ORB Visualization
(soon)
Dick Ballard said:
In the
declarative n-dimensional space you can exchange independent and dependent
roles and reason in any order or direction, e.g. p2 as a function of
(a,b,p1,p3,..pn).
You are in the company of physicists who think routinely in all "degrees of freedom".
This comment about a declarative n-dimensional space is important to me, partially because of a set of intuitions. I have only partially been able to develop these intuitions. Now and then I get some time to advance the work; or to see in someone else’s work the same intuition. .
The Orbs are in the most general from perfectly capable of encoding the n-aries that you speak of, and the relationship between a constraint and a dimension (in a Hilbert space) is in fact the foundational notion that Newtonian physics depends.
The exchange of independent and dependant roles implies some sort of symmetries and in some cases one is likely to find that indeterminacy and the arrow of time does not really support symmetry. But in other cases, the symmetry is likely to be of value.
The problem is as John Sowa is stating. The problem is not in syntax.
The problem is in addressing the meaning of things in the way that natural living systems address the meaning of things. This means using memory, awareness and anticipation in ways that involve action-perception cycles.
There is no religion, on my part here, only the observation that life and living processes have not been shown to be reducible to a mechanical computation, no matter what the formalism and no matter what the dimension within which the formalism acts.
Having said this, one does not mean that our formalism cannot become much better. This is what the development of work like mine, or work by the polylogics group in Germany, or the applied semiotics groups in Russia; is all about.
Nathan and I have developed a view of these beads games using the simplest form of the encoding rules for Orbs. A tutorial based on this simplest encoding is show in a tutorial.