Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

EchoesOfTheHorizon
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by EchoesOfTheHorizon » Tue Nov 28, 2017 11:35 pm

Thanks for the thermodynamic mnemonic, I'll copy it down. I wanted to find a few things like that before I start a new look in a few months at electricity, I took a commercial and Residential electric course a few years back in Ohio, and the National Electric Code (or the text book) opened up with a rule on electricity that was similar, but I wasn't prepared to tackle it then. Omhs law wheel I think it was.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohm%27s_law

Yeah, it is. You'll see the wheel down towards the bottom. I know I want the end result (once I find a few more wheels/graphs, and map it out against a certain periodic table {how I know this, I don't know, the reasoning is done subconsciously, I follow my hunches, they stick with me for years}) is to set up a system that allows me to merge the data with a basic rule of bifurcation (anytime a network with a mainline splits up into two sublimes) for any element or allow used for a conduit. I know I need to know about temperature, density, length, insulation, and white noise, besides the electrical charge. One periodic chart in particular keeps jumping out in my mind:
Stowe–Janet–Scerri Periodic Table
ADOMAH periodic table

I know the two periodic tables can be combined in a Wheel, similar to a old locksmith key cutting, operating perpendicular to the Ohms law, I don't know how I know, but I know, and it is a combination all pattern that results.

I started getting interested in this when I lived for a time in the woods off of St. Lewis Heights on Oahu, it had a electric tower than sent cables straight down a mountainside, almost verticals, so I sat down and tried to reverse engineer the categories of thought that would be needed to calculate in advance how wide, thick, strong the wire would have to be, and how long to make it.... as one obviously would have problems just laying uncut cord up a mountain and down the backside. I figured such a effort was made, and tried to guess at it.... but knew the mere existence of substations meant they didn't fully understand it themselves, given how erratic and unpredictable the overall system's efficiency could be. I remember from my residential electric course Aluminum and Copper aren't supposed to connect directly either. I want a more simple, intuitive grasp of why, and how to know when to do it. Undoubtedly a solution exists, but I want to do it, differently.... just cause.

Anyway, probably just reinventing the wheel here, but it is my wheel to reinvent. It is a idea I can't shake, and it looks you handed me another aspect, so thank you.



Um.... chromosomes are little computers unto themselves, but I don't think our brains are controlled by them in such a fashion, anymore than blueprints for a sky scrapper control the future business transactions of businesses occupying it. Obviously the building can't exist without blueprints, and it sets limits on what can and can't be done physically in that space, but doubt our chromosomes are effecting our thinking in such a way that we would have one class of logic per chromosome. But I can't hide the idea that some hidden force is at work like I described, putting limits or adding behavior to logic used in such long chains.

Cellular Autonamata isn't AI. It is just a simple rule pattern, like a checkerboard, that goes on forever seemingly. Some is uniformed, like a fractal pattern, other appear pure chaos, and nobody quite knows why. It is unfortunately built into our mathematics as a result.... as our number theory abides to many concepts of it. This echoes really old Pythagorean superstitions, and I don't know what to say to it. We expect to encounter life in space, to exist in unexpected forms, but not hidden in physics, or in our number system. This would hold for a alien species who can do patterns and basic geometry like rectangles, and can count linearly. It might be the universal mathematics for all I know.

And some truth does appear to exist for Epigenetics, I wasn't for it when I first heard of it, but was persuaded otherwise. I don't know how strong it is though as a effective force, or how reversible it is, but see some merit to it. It exists in other systems, like Ekistics (a philosophy of city planning. A butterfly effect of sorts that can cause weird traits to carry on in a society over the years, long after the original buildings or economic needs of a area dies off). This can happen in the transmission of technology as well.

Plato's Rock
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:01 am

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by Plato's Rock » Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:02 am

Cool, about the periodic table, I didn't know anyone was reformatting it. From the looks of it they're opening up so it's easier to explore "heavier elements". When I took nuclear chem, there was a lauded "Island of Stability" where there was speculated heavier elements that could last longer (they wouldn't decay as fast) ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability ).

