http://www.exploratorium.edu/exploring/language/language_article4.html#globa
l
> i wish i could communicate the idea better,
> yet it is to include the dimension of time and
> indecision so, playing games maybe it can
> be considered this, thought it is an attempt
> to communicate what is basically a nature
> of paradox found in, say, charge, where a
> neutral charge (N) co-exists within what is
> positive (+) and negative (-) inside of the
> structure of the material world, which is
> not a two-part system, but three part as
> neutral is still a 'charge', even if nothing.
i would say the material world is much more than a a part-system ( any
number...)
> so, instead of the binary yes-no, or +, -,
> there is also a neutral position. and there
> could be, instead of say 1 and 0, morelike
> -1, 0, +1 or more simply -, N, + which is
> more closely identical to what is going on
> in computation in the form of energy inside
> the computer and phone lines and the rest.
> so, if you consider the spanning of, say,
> -1 to +1 and take out the middle, you have
> 2 ones, yet only if it is in the realm of the
> possible yet not-yet-decided, and not in
> the realm of a probability of decision yet
> of the range of decision, like a wave that
> goes below 0 and above zero and in its
> doing so would equal 2, such that -1 and
> +1 equal two, or so it would seem. so that
> the venn diagram (not a traditional logic,
> but a paradoxical logic) would be some-
> thing like (1 ) 0 ) and (0 ) 1) simultaneously.
there you enter the relative and absolute values of number(ed contents )
and the charges in physics ( neutron/proton) are copied from a set of values
used also in maths to make everybody understand each other scientist...
just wonder how arabics, aztechs or hindus astronomers or mathematicians
developped their arithmetical concepts without using the same language
(numbers , f.i. ) we use now.
> thus, the diagram would be (-1(0)+1) or
> even (-(N)+) possibly. i do not know yet
> am attempting to do what you say, which
> you erased your question to evaluate it by.
>
the actual question was how to demonstrate (logically/mathematically)
that actually 1 plus 1 gives (?) or "produces" two, and not 1.55 or 2.78.
it's actually a very difficult concept to show, as it needs to define some
sets of values we consider perfectly normal, common and accepted from
basic school,
actually that set could have been different.
we probbaly came to use the most complete.
our decimal system is based on definitions we developped ( including the
notion of zero or no value/nonexistence in maths) very differently from the
those civilizations using duodecimal or let's say vigesimal systems for
mathematical calculus,
the results we attained answered a need.
the binary system in computing could be described as less complicated , as
the encoding / alphabet is much simpler there, even if the speeding of the
process gives very complex results, but using another encoding is necessary
to "transcript" the code to understandable result for our brains.
a duplicated alphabet , for computers, replacing or imitating the actual
decimal system for numbers and + - 24 symbols alphabets ( for western
languages) in phrasing , for (real)(?) human communication.
>> Pat
>
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html
l
> i wish i could communicate the idea better,
> yet it is to include the dimension of time and
> indecision so, playing games maybe it can
> be considered this, thought it is an attempt
> to communicate what is basically a nature
> of paradox found in, say, charge, where a
> neutral charge (N) co-exists within what is
> positive (+) and negative (-) inside of the
> structure of the material world, which is
> not a two-part system, but three part as
> neutral is still a 'charge', even if nothing.
i would say the material world is much more than a a part-system ( any
number...)
> so, instead of the binary yes-no, or +, -,
> there is also a neutral position. and there
> could be, instead of say 1 and 0, morelike
> -1, 0, +1 or more simply -, N, + which is
> more closely identical to what is going on
> in computation in the form of energy inside
> the computer and phone lines and the rest.
> so, if you consider the spanning of, say,
> -1 to +1 and take out the middle, you have
> 2 ones, yet only if it is in the realm of the
> possible yet not-yet-decided, and not in
> the realm of a probability of decision yet
> of the range of decision, like a wave that
> goes below 0 and above zero and in its
> doing so would equal 2, such that -1 and
> +1 equal two, or so it would seem. so that
> the venn diagram (not a traditional logic,
> but a paradoxical logic) would be some-
> thing like (1 ) 0 ) and (0 ) 1) simultaneously.
there you enter the relative and absolute values of number(ed contents )
and the charges in physics ( neutron/proton) are copied from a set of values
used also in maths to make everybody understand each other scientist...
just wonder how arabics, aztechs or hindus astronomers or mathematicians
developped their arithmetical concepts without using the same language
(numbers , f.i. ) we use now.
> thus, the diagram would be (-1(0)+1) or
> even (-(N)+) possibly. i do not know yet
> am attempting to do what you say, which
> you erased your question to evaluate it by.
>
the actual question was how to demonstrate (logically/mathematically)
that actually 1 plus 1 gives (?) or "produces" two, and not 1.55 or 2.78.
it's actually a very difficult concept to show, as it needs to define some
sets of values we consider perfectly normal, common and accepted from
basic school,
actually that set could have been different.
we probbaly came to use the most complete.
our decimal system is based on definitions we developped ( including the
notion of zero or no value/nonexistence in maths) very differently from the
those civilizations using duodecimal or let's say vigesimal systems for
mathematical calculus,
the results we attained answered a need.
the binary system in computing could be described as less complicated , as
the encoding / alphabet is much simpler there, even if the speeding of the
process gives very complex results, but using another encoding is necessary
to "transcript" the code to understandable result for our brains.
a duplicated alphabet , for computers, replacing or imitating the actual
decimal system for numbers and + - 24 symbols alphabets ( for western
languages) in phrasing , for (real)(?) human communication.
>> Pat
>
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html