finally, one must not carry on (charrier), nor charity-on (chariter). There is no chance that one might have the key to the road accident (accident de parcours) that made it so that sex has ended up becoming a malady for the speakingbeing, and the worst malady, that by which it reproduces.

但是最后,我们一定不要执行,也不是从事慈善。没有机会让我们拥有这个道路意外地解答。这个道路意味如此形成,以致性结果成一种疾病,对于言说的主体。这是最糟糕的疾病,主体凭借它来繁殖。

It is obvious that biology has an advantage in forcing itself to become, with
a little different accent, viology, the logy of violence; in forcing itself to the side of mold, with which said speakingbeing has many analogies. One never knows.

显而易见地,生物学拥有一个优势,以稍微不同的强调,强迫它自己成为暴力学,强迫它自己到黴菌的这一边。被说的言说主体跟黴菌有许多的类似。我们永远无法知道

A good encounter. One François Jacob is enough of a Jew to have permitted rectifying the non-rapport, which, in the current state of knowledge, can only mean replacing the fundamental disproportion of said rapport by another formula, by something that can only be conceived of as a detour devoted to an
erre, but to an erre limited by a knot.

一个很好的遭遇。有一位法兰克斯、杰柯布是一位犹太人,他曾经容许修正这种「非亲密关系」,根据知识的目前状态,那仅能意味着,凭借另外一种公式,取代被说的亲密关系的基本不平衡。以某件仅能被构想,作为专注于「失误」的迂回,但是专注于受到环结限制的「失误」。

I think you have seen the papers distributed by Michel Thomé and Pierre Soury, which demonstrate that there is only one oriented Borromean knot. I would like to underline the remark I have made today; the fact that there is a means of making a cycle with two circles has some consequences concerning this proposition. I agree that there is an oriented knot when there are three rounds of thread, but not when there are more.

我认为你们已经看见过麦克、汤枚与皮尔、邵瑞散发的论文。这些论文证明我今天做过的谈论。事实上,有一个方法用两个圆圈製作一个循环。关于这个命题,它拥有一些结果。我同意,有一个定向的环结,当有三个线的圆圈,但是再多圆圈就没办法。

Nonetheless, if you transform one of these circles into an infinite straight line, there is no longer only one oriented knot, but two. For the infinite line is not orientable. Beginning with what could one orient it? It is only orientable
beginning with any chosen point on it, from which the orientations diverge. But if they diverge, that does not give it one orientation.

可是假如你们转移其中一个圆圈,成为无限的直线,就不再仅是一个定向的环结。因为无限定线并不是定向的。开始于我们能够替它定向什么?那仅是可定向的,开始于任何可选择点在它上面,从那里,这些定向分叉。但是假如它们分叉,那并没有给予它一个定向。

To hold ourselves to a simple formulation, let us remark that in the double circle (Figure 8), there is an orientation, which we will designate with the word gyrie.

为了让我们自己固定在一个简单的构想,让我们谈论,在这个双重的圆圈(图形八),有一个定向。我们将会用「环圈」这个字词指明它。

Not that we could say that this is a dextro- or levogyrie Everyone knows–it’s why we couldn’t send as a message to someone from another planet the distinction between right and left.

倒不是因为我们能够说,这是一个「右旋」或是「左旋」的环圈。每个人知道—这就是为什么我们不能够送右与左之间的区别,给某一位从另外一个星球来的人。

It has to be admitted that it is impossible, like the quadrature of the circle. But we could with words distinguish the gyres as being two for the inhabitants of another planet. It would suffice that they have the notion of a horizon, which would also give them that of the plane.

我们必须承认,这是不可能的,就像圆圈的求面积。但是我们能够使用文字区别那些环圈,作为是两个环圈,给另外一个星球的居民。这样说就足够了,他们拥有一个地平线的观念,那也会给予他们平面的观念。

If we flatten out these two circles by themselves, having supposed the notion of a horizon (Figure 9), we can distinguish the two circles from our Figure 8, the direction their respective gyres ( . . .). Thus we have here (Figure 8) two orientations, this one dextrogyre and this one levogyre.