Regarding mixing copper and aluminum wiring (I did a quick look online), and it said they'd corrode each other. Meaning if they're in too close of proximity they'd effectively make a little "battery" (a re-dox reaction) where one would oxidize, and the other would redox. Effectively creating a surge, and destroying the wiring in said area. There's more chemistry to it than that, but I'm not sure how detailed you'd want to know.

Chromosomes are interesting in that aspect, and no I don't think they control higher order functions. It was just a comparison I was making to developments of AI. The Binary Code compilations may be nothing more than the low-level functioning of an AI. Like here is your "genetic legacy".

A major question, I've been hitting upon lately is; Is our logic determined by the "structure" of our brains/minds? In other words this ties into the idea of are there alternative forms of mathematics (yes), non-euclidean geometry ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Euclidean_geometry ) comes to mind. Meaning that for all I know, every individual on this planet could in theory have their own form of logic that makes sense to them, and that there are areas where their logic simply fails/doesn't work. Ie; A situation doesn't make sense to me, I can't even comprehend it, nor wrap my mind around it. It'd be like trying to understand why a fish swims from the fish's perspective...It just does. (Probably not the best illustration, but it was an attempt).

And in respect to the last comments, Tradition. Carries one behavior over to the next generation whether it's good or bad. It's a conservative function in reality, and it makes me think of, well a lot of things. We just do it because it works, or our parents did it, and their parents did it that way too...

EchoesOfTheHorizon
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by EchoesOfTheHorizon » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:50 am

Ethics when viewed as just habit in culture does the same, it carries over. Have the wrong ethical system over time though, and it can change your racial characteristic I believe.

For example, as a man I like certain types of women more than others. It can range across the races, I find some women from India as attractive as from Eastern Europe, and some black women, but they are all going to share some similar traits. Most are going to have long hair, usually dark. Soft, smooth skin, and either a small nose, or a angular one that stands out.

This isn't fully known to me why it is the case, and in species where males choose the females in little harems, oftentimes they choose females that have a lot of similarities, like in the case of horses. I'm sure the hormones and sense of beauty is balanced between psychology, epigenetic and standard sexual selection needs. Like.... I have indestructible cankles, and can't spring my ankle. Had many bad tumbles, but never quite happened. But I have a bad knee. I'm psychologically going to drift to women with excellent knees to hopefully make up for any deficit. But it might also just be pure genetic motivations that push me to liking women with great legs. I like nice faces, good legs, could care less about the butt and chest arguments. I was once a excellent runner, so it might be a evolutionary push on my part forcing me towards that.

Now, as far as women go, ethical rules of a society can pass their looks on like wildfire, or cause it to stagnant. For example, the population that the Buddha came from, it was common to make women involuntary.... what is the word I'm looking for, not quite courtesan.... they were enformed they couldn't marry, sometimes informed over their fiancé' bloody corpse at the wedding, they couldn't marry, but had to date multiple men, and couldn't stay dedicated to any one man for X number of years. They got mansions out of this, and a lot of fame, and despite being what we call sluts, generally had been treated the opposite. The Buddha was a friend of the most famous one of his era, she was a important convert.

Now.... obviously in the era prior to Buddhism, being a elegant skank ninja had it's reproductive advantages, and these ladies undoubtedly had a lot of high end men coming after them. That will trickle down into the gene pool after a while. After Buddhism, with a heavy targeting of such institutions, you can expect that the migration of hotface genes diminished a bit. Was still all over in the beginning, but give it several dozen generations with nobody promoting it with the celebrity status it once had, it is going to subside. These nuns typically didn't reproduce.

Now, was this chromosomal? Absolutely, it was involved. Both the acceptance and rejection. Even the rejection is going to be lead by a mind, formed by generics, but also it is conditioned by environment. How well does this effect DNA? I suspect a bit, given the neurotransmitters effected can effect sperm.

I gotta go, reply to the mind question in a bit more indepth. Lost track of time.

User avatar
GreatandWiseTrixie
Posts: 1587
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:51 pm

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by GreatandWiseTrixie » Wed Nov 29, 2017 5:40 am

Plato's Rock wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:50 am
Or any other many-valued logic?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-valued_logic & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-valued_logic & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaina_seven-valued_logic

I found myself heading in that direction for awhile, but I'm not sure what use there is to it. And is it possible from a logical stance to turn a two valued logic into a three valued logic, and upwards into higher "logics"? If so what would be the process and/or mechanism?

