Operator Variables in Logical Graphs • 6

Another tactic I tried by way of porting operator variables into Peirce’s logical graphs and Spencer Brown’s logical forms was to hollow out a leg of the latter’s crosses, gnomons, or markers, whatever you wish to call them, as shown below.

Transitional Form (q)_p = {q,(q)}

The initial idea I had in mind was the same as before, that the operator over q would be counted as absent when p evaluates to a space and present when p evaluates to a cross.

However, much in the same way operators with a shade of negativity tend to be more generative than the purely positive brand, it turned out more useful to reverse the initial polarity of operation, letting the operator over q be counted as absent when p evaluates to a cross and present when p evaluates to a space.

So that is the convention I’ll adopt from this point on.

cc: FB | Logical GraphsLaws of FormMathstodonAcademia.edu
cc: Conceptual GraphsCyberneticsStructural ModelingSystems Science

This entry was posted in Amphecks, Animata, Boolean Algebra, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Deduction, Diagrammatic Reasoning, Duality, Equational Inference, Graph Theory, Laws of Form, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Model Theory, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Proof Theory, Propositional Calculus, Propositional Equation Reasoning Systems, Spencer Brown, Theorem Proving, Visualization and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Operator Variables in Logical Graphs • 6

  1. Pingback: Survey of Animated Logical Graphs • 7 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  2. Pingback: Operator Variables in Logical Graphs • 7 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

Leave a comment

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