Differential Logic • Discussion 11

Re: Differential Logic • Discussion 9

Let’s look more closely at the “functor” from \mathbb{R} to \mathbb{B} and the connection it makes between real and boolean hierarchies of types.  There’s a detailed discussion of this analogy in the article and section linked below.

Assorted types of mathematical objects which turn up in practice often enough to earn themselves common names, along with their common isomorphisms, are shown in the following Table.

\text{Table 3.} ~~ \text{Analogy Between Real and Boolean Types}

Analogy Between Real and Boolean Types

cc: Category TheoryCyberneticsOntologStructural 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.