# Is beauty necessarily fleeting?

Good summary here:

…from Boselie & Leeuwenberg (1985)

Now, take a look at this: New Theory of Time

Therein, there is the notion that our time flows in a certain direction and as a consequence of our universe moving from a state of low entropy to a state of high entropy.

“Entropy” can then be interpreted as one of the two polar opposites cited above: i. e., high entropy is parallel to notions of “complexity, multiplicity, or diversity,” and low entropy is parallel to notions of “order, lawfulness, or unity.”

This means that, as our universe moves from a state of low entropy to a state of high entropy, the function (or ratio) of these two gradually shifts in value. If “the nature of beauty is formulated in the principle of “unity in variety” (which we here conceive as the principle of “[low entropy] in [high entropy]”), then there must be a single moment in the evolution of the universe at which that universe is most beautiful. In addition, according to Carroll’s theory, there must be a single speed and direction of time that is likewise most beautiful.

Note that this would then also be true of *any* system that moves from a state of low entropy to a state of high entropy. At some point definitive point during that transition, the low entropy/high entropy ratio will attain a value at which that system is most beautiful.

Beyond that point, however, everything proceeds increasingly downhill to ugly.

However, suppose this sort of formal definition of beauty can be applied to *games* and *game systems*, which (more so than our universe) might conceivably be stabilized at this single definitive point at which unity and variety, order and chaos, are related most beautifully, and time is likewise perceived to flow most beautifully.

If this stabilization can be achieved within that system — e. g., a *game* system — then would that system not be the culminate achievement of art in its indefinite suspension of the experience of beauty?