Home | Who I am ?
I was born in the mountains where I spent all my childhood and adolescence. Very early I was passionate about mathematics, inventions and language. Having been several years ahead at school, I learned everything by myself, with the curiosity and activity of a researcher intrigued the mysteries of the world. I stayed in the mountains until I entered the Ecole Normale Supérieure in the Rue d’Ulm, an old version before the Magisterium, a time when students from different areas learned from each other. So far specialized in mathematics and physics, I took this opportunity to take an interest in linguistics and political sciences. At that time, I got the Aggregation and then got the equivalent of a PhD in mathematics. Actually I didn’t publish the second part, since I was intrigued in the mysteries of the universe much more than I was interested in a career at University. I then taught three years at the Ecole Normale Supérieure in Lyon where I was helping the students to get the Agrégation, then studied two years at the Institute of Political Sciences, Science Po. I became a professor in classes préparatoires, which allowed me to continue personal research at the same time, I studied in detail mathematical logic, theoretical physics, psychoanalysis. For example, I did a thesis in string theory (unpublished for similar reasons) but the main part of my work was to continue to question the world as it was intriguing to me, and this for many years. At one point I had the idea about two new interpretations, one for the wave function, the other for gravitation. The interpretation of the wave function eliminated the question of probability, which was interesting but raised the question of reality from another perspective. Interaction preceded matter, the universe was an empty being, in agreement with Lao Tzu as well as with some presocratic philosophers for example. These questions were exciting, and for gravitation I was testing a whole series of ideas that had come to me because of my thorough knowledge of the thoughts of the great physicists in history. To what extent could the very definition of physics account for the content of physics itself, or, at least, in what way was the content of physics affected by this definition? Did physics possess contents or equations which would in return have assured the universality of the laws which physics postulated in the first place? Did some kind of general laws of thought allow access to the content of physics beyond all possible experiment, such as the creation of the universe, for example? These ideas led me to wonder whether, at the end, the gravitational constant did not simply control the very complexity of the universe, making gravitation a very special force, although still a quantum interaction. The formula that would link the gravitational constant with those of the other forces would then have a quite different form, involving an exponential. In fact, my latest research was even more interesting to me. I had at first the idea of identifying mathematical intuition and the unconscious, thus also identifying scientific research and the development of a psychoanalysis. Not only mathematical formalism and calculation, but also what a Lacan of the early seminaries would have called the symbolic and its laws, appeared as complexes, global formations, and not as the thought itself, which one would have been the imaginary. This imagination in this case worked to always carry out and repeat a single local identifying operation, equivalent to a synthesis operation. By constantly identifying, the imaginary would work and synthesize beyond temporality and negation, which had made Freud say that the unconscious knows neither time nor contradiction, On the other hand, it was possible to trace, by following the history of the individual, the formation of complexes as unity, then as negation, space and time. I was able to demonstrate that the scientific explanation of the world by physics follows step by step the development of the imaginary in the first months of life, which therefore raises the question of the relationship between the real and the imaginary in a form easier to handle (real and imaginary as they can be taken from Lacan’s theories). My latest ideas led me to think that the intersection between the real and the imaginary is placed in the animal dispositions of man. To put it simply, but at this stage this is only a hypothesis, the “speaking being” can imagine as much as he wants, even delirious, his animal nature can only bring him back to earth. What he imagines could only be a dual representation of the real, for the simple reason that, through this duality, this is his survival which is ensured. Physics would then take reality in an imaginary circularity, or say in a dual way, the imaginary would be taken from the beginning in a real circularity.