Alpha Now, Omega Later : 6

Re: Alpha Now, Omega Later • Theorems From Physics? • Isomorphism Is Where It’s At

In the late 1970s a number of problems in combinatorics and graph theory that I really wanted to know the answers to had driven me to the desperate measures of trying to write a theorem-proving program to help with the work. Being familiar with the conceptual efficiencies of Peirce’s logical graphs and inspired by George Spencer Brown’s more recent resurrection of Peirce’s ideas, I naturally turned to those resources for the initial implements of my computational prospecting. The succession of computers and programming languages that I quested with over the years taught me a lot about the things that work and the things that do not. Dissolving for now to the present scene, I will use the next few posts to outline, as succinctly as I can, the basic constructs that developed through that line of inquiry.

Minimal Negation Operators and Painted Cacti

Let $\mathbb{B} = \{ 0, 1 \}.$

The objects of penultimate interest are the boolean functions $f : \mathbb{B}^n \to \mathbb{B}$ for $n \in \mathbb{N}.$

A minimal negation operator $\nu_k$ for $k \in \mathbb{N}$ is a boolean function $\nu_k : \mathbb{B}^k \to \mathbb{B}$ defined as follows:

$\nu_0 = 0.$
$\nu_k (x_1, \ldots, x_k) = 1$ if and only if exactly one of the arguments $x_j$ equals $0.$

The first few of these operators are already enough to generate all boolean functions $f : \mathbb{B}^n \to \mathbb{B}$ via functional composition but the rest of the family is worth keeping around for many practical purposes.

In most contexts $\nu (x_1, \ldots, x_k)$ may be written for $\nu_k (x_1, \ldots, x_k)$ since the number of arguments determines the rank of the operator. In some contexts even the letter $\nu$ may be omitted, writing just the argument list $(x_1, \ldots, x_k),$ in which case it helps to use a distinctive typeface for the list delimiters, as $\texttt{(} x_1 \texttt{,} \ldots \texttt{,} x_k \texttt{)}.$

A logical conjunction of $k$ arguments can be expressed in terms of minimal negation operators as $\nu_{k+1} (x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_{k-1}, x_k, 0)$ and this is conveniently abbreviated as a concatenation of arguments $x_1 x_2 \ldots x_{k-1} x_k.$

See the following article for more information:

Minimal Negation Operators

To be continued …

3 Responses to Alpha Now, Omega Later : 6

Pingback: All Process, No Paradox : 2 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Alpha Now, Omega Later : 7 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: All Process, No Paradox • 8 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

	Poor Richard on Differential Logic and Dynamic…
	Survey of Differenti… on Frankl, My Dear • 12
	Survey of Differenti… on Frankl, My Dear • 11
	Survey of Differenti… on Frankl, My Dear • 10
	Survey of Differenti… on Frankl, My Dear • 9
	Survey of Differenti… on Frankl, My Dear • 8
	Survey of Differenti… on Frankl, My Dear • 7
	Survey of Differenti… on Frankl, My Dear • 6
	Survey of Differenti… on Frankl, My Dear • 5
	Survey of Differenti… on Frankl, My Dear • 4

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30	31