假如我们摆平这两个圆圈的本身,因为我们曾经假定一个地平线的观念( 图形九),我们能够区别这两个环圈,跟我们的图形八,它们的个别的环圈的方向(…)。因此,我们在此拥有(图形八) 两个定向

But we are incapable of saying which is dextro, which levo. We are incapable of transmitting it in a message. And no manipulation of the three-looped knot gives without ambiguity the definition of levo and dextro.

但是我们不能个说哪一个是右旋转,哪一个是左旋转。我们不能个以讯息传递它。 这三个圈套的环结的操控,毫无曖昧地给予左旋转与右旋转的定义。

On the other hand, the existence as such of two gyres is quite manifest. For there to be two gyries, two oriented Borromean knots, it therefore suffices that we make one of the three rounds into an infinite straight line, inasmuch as the
infinite straight line is defined as non-orientable.

在另一方面,两个环圈的存在本身,是相当明显的。为了让有两个环圈,两个定向的波洛米恩结,因此我们制作这三个环圈的其中一个成为一条无限的直线,就足够了。因为这条无线的直线,被定义为「非定向」。

If the rounds are all oriented, either as centrifugal, going toward the exterior, marked e, or centripetal, toward the interior, marked i, we have the following possibilities, extracted quite correctly by Soury and Thomé: 3e/3i/1i, 2e/1e, 2i. Which only makes one oriented knot.

假如这些圆圈都是被定向,不管是离心定向,朝向外面,被标示为「e」,或是向心定向,朝向内部,被标示为「i」,我们都有以下的可能,有邵瑞与汤玫相当正确地抽取出:3e/3i/1i, 2e/1e, 2i.。这仅是会形成一个定向的环结。

But with a line without an orientation, marked o, we have 1o, 1i, 1e. And this order is differentiated from another: 1o, 1e, 1i.

但是用一条没有定向的线,被标示为0,我们就拥有1o,1i,1e。这个秩序不同于另外一个1o,1e,1i。

From the diverse flattenings out of Soury and Thomé it results that the knot remains the same–if I may say so–from all the points of view of the flattening out. But it suffices to take one from elsewhere, from the non-point-of-view, to demonstrate that there are two oriented Borromean knots.

从对于邵瑞与汤玫的这个差异的摆平,结果是,环结始终是相同—容我这样说—从摆平的各个观点。但是我们只要从别的地方取来一个就足够了,从这个「没有观点」,为了要证明:有两个定向的波罗米恩环结。

Lets us sum up. If the three rounds are oriented, the knot isn’t, since orientation implies that there are two orientations. But to the extent that one of these rounds is specified, two distinct orientations appear.

让我们作个结论。假如三个圆圈都是定向,这个环结就没有定向,因为定向暗示着:有两个定向。但是随着这三个圆圈的其中一个被指明,两个清楚的定向就会出现。

Specifying a round can be simply to color it, to signify that it remains identical to itself, and that it is therefore non-orientable. Coloring a round is thus equivalent to transforming it into a straight line. Which shows you in passing that coloring a round and orienting it can make two.

明确指明一个圆圈,有时仅是要给予染色,要标示,它跟它自己始终是一致的。它因此是「非定向」。替一个圆圈染色,因此是相等于转换它成为一条直线。这有时候跟你们显示:染色一个圆圈及定向它,会成为两个圆圈。

No doubt it will come to the minds of Thomé and Soury that the flattening out introduces a suspicious element here.

无可置疑地,汤玫与邵瑞会想到,摆平介绍一个可疑的元素在这里。

Nonetheless, I indicate to them that the same articulations concerning orientation are relevant (valent) if we draw the two circles in the following fashion (Figure 10), which makes no reference to the exteriority of one of these curves in relation to the curve of the other. There is neither an external nor an internal; however, there is thus already a means to demonstrate that there are two oriented three-looped Borromean knots.

可是,我跟他们指示著,关于定向的相同的表达是相关的,假如我们用以下的方式,画这两个圆圈(图形10)。它没有提到这些弯曲线的其中一个的外在性,相关于另外一个的弯曲线。可是,既没有外在,也没有内在,它因此仅有一个方法证明,有两个定向,三个圈套的波罗米恩环结。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: