Transformations of Logical Graphs • Discussion 1

Re: Laws of FormMauro Bertani

Dear Mauro,

The couple of pages linked below give the clearest and quickest introduction I’ve been able to manage so far when it comes to the elements of logical graphs, at least, in the way I’ve come to understand them.  The first page gives a lot of detail by way of motivation and computational implementation, so you could easily put that off till you feel a need for it.  The second page lays out the precise axioms or initials I use — the first algebraic axiom varies a bit from Spencer Brown for a better fit with C.S. Peirce — and also shows the parallels between the dual interpretations.

Additional Resources

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, Interpretive Duality, Laws of Form, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Model Theory, Painted Cacti, Proof Theory, Propositional Calculus, Propositional Equation Reasoning Systems, Spencer Brown, Visualization and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Transformations of Logical Graphs • Discussion 1

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

Leave a comment

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