Differential Propositional Calculus • Discussion 5

Re: Peirce ListHelmut Raulien
Re: Ontolog ForumMauro Bertani

HR:
  1. I think I like very much your Cactus Graphs.  Meaning that I am in the process of understanding them, and finding it much better not to have to draw circles, but lines.
  2. Less easy for me is the differential calculus.  Where is the consistency between \texttt{(} x \texttt{,} y \texttt{)} and \texttt{(} x \texttt{,} y \texttt{,} z \texttt{)}?  \texttt{(} x \texttt{,} y \texttt{)} means that x and y are not equal and \texttt{(} x \texttt{,} y \texttt{,} z \texttt{)} means that one of them is false.  Unequality and truth/falsity for me are two concepts so different I cannot think them together or see a consistency between them.
  3. What about \texttt{(} w \texttt{,} x \texttt{,} y \texttt{,} z \texttt{)}?
MB:
So, if I want to transform a circle into a line I have to use a function f : \mathbb{B}^n \to \mathbb{B}?
This is the base of temporal logic?  I’m using f : \mathbb{N}^n \to \mathbb{N}.

Dear Mauro,

If I understand what Helmut is saying about “circles” and “lines”, he is talking about the passage from forms of enclosure on plane sheets of paper — such as those used by Peirce and Spencer Brown — to their topological duals in the form of rooted trees.  There is more discussion of this transformation at the following sites.

This is the first step in the process of converting planar maps to graph-theoretic data structures.  Further transformations take us from trees to the more general class of cactus graphs, which implement a highly efficient family of logical primitives called minimal negation operators.  These are described in the following article.

cc: CyberneticsLaws of FormOntolog Forum • Peirce List (1) (2) (3)
cc: FB | Differential LogicStructural ModelingSystems Science

This entry was posted in Amphecks, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Category Theory, Change, Computational Complexity, Cybernetics, Differential Analytic Turing Automata, Differential Calculus, Differential Logic, Discrete Dynamics, Dynamical Systems, Equational Inference, Functional Logic, Gradient Descent, Graph Theory, Group Theory, Hologrammautomaton, Indicator Functions, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematical Models, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Propositional Equation Reasoning Systems, Time, Visualization and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Differential Propositional Calculus • Discussion 5

  1. Pingback: Differential Propositional Calculus • Discussion 6 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  2. Pingback: Animated Logical Graphs • 67 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  3. Pingback: Survey of Differential Logic • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.