Differential Logic • Discussion 6

Re: Differential Logic • 5
Re: Laws of FormLyle Anderson

JA:
The differential proposition \texttt{((} \mathrm{d}p \texttt{)(} \mathrm{d}q \texttt{))} may be read as saying “change p or change q or both”.  And this can be recognized as just what you need to do if you happen to find yourself in the center cell and require a complete and detailed description of ways to escape it.
LA:
Is this what is new:  “you happen to find yourself in the center cell [of a Venn diagram] and require a complete and detailed description of ways to escape it”?

Dear Lyle,

What’s improved, if not entirely new, is the development of appropriate logical analogues of differential calculus and differential geometry.  There has been work on applying the calculus of finite differences to propositions, but the traditional styles of syntax are so weighed down by conceptual clutter that the resulting formal systems hardly get off the ground before they become too unwieldy to stand.

That is where the formal elegance and practical efficiency of C.S. Peirce’s logical graphs and Spencer Brown’s graphical forms come to save the day.  That, I think, is new.  Or at least it was when I began to work on it.

Regards,

Jon (the Prisoner of Vennda, No More)

Resources

cc: CyberneticsOntolog • Peirce (1) (2) (3) (4)Structural ModelingSystems Science
cc: FB | Differential LogicLaws of Form

This entry was posted in Amphecks, Animata, Boolean Algebra, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Category Theory, Change, Cybernetics, Differential Analytic Turing Automata, Differential Calculus, Differential Logic, Discrete Dynamics, Equational Inference, Frankl Conjecture, Functional Logic, Gradient Descent, Graph Theory, Hologrammautomaton, Indicator Functions, Inquiry Driven Systems, Leibniz, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Surveys, Time, Topology, Visualization, Zeroth Order Logic and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Differential Logic • Discussion 6

  1. 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.