§1 pictures that are equations
Definition 1.1. A picture is an equation drawing when every line of it is a curve with an equation, and nothing else is drawn. Each picture below carries every one of its equations as its caption.
Proposition 1.2. Such a picture cannot drift from its equations: the page computes every curve from the same equation that it prints, when it is built.
y = 0.35 sin(2x) + 0.12 sin(5x + 1) + 1 {-6 ≤ x ≤ 6}y = 0.3 sin(2x + 1.2) + 0.1 sin(6x) {-6 ≤ x ≤ 6}y = 0.25 sin(2x + 2.5) + 0.08 sin(7x + 2) - 1 {-6 ≤ x ≤ 6}
(1.1 sin(t) sin(t/2)^1.5, 2 cos(t)) {0 ≤ t ≤ 2π}(0.55 sin(t) sin(t/2)^1.5, cos(t) - 0.85) {0 ≤ t ≤ 2π}
y = 0.35x² - 1 {-1.6 ≤ x ≤ 1.6}y = -0.1 {-1.6 ≤ x ≤ 1.6}(0, t) {-0.1 ≤ t ≤ 1.9}y = 1.9 - 1.4x {0 ≤ x ≤ 1.3}
r = 1.5 + 0.07 sin(16θ) {0.45 ≤ θ ≤ 2π}(1.45 cos(0.3) + 0.22 cos(t), 1.45 sin(0.3) + 0.22 sin(t)) {0 ≤ t ≤ 2π}
Remark 1.3. the four are things of the author's profile: the sea of his work, the flame of "the aquatic prometheus", the orange boat of its icon, and Ouroboros. they are drawn the way people draw with the graphing calculator Desmos; type the lines into one to draw them again.
§2 three answers about a source
Definition 2.1. The pipeline has four steps, each an effect in Polysemy: read the scan with Tesseract; ask a model if the reading looks broken; ask for notes on the hard passages, each marked as a guess; check each note against the literature.
Definition 2.2. The check answers one of three things: no source was found, a source says the opposite, or the note is likely an invention.
“absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Collapsing the two into one "unconfirmed" bucket would silently discard that distinction.”
Proposition 2.3. A claim with no source is not a false claim. It is a claim that waits.
§3 the letters
Definition 3.1. The test case is one real document. The README calls it “the declassified 1955 correspondence between John Nash and the NSA”.
“In 2011, the National Security Agency declassified letters written by Nash in the 1950s, in which he had proposed a new encryption–decryption machine.”
Remark 3.2. not verified at the source: the NSA's own pages answered “access denied” when this page was written, so the year 1955 stands on the README alone. the scan is not in this repository.
§4 a game of two players
Definition 4.1. Two players. The author chooses once: to open the work or to close it. The reader chooses each day: to check, or to trust.
Proposition 4.2. Only the top row lets the reader change column. That is the whole case for opening.
Remark 4.3. a reading, drawn as a game. it is not a result: no payoff here was measured. the long form of the argument is a book, closed source: the god that failed, by the same author.
§5 a mask with its key beside it
Definition 5.1. The code is written and read in English on the author's disk; what git stores, and what GitHub shows, has its names in Latin. Two filters of git do it at the border.
“A filter driver consists of a clean command and a smudge command, either of which can be left unspecified.”
- Nashkell
- Nashcellum
- Pipeline
- Series
- Retry
- Conatus
- Effect
- Effectus
Proposition 5.2. The mask hides nothing. It is set in one clone, so a fresh clone sees the Latin; it changes names and not paths, so “the Latin form stored in git is not directly buildable”; and its key, the list of pairs, is a file of the same repository.
Remark 5.3. so it is a study of how such a mask works, and not a lock.
§6 comments in Latin
Definition 6.1. Every comment in the source is in classical Latin; names, types and the prompts sent to the model stay in English. A hook of git refuses a commit whose comments are not Latin.
-- Summa totius operis: textus originarius, iudicium de qualitate,
-- commentarii, et comprobationes fontium -- omnia in una structura.Remark 6.2. the README says where the hook is weak: it reads lines with a pattern and not with a parser. written again from that description, it flags exactly the one false positive that the README names. the first commit is called sic mundus creatus est: so the world was made.
§7 what is not right in it
Remark 7.1. the Haskell pipeline has no tests.
Remark 7.2. the justfile says of itself, in Latin, that it was not run where it was written.
Remark 7.3. the pipeline was not built or run for this page.
§8 the book and the record
Definition 8.1. The open book: Nashkell: Rhizomatic experiments, v0.1.0, in progress. Five experiments, in the voice of Nash. Its text is CC BY 4.0. Cite it as doi 10.5281/zenodo.23356739.
Remark 8.2. each fact of this page, with where it was read, is in REFERENCES.md; the ideas are in the notes. all rights reserved for the code, this page and its drawings; the book and the notes are CC BY 4.0. the licence.
Remark 8.3. the author's other works, each with its DOI: marola, ww3-gpu, marola-bench, picasso, closed source, and his profile.
§9 how to cite
Definition 9.1. The two DOIs of the book, as Zenodo minted them on 14 October 2026:
- Latest DOI10.5281/zenodo.23356739
- one DOI for the whole book. It always opens the newest version. Cite this one.
- Permanent DOI · v0.1.010.5281/zenodo.23356740
- one DOI for v0.1.0 alone: the same text forever. Add it when the exact wording matters.
Hoffmann, M. (2026). Nashkell: Rhizomatic experiments (Version v0.1.0). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23356739
@book{hoffmann2026nashkell,
author = {Hoffmann, Matheus},
title = {Nashkell: Rhizomatic experiments},
year = {2026},
version = {v0.1.0},
publisher = {Zenodo},
doi = {10.5281/zenodo.23356739}
}Remark 9.2. professional citation is the argument of the author's other book. cite this one, and cite what you borrow.