Rhizomatic structures are able to quantify a level of communication, not as traces or representation, but to a degree that legitimizes the mapping of linear relationships between plateaus. The illustration of the rhizome in Deleuze & Guattari communicates its ability to form structures that are inherently morphological in nature as that is the underlying basis for the rhizome. The rhizome constructs the plateau as a relationship to the map, drawing linear communications through time. The linearity is essential; where the plotted point is but a singularity, the affect of vectors make the point a line. Vectors, not mentioned outright as a typology in the reading, are integral in the morphosis of the rhizome. Vectors give the rhizome the necessary information to map the next dimension. They are able to function as the singular factor in the n – 1 equation considered by Deleuze & Guattari. In producing the vector, the rhizome moves into temporality and limits itself to an ongoing process of change. As a counter argument, the notion of permanence comes up again. Whether a rhizomatic structure benefits from permanence is not important, but whether it can create permanence is. Deleuze & Guattari contrast the rhizome with the root and tree, also a morphological system, yet draws greater connotations of permanence, and consequently, importance. The rhizome may be able to generate similiar effects if, not only the vectors and linear relationships informed the plateaus, but the plateaus themselves grew as part of the morphological process, imprinting or affecting their own importance through a developing permanence.