a large part of the attraction towards math and anarchy (especially of the more playful, game oriented, nihilist sort) is that they both offer atheistically beautiful and very complex systems of thought and analysis, and operate within the same conventions and spheres of existence, yet i think a lot of the logic (though obviously not all) used by each play very different roles and/or are not interchangeable within each system. for example, a vector is the equivalent of the middle ground fallacy, which in ideological arguments produces illogical things like platformists, but in geometry produces a logical framework (it also seems that existence itself is either a bizarre loophole in the middle ground fallacy; as all life and everything that springs from it (anarchy included) is the middle point between non-existence and death), or either its a weird metaphysical use of a mathematical proof). because of their differences in application, its seems that both systems integral to interpreting the world on complementary physical and abstract levels.
so, your thoughts? add-on questions might be, how do both frames of logic influence each other, and what similar reference points/points of conflict do they provide? is anarchy something that stems from the physics of a mechanical logic, or is it the reverse, or do you think the relationship is even worth analyzing?