Category Archives: Differential Logic

Theme One Program • Discussion 1

Posted on March 23, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Laws Of Form • Armahedi Mahzar AM:  Why do you need XOR in your inquiry system? Clearly we need a way to represent exclusive disjunction, along with its dual, logical equivalence, in any calculus capable of covering propositional logic, … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Theme One • A Program Of Inquiry 10

Posted on March 18, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Lexical, Literal, Logical Theme One puts cactus graphs to work in three distinct but related ways, called lexical, literal, and logical applications.  The three modes of operation employ three distinct but overlapping subsets of the broader species of cacti.  Accordingly we … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Theme One • A Program Of Inquiry 9

Posted on March 14, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

We have seen how to take an abstract logical graph of a sort a person might have in mind to represent a logical state of affairs and translate it into a string of characters a computer can translate into a … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Theme One • A Program Of Inquiry 8

Posted on March 10, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Coding Logical Graphs My earliest experiments coding logical graphs as dynamic “pointer” data structures taught me that conceptual and computational efficiencies of a critical sort could be achieved by generalizing their abstract graphs from trees to the variety graph theorists … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 9 Comments

Theme One • A Program Of Inquiry 7

Posted on March 3, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • (1) • (2) Discussion arose in the Laws Of Form Group about computational explorations of George Spencer Brown’s calculus of indications. Readers of Peirce are generally aware Spencer Brown revived certain aspects of Peirce’s logical graphs, focusing on … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Theme One • A Program Of Inquiry 6

Posted on February 28, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Programs are algorithms operating on data structures (Niklaus Wirth).  How do we turn abstract graphs like those used by Charles S. Peirce and G. Spencer Brown into concrete data structures algorithms can manipulate?  There are many ways to do this, but one … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

Survey of Theme One Program • 2

Posted on February 25, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

This is a Survey of blog and wiki posts relating to the Theme One Program I worked on all through the 1980s.  The aim was to develop fundamental algorithms and data structures to support an integrated learning and reasoning interface, … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 20 Comments

Differential Logic • Comment 3

Posted on December 30, 2017 by Jon Awbrey

In my previous comment on boundaries in object universes and venn diagrams, and always when I’m being careful about their mathematical senses, the definitions of “topology” and “boundary” I have in mind can be found in any standard textbook.  Here are … Continue reading →

Posted in Amphecks, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Computational Complexity, Diagrammatic Reasoning, Differential Analytic Turing Automata, Differential Logic, Discrete Dynamical Systems, Graph Theory, Hill Climbing, Hologrammautomaton, Laws of Form, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Propositional Equation Reasoning Systems, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

Differential Logic • Comment 2

Posted on December 28, 2017 by Jon Awbrey

As always, we have to distinguish between the diagram itself, the representation or sign inscribed in some medium, and the formal object it represents under a given interpretation. A venn diagram is an iconic sign we use to represent a … Continue reading →

Posted in Amphecks, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Computational Complexity, Diagrammatic Reasoning, Differential Analytic Turing Automata, Differential Logic, Discrete Dynamical Systems, Graph Theory, Hill Climbing, Hologrammautomaton, Laws of Form, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Propositional Equation Reasoning Systems, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Differential Logic • Comment 1

Posted on December 21, 2017 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Gil Kalai • Pivotal Variables Just a tangential association with respect to logical influence and pivotability.  I have been exploring questions related to pivotal variables (“Differences that Make a Difference” or “Difference In ⟹ Difference Out”) via logical analogues … Continue reading →

Posted in Amphecks, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Computational Complexity, Differential Analytic Turing Automata, Differential Logic, Discrete Dynamical Systems, Graph Theory, Hill Climbing, Hologrammautomaton, Logic, Logical Graphs, Logical Influence, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Pivotal Variables, Propositional Calculus, Propositional Equation Reasoning Systems, Visualization, Zeroth Order Logic | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments