Please read
http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/tools-yak/2004-11/msg00018.html
http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/tools-yak/2004-11/msg00020.html
carefully first... (01)
Then attempt the following [DRAFT work]. (I make no apologies for it
probably being really heavy going.) (02)
[These are some tangential comments I originally wrote as a draft
response to something Jack sent me (offline). They are still a work in
progress but, they seem (tangentially) relevant, so I'm posting them. I
was attempting to provide a consistent theoretical framework for ...
well, almost everything...] (03)
As I see things...
In pure geometric terms context is a fifth parameter added to a four
dimensional space-time. The fifth parameter consists of a bounding
shape declared under the terms of some geometry, which is then projected
into 4-D space-time.
Assuming at least Special Relativity with regard to frames of
reference, and assuming an observer-observed pattern associating such
frames, then that fifth parameter always constrains reference (and hence
truth) from the observer's point of view. But given that we are using
Relativity theory there should be a geometric mapping of that shape into
the observed frame to reveal its (4-D projected) shape from that other
perspective. The bounding shape of that fifth parameter need not
encompass the observer even though its shape and extent is determined by
the observer. (04)
Physical truth in science tends to take the approach of being the set of
all as-yet-unfalsified assertions that are common to all perspectives
declared to be within a given geometric boundary considered as being
mapped bijectively between any two perspectives (a.k.a frames of reference). (05)
In conceptual and abstract terms, however, context concerns more the set
of conceptual conditions created by, and/or informing, a discourse as a
discourse progresses. Context is as such acting in the imaginary realm. (06)
The conceptual conditions are collectively termed a theory if they
entail only a set of hypotheses about experiential phenomena. (07)
In the sciences, as-yet-unfalsified assertions hold under the terms of
any as-yet-unfalsified theory with which they are consistent. (08)
Theories, a subset of imaginary constructs, are thus used to classify
reality. (09)
In science the data (of reality) over which theory acts ought to be
reproducible by repetition of an experiment and the acceptable limit for
error is strict. (010)
In history, such strict reproduction is not possible. Partly because
history does not repeat itself exactly in our lifetimes, partly because
psychology is not yet reducible to physics (and may never be). Also,
history itself is written down, and hence written down by an individual
or group psychology. It is then reinterpreted when read by any other
individual. Hence the text and its interpretation are subject to
whatever conceptual conditions were in action. (011)
That suggests to me that the best history is a mass history, where the
weight of numbers of perspectives mitigates against the loss of
important interpretations. (012)
The recording of history can have a history too. The 'records' of
history are entities that persist in the present (as perceived by some
observer in some space-time frame of reference). As such they have an
extent within four-dimensional space-time and the shape of the extent
can be governed by the geometry of the context imposed by the observer. (013)
Assuming we can describe the geometry of observation over a space-time
frame of reference - typically this is assumed by us to be the same as
the geometry of the space-time itself and vice versa - then we can
create an address for any point in that space-time. (014)
The assumption of a given degree of granularity for entities means that
a specific set of addresses given as point descriptions can be labelled
according to a higher level addressing scheme. Since a label will
persist over time, the label /indicates/ a set of space-time points,
whereby the entity found at any point in the set is considered to be
'the same' entity as at any other point in its duration. (015)
(Labels are also themselves, unlabelled entities that will have a set of
space-time point descriptions.) (016)
What constitutes an entity being the same at two different points in
space-time is a subjective consideration that the two manifestations are
/not considered to be different/. This might be made stricter and more
scientific by saying that they are not /measurably different/ according
to some scheme of measurement. (017)
So an effective label points to something that is not measurably
different over time according to some agreed measurement scheme with
respect to the properties of entities. (018)
--
Peter (019)
John Sechrest wrote:
> Ahhh. The joy of pointers.... This is the exact problem we have
> when we start abstracting data.
>
> Do you mean the data that is the current data for right now?
> Or do you mean the data that is the data for when I created the link?
>
> And we know that people ALWAYS get mixed up by what they mean. They
> get a default model and go with it, often not deciding correctly
> until the change that breaks what they thought they had.
>
>
> Is there any way to make the mental metaphore for pointing at
> THIS FIXED THING HERE, which will never change
>
> And make that a totally different metaphore that
> pointing at THIS STREAM OF CURRENT DATA, which has the current
> correct information.
>
>
> Just because they are both pointers, does not mean that the metaphore
> has to be the same....
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Chris Dent <cdent@blueoxen.org> writes:
>
> % On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Peter P. Jones wrote:
> %
> % > > I do think that each version should get a nid, and one should
> % > > have the option of using the essentially frozen content, but by
> % > > default it should be the dynamic.
> % >
> % > How do I get at a particular frozen version using only a NID or 'bare'
>URL?
> %
> % Perhaps when a piece of content is created it gets two intitial
> % nids: the long lifed one, and one for the current version.
> %
> % If you want the current version you use that nid, if you always
> % want the latest and greatest use the long lifed one.
> %
> % maybe?
> %
> % The guy sitting next to me disagrees, he says: nid alone should always
> % point to the latest and greatest, while nid-version should create
> % to a frozen version, thus qualifying the nid at a point in time.
> %
> % --
> % Chris Dent cdent@blueoxen.org
> % AIM: sleepleft http://burningchrome.com/~cdent/mt
> % It's faith all the way down. We choose reason.
> %
> % --
> % This message is archived at:
> %
> %
>http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=tools-yak&i=Pine.OSX.4.58.0502041523250.27482@nitrous.local
> %
>
> -----
> John Sechrest . Helping people use
> . computers and the Internet
> . more effectively
> .
> . Internet: sechrest@peak.org
> .
> . http://www.peak.org/~sechrest
> (020)
--
This message is archived at: (021)
http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=tools-yak&i=4204C758.2020100@concept67.net (022)
|