This is a first drafting of the Conceptualization Formula as Art.
*(p) is the perception of logic or illogic of the observer which can be represented by a negative or a positive of the outcome. I offer up my formula for conceptual art.
Where the conceptual is represented by an idea encompassing intelligence which is derived from the following expression of *F = T ∇ Sτ the intelligence equation. (Right, Vid. 1.)
Additionally, quantum and meta subtracting logic raised to the power of perception which can be negative or positive. The simplified expression leaving out perception is the art of conceptualization represented.
Art can change the world, or its perception of the world and has represented this since the first scratchings in the sand or paintings in a cave. It has been said, the visual representations of cave drawings are indicative and constrained to the intelligence and experience of that specific time.
Let's suppose images depicted are the artist's best way of explaining the unexplainable. Some artists in history have embedded objects and messages in their art for future generations to decipher because the prevalence of intelligence and repercussions of their period precluded them from openly demonstrating their thoughts aggressively.
In the days of Duchamp and others who openly tested the status quo, we are moving into generational thinking which offers artists more freedom to challenge, and clearly state their intentions.
The truth of imagination leads us towards solving mysteries permitted to remain as such by the closed minded.
Conceptualizing possible outcomes based on the formula presented lends itself to two simultaneous outcomes. Positive and Negative perceptions of the observer. This speaks directly to our limited vision as what quantum physicists call "flatlanders".
Flat-landers are those who live on a plane of existence which have a limited scope of vision.
This is explained quite well in this video linked from TEDx. (Right, Vid. 2.)
I am introducing a method of explaining, the unexplainable with our limited spectrum of vision and applying it to conceptual theory and art. Why shouldn't a crossover of science and art combine to formulate a theory for art?
As we approach a better understanding of what only theory can tell us about our visible universe, as artists we should be reaching for a further point on the horizon to depict what we envision could be possible.