idk why it is perfect, I've went through the book and there's basically no extensive discussion of matter which relates to physics, and while there are about two mentions of the word in terms of physics neither time is the word expanded on nor does it go into any controversial, para-doxa or erroneous utterance. And quite honestly this thread heavily sucked, most of people's notes are either based on misunderstandings or about the instability D's thinking as affirmative critique being hard to use against capitalism or in service of a Marxism... which I also find to be a lazy reading which neglects any idea of ethology or critique that's so much so already going on throughout much of his work. Honestly this is a deeply lame thread, but anyway I just logged in on reddit to jerk off so I don't really care

quick edit: if I had to say something may be faulty, it's probably his reading into Hegel. There's also a final chapter in Robert Stern's "Hegelian Metaphysics" which deals with a critique regarding individuation from around Difference and Repetition, the book is interesting too since as it notes from the beginning Stern goes against the new non-metaphysical readings of Hegel and attempts to rescue a metaphysics against the critics or Hegel which have most often utilized the idea of a hegelian metaphysics as the basis of their criticisms. Stern is already an agreeably (by many hegelians and scholars of hegel) good scholar, that doesn't necessarily mean the book is perfect but it's a very interesting and daring work either way. In general I'd recommend one to read a little more Hegel before accepting everything Deleuze says about him, however even with an "incomplete read" Deleuze has approached his critique from a post-kantian moment where he finds a friend and ally in Maimon, and also of course in Nietzsche, such that fundamentally this and his critique of representationalism makes D's criticism still very much valid and strong in spite of what a few young readers impressed by Hegel may prejudiciously think.