Like say, a person thinks like a computer, in binary only. Is it possible for said binary thinker to ratchet up their mind with "higher value" forms of logic?

I have a few thoughts, but I'll hold off for now.
I can say one thing. Personality and psychology test would be a whole lot less quackery if they used three valued logic.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1574
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:31 am

Plato's Rock wrote:
Tue Nov 28, 2017 10:06 pm
Ah, epigenetics. I touched briefly upon the subject in college, but it was only covered up to the point where methalaytion of the DNA/RNA strands was starting to happen. In essence, the profs. conveyed that epigenetics allowed for a sense (only a sense) of larmarkian evolution. That stressors can change generations if the stress is extreme enough, and persistent enough. Like say your grandparents went through a famine, as grandchildren you'd be slightly affected by said stressor with either a slight disposition to "horde energy" (build up fat count), or survive off of less rations. (The details weren't quite clear when I covered it, and they probably still aren't).

I have no idea what you mean by "god-mind". Is that some sort of solipsistic state where one thinks they're god?
I put the article up for the DNA reference. God-mind, I am assuming, would be equivalent to universal consciousness.

Plato's Rock
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:01 am

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by Plato's Rock » Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:09 pm

Needed some time to think about how I wanted to respond, and if there was room to respond.

@Echoes,
I find myself in consent with the notions you presented of Ethics in a culture being a product of habit, so not much to say there. The question is, is it more beneficial to compromise one's ethics, for the sake of updating the culture? Like say there's a sudden sea change in social mores which do tend to happen. Is it beneficial to jump on board with the changes immediately, or to try and ride out the perceived change? Say that with all the Political Correctness flying about, one can either hop on board becoming indoctrinated into the SJW caste, or do they form reactionary groups against it with the desire to squelch the new surge? How does one navigate said choices when their ethics are a distillation of the culture? It almost seems paradoxical the way I've framed it, but it may not be.

Lite example riffing off of yours; Say you couldn't find a woman with excellent knees (they're all taken, or in a minority...or some other restriction), would you 1) Adjust your motivations, and desires to adapt 2) look elsewhere while maintaining the same standards? Thinking it may just be a "bubble". Either way there seems to be a cost of regret. 1) You're ethics/beliefs were compromised 2) You upheld your beliefs, but at a certain cost to maintain them....you had to move...etc

Biologically speaking the successful "males" are the one's who procreate the most. They have better odds of keeping their "Selfish Genes" going...even if it is a crapshoot. They have more "tickets in the game". Whereas those males who are looking for a quality individual, will often have less "odds/tickets in the game". Say the culture is optimized, at present, for a certain type of successful male, but it shifts drastically in moments...what happens?

Is it better to adopt; Fluid Ethics, or Contextual Thinking (many valued logic)? But that goes against having a "character/personality"...most people expect constancy. Not a shifting personality that changes on interaction/nature. Aka All things are nails to my hammer. Yet rationally, it makes more sense to recognize the nuance, "Hey this is a Philips screw!".

@Trixie,
Possibly, but there's still restrictions, or a domain size on three valued logic. There's just more possibilities than two valued. It creates a bigger envelope, which can scare people.

@Eod,
I'm having a hard time grasping that concept of "God-Mind"...especially if it's a Universal Consciousness. Is it like a general intelligence that may be mutable, or is it consciousness that can "plug an play" in different forms (Substrate independence)?

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1574
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:59 pm

Plato's Rock wrote:
Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:09 pm
Needed some time to think about how I wanted to respond, and if there was room to respond.

@Echoes,
I find myself in consent with the notions you presented of Ethics in a culture being a product of habit, so not much to say there. The question is, is it more beneficial to compromise one's ethics, for the sake of updating the culture? Like say there's a sudden sea change in social mores which do tend to happen. Is it beneficial to jump on board with the changes immediately, or to try and ride out the perceived change? Say that with all the Political Correctness flying about, one can either hop on board becoming indoctrinated into the SJW caste, or do they form reactionary groups against it with the desire to squelch the new surge? How does one navigate said choices when their ethics are a distillation of the culture? It almost seems paradoxical the way I've framed it, but it may not be.

Lite example riffing off of yours; Say you couldn't find a woman with excellent knees (they're all taken, or in a minority...or some other restriction), would you 1) Adjust your motivations, and desires to adapt 2) look elsewhere while maintaining the same standards? Thinking it may just be a "bubble". Either way there seems to be a cost of regret. 1) You're ethics/beliefs were compromised 2) You upheld your beliefs, but at a certain cost to maintain them....you had to move...etc

Biologically speaking the successful "males" are the one's who procreate the most. They have better odds of keeping their "Selfish Genes" going...even if it is a crapshoot. They have more "tickets in the game". Whereas those males who are looking for a quality individual, will often have less "odds/tickets in the game". Say the culture is optimized, at present, for a certain type of successful male, but it shifts drastically in moments...what happens?

Is it better to adopt; Fluid Ethics, or Contextual Thinking (many valued logic)? But that goes against having a "character/personality"...most people expect constancy. Not a shifting personality that changes on interaction/nature. Aka All things are nails to my hammer. Yet rationally, it makes more sense to recognize the nuance, "Hey this is a Philips screw!".

@Trixie,
Possibly, but there's still restrictions, or a domain size on three valued logic. There's just more possibilities than two valued. It creates a bigger envelope, which can scare people.

@Eod,
I'm having a hard time grasping that concept of "God-Mind"...especially if it's a Universal Consciousness. Is it like a general intelligence that may be mutable, or is it consciousness that can "plug an play" in different forms (Substrate independence)?
In reality it may be 3 as 1 and 1 as 3 as I have wrote on a few other threads (I think I am becoming too repetitive at this point in time).

What we observe, through consciousness as consciousness, is measurement through the application of 1 as:

1) unifier, from which we can observe constants that never change
2) individuator, from which we observe particulate units which exist through relation and change
3) both unity and individuation being grounded in dimension as limits or boundaries through which reality is formed.
4) neither unity nor individuation as possible dimensional limits, or no-limit, through which exists eternity as a boundary in itself.

So the God-Mind, as reason or the "divine spark" various philosophies and religions observe inherent which man, is the application of measurement as reason which in turn form reality through the boundary line of proportionality as balance. In these respects what we observe as the God-Mind is unification and balance through observation of the center point as centering.

Plato's Rock
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:01 am

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by Plato's Rock » Fri Dec 15, 2017 12:03 am

I have no idea how to respond to that. Other than through this <-.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1574
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:05 am

Plato's Rock wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 12:03 am
I have no idea how to respond to that. Other than through this <-.
The act of achieving balance or "centerness" structures reality as all dimensions are rooted in proportionality. What we understand of logic is the observation of centers, that form dimensions which in turn form proportions. Proportion in turn is the foundation for being as it the root of all dimensions.

The nature of logic fundamentally breaks down to the observation of center points, as foundations for arguments. These arguments in turn observe dimensions which bring a unifying effect by observing constants and in a seperate respect observes individuation by observing multiple relative units.

It is this nature of dual constants and changing variables that form proportionality as a dimension of measurement that observes and defines truth.

Dalek Prime
Posts: 4337
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:48 am
Location: Canuckistan

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by Dalek Prime » Sat Mar 10, 2018 4:30 pm

Back in the 90s, I was considering a ternary hardware prototype, but like many things, it fell by the wayside.

Plato's Rock
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:01 am

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by Plato's Rock » Mon Mar 12, 2018 2:54 am

Life seems to happen that way, doesn't it?

Plato's Rock
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:01 am

Re: Anyone Else Think About Three-Valued Logic?

Post by Plato's Rock » Mon Mar 12, 2018 9:27 am

Out of curiosity Dalek Prime, are, or have you been able to figure out the logic behind some of the Three-Valued functions? Aka, the forms of "logic gates", or stuff. If so, we may need to talk more because I have a blind hunch that I may have figured out a way to build a "ternary+ computer", but I don't understand the logic behind Three-Values that well. Hence why I started this thread.

..., and if you're extremely familiar with how to function out the logic behind Ternary, we may need to talk more in private.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests