## Dictionaries and Mathematics

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

TryingMyBest
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:58 am

### Dictionaries and Mathematics

I know that mathematical logic uses equations. A dictionary is just a bunch (172,000) of equations with 172,000 variables. Why not simply solve it? If you have the same number of variables as you do equations then it's definitely solvable.
I'm certain that visual representations of the solution would be stunning.
Then ask the AI, "what is love?" and the range of answers would be astonishing. Artificial Intelligence will make great philosophy tutors once mathematicians solve the dictionary problem. Is any of this already occurring, when can we expect results?

If it isn't being done, does anyone want to start a business with me? lol

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4112
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

TryingMyBest wrote:
Mon Dec 17, 2018 6:03 am
I know that mathematical logic uses equations. A dictionary is just a bunch (172,000) of equations with 172,000 variables. Why not simply solve it? If you have the same number of variables as you do equations then it's definitely solvable.
I'm certain that visual representations of the solution would be stunning.
Then ask the AI, "what is love?" and the range of answers would be astonishing. Artificial Intelligence will make great philosophy tutors once mathematicians solve the dictionary problem. Is any of this already occurring, when can we expect results?

If it isn't being done, does anyone want to start a business with me? lol
This is actually an interesting post.

When I got fed up with the philosophy I was taught at the academic and religious institutions, I decided to start at square one: Dictionaries and Thesaurus.

Equations are not merely quantitative but qualitative as well; hence the standard poetic verse with which philosophy and religion use to be written in was not strictly necessitated by a mere love of aesthetic, but because the quality of the written or spoken word required truth as form in itself.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3299
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

TryingMyBest wrote:
A dictionary is just a bunch [ I72 000 ] of equations with I72 000 variables . Why not simply solve it ?
If you have the same number of variables as you do equations then its definitely solvable
There are more definitions than there are words so the number of variables is not the same
And also definitions are not prescriptive as words are not absolute because old ones become extinct and new ones are invented
Numbers by contrast are eternal and all occupy a fixed place upon the number line which is not only eternal but infinite as well

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4112
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 18, 2018 12:50 am
TryingMyBest wrote:
A dictionary is just a bunch [ I72 000 ] of equations with I72 000 variables . Why not simply solve it ?
If you have the same number of variables as you do equations then its definitely solvable
There are more definitions than there are words so the number of variables is not the same
And also definitions are not prescriptive as words are not absolute because old ones become extinct and new ones are invented
Numbers by contrast are eternal and all occupy a fixed place upon the number line which is not only eternal but infinite as well
Each number requires further numbers to define it, ad infinitum. Language mirrors this nature.

All equations give the impression of being absolute but are inherently random. There are an infinite number of ways to get 1, 2, 3, etc.

The nature of a word needing to be defined by another word and then defined by another word, etc. Ad infinitum, necessitates language as having an infinite property.

The word, as defined by another words, requires a cycle. The number line follows this same nature.

X word is defined by Y word, and the definition of Y word points back to X.
1 leads to 2 and 2 leads to 1 and 1 while being directed to 3 as 2 and 1 and 4 as 2 and 2. The number line results from cycles.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3299
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

Eodnho7 wrote:
The nature of a word needing to be defined by another word and then defined by another word etc
Ad infinitum necessitates language as having an infinite property
Language does not have an infinite property because the numbers of words and their definitions are both finite
In any case having an infinity of words would be impractical as human memory could not remember all of them

Human memory cannot even remember all of the words that currently exist now
The number of words in everyday use is only a subset of all known words anyway

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4112
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 18, 2018 5:02 am
Eodnho7 wrote:
The nature of a word needing to be defined by another word and then defined by another word etc
Ad infinitum necessitates language as having an infinite property
Language does not have an infinite property because the numbers of words and their definitions are both finite

False, because all language is premised in prior languages certain values consonants or vowels have a constant nature where they variate based upon ther relations to other constants or vowels (the word). All words are premised on further words, and this progression is a continuum.

You fail to take into account not just "x" word, but also its variations in other words through other languages through time while simultaneously taking into account the various symbolism used to determine them (the variations of hieroglyphs or pictorial symbols for a cat including the modern emoji as a modern cave painting) multiplied by the potential number of further civilizations in other worlds or dimensions.

In any case having an infinity of words would be impractical as human memory could not remember all of them

Having an infinity of numbers applies logically to this argument as well. However there may be an infinity of words with a certain consonant but this does not change this one constant acts as a constant and is infinite in itself.

Human memory cannot even remember all of the words that currently exist now
The number of words in everyday use is only a subset of all known words anyway

Human memory does not remember past languages except through parts in modern language. All the words do not have to be remembered if we use certain qualities in all the words with the word strictly being a variation of a vowel or consonant for example. It is like saying we my not know all numbers, but we know all numbers are composed of 1, all evens contain 2, etc.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3299
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

There are only twenty six letters in the alphabet and only certain combinations of those letters can form actual words
There are more non words that can be formed including words that are linguistically valid although have no definition

There are only ten digits but unlike letters there no limitation whatsoever on what combinations can form other numbers
Therefore there exists an infinity of numbers from those ten digits but not an infinity of words from the twenty six letters

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4112
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Dec 18, 2018 6:44 am
There are only twenty six letters in the alphabet and only certain combinations of those letters can form actual words
There are more non words that can be formed including words that are linguistically valid although have no definition

And language is not limited to the English, as well as the spelling of the words, as well as words, change over time. Because spelling progressively changes there is potentially no limit to language. Take the standard English alphabet, applie it to a foreign language and the word spellings are potentially infinite.

You fail to take into account time and the change of language which occurs to number as well considering time exists through counting. Combinations are limited to the context of the language, but considering languages form through other languages over time language as a context is fundamentally just a boundary of change.

Having "xu" as a foundational set of letter to a word is only limited by time.

There are only ten digits but unlike letters there no limitation whatsoever on what combinations can form other numbers
Therefore there exists an infinity of numbers from those ten digits but not an infinity of words from the twenty six letters

TryingMyBest
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:58 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

Eodnjoj7, surreptitious57,
Thank you for the intriguing thoughts on the subject.
I admit that some words have multiple meanings; but this can easily be accounted for, still producing an equal number of equations and variables.
I also recognize that a dictionary is circular-logic insofar as it defines itself, yet it is not just a set of random numbers, these words are indicative of actual real-life things, events, experiences, etc. such that this circular-logical book describes reality.

Hopefully, you will find this next part as intriguing as I do: I would like to explain what I think the solution to the dictionary might "look" like.

(By "equations" I mean definitions; by "variables" I mean words.)
First, the equations would have to be transcribed into a form that follow English grammar syntax rules. This will maintain the integrity of the definitions. (An aside: a thesaurus could also be used instead, delivering still useful results.)
Second, a variable's equation could be deleted and then resolved for. By temporarily deleting the equation (definition) of "beauty" and asking the computer to generate a new one, the computer would be tasked with encompassing everything that beauty is, that is all references based on other definitions, and derive a new definition for the term. I think this definition would have some similarities and some differences with the original definition, but I sincerely doubt they would be equivalent. This could be done countless times with different words until "new" associations are uncovered. Perhaps truer and truer definitions would emerge with each iteration of this process.

Third, taking it to visualization step: The dictionary is supposed to represent the truth about meaning. This could be visualized by assigning a 3-dimensional node to each word and by allowing the nodes to move in 3-D space as they are attracted to (other nodes that correspond to) their meaning. At first, all words would be given random (x,y,z) coordinates but words of similar meanings would quickly coalesce and form physically intriguing structures. Each connection to other words would serve as a level of attraction between the two nodes. I think that after a bit of time, the simulation would balance and there would be structures of meaning floating and swirling and interacting with other structures of meaning. Perhaps an entire structure would represent Reality while another structure would represent that which is false??? Perhaps the virtues and values would find distinct places and be able to be categorized more easily (and more plain to see!). Perhaps emotions could be quantified. Perhaps much more could be learned. To visualize the true connections of all the words in the dictionary is a powerful tool - it is similar to visualizing what reality truly consists of. If I knew how I would build it. I'm sure the folks at Google have the technical expertise, of course, they already have the equations, I just wish someone would build this tool so that I, and others, might better understand the nature of Truth by definition.

We describe our world by using words. I see value in letting those words and definitions work for us to that we may uncover Truth that we weren't even looking for. Will it work? Is it at least worth a shot?

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4112
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

TryingMyBest wrote:
Tue Dec 18, 2018 9:38 pm
Eodnjoj7, surreptitious57,
Thank you for the intriguing thoughts on the subject.
I admit that some words have multiple meanings; but this can easily be accounted for, still producing an equal number of equations and variables.
I also recognize that a dictionary is circular-logic insofar as it defines itself, yet it is not just a set of random numbers, these words are indicative of actual real-life things, events, experiences, etc. such that this circular-logical book describes reality.

Hopefully, you will find this next part as intriguing as I do: I would like to explain what I think the solution to the dictionary might "look" like.

(By "equations" I mean definitions; by "variables" I mean words.)
First, the equations would have to be transcribed into a form that follow English grammar syntax rules. This will maintain the integrity of the definitions. (An aside: a thesaurus could also be used instead, delivering still useful results.)
Second, a variable's equation could be deleted and then resolved for. By temporarily deleting the equation (definition) of "beauty" and asking the computer to generate a new one, the computer would be tasked with encompassing everything that beauty is, that is all references based on other definitions, and derive a new definition for the term. I think this definition would have some similarities and some differences with the original definition, but I sincerely doubt they would be equivalent. This could be done countless times with different words until "new" associations are uncovered. Perhaps truer and truer definitions would emerge with each iteration of this process.

Third, taking it to visualization step: The dictionary is supposed to represent the truth about meaning. This could be visualized by assigning a 3-dimensional node to each word and by allowing the nodes to move in 3-D space as they are attracted to (other nodes that correspond to) their meaning. At first, all words would be given random (x,y,z) coordinates but words of similar meanings would quickly coalesce and form physically intriguing structures. Each connection to other words would serve as a level of attraction between the two nodes. I think that after a bit of time, the simulation would balance and there would be structures of meaning floating and swirling and interacting with other structures of meaning. Perhaps an entire structure would represent Reality while another structure would represent that which is false??? Perhaps the virtues and values would find distinct places and be able to be categorized more easily (and more plain to see!). Perhaps emotions could be quantified. Perhaps much more could be learned. To visualize the true connections of all the words in the dictionary is a powerful tool - it is similar to visualizing what reality truly consists of. If I knew how I would build it. I'm sure the folks at Google have the technical expertise, of course, they already have the equations, I just wish someone would build this tool so that I, and others, might better understand the nature of Truth by definition.

We describe our world by using words. I see value in letting those words and definitions work for us to that we may uncover Truth that we weren't even looking for. Will it work? Is it at least worth a shot?
You have some legitimate questions, and a "massive" amount can be learned about philosophy just though studying a dictionary and thesaurus.

One way to look at it is that all words are synthetic, they exist as the medial points to other words; hence to visualize the connective properties of words we are left with words as point space where each word is an origin of another word...a center point so to speak.

TryingMyBest
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:58 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Wed Dec 19, 2018 1:08 am
TryingMyBest wrote:
Tue Dec 18, 2018 9:38 pm
Eodnjoj7, surreptitious57,
Thank you for the intriguing thoughts on the subject.
I admit that some words have multiple meanings; but this can easily be accounted for, still producing an equal number of equations and variables.
I also recognize that a dictionary is circular-logic insofar as it defines itself, yet it is not just a set of random numbers, these words are indicative of actual real-life things, events, experiences, etc. such that this circular-logical book describes reality.

Hopefully, you will find this next part as intriguing as I do: I would like to explain what I think the solution to the dictionary might "look" like.

(By "equations" I mean definitions; by "variables" I mean words.)
First, the equations would have to be transcribed into a form that follow English grammar syntax rules. This will maintain the integrity of the definitions. (An aside: a thesaurus could also be used instead, delivering still useful results.)
Second, a variable's equation could be deleted and then resolved for. By temporarily deleting the equation (definition) of "beauty" and asking the computer to generate a new one, the computer would be tasked with encompassing everything that beauty is, that is all references based on other definitions, and derive a new definition for the term. I think this definition would have some similarities and some differences with the original definition, but I sincerely doubt they would be equivalent. This could be done countless times with different words until "new" associations are uncovered. Perhaps truer and truer definitions would emerge with each iteration of this process.

Third, taking it to visualization step: The dictionary is supposed to represent the truth about meaning. This could be visualized by assigning a 3-dimensional node to each word and by allowing the nodes to move in 3-D space as they are attracted to (other nodes that correspond to) their meaning. At first, all words would be given random (x,y,z) coordinates but words of similar meanings would quickly coalesce and form physically intriguing structures. Each connection to other words would serve as a level of attraction between the two nodes. I think that after a bit of time, the simulation would balance and there would be structures of meaning floating and swirling and interacting with other structures of meaning. Perhaps an entire structure would represent Reality while another structure would represent that which is false??? Perhaps the virtues and values would find distinct places and be able to be categorized more easily (and more plain to see!). Perhaps emotions could be quantified. Perhaps much more could be learned. To visualize the true connections of all the words in the dictionary is a powerful tool - it is similar to visualizing what reality truly consists of. If I knew how I would build it. I'm sure the folks at Google have the technical expertise, of course, they already have the equations, I just wish someone would build this tool so that I, and others, might better understand the nature of Truth by definition.

We describe our world by using words. I see value in letting those words and definitions work for us to that we may uncover Truth that we weren't even looking for. Will it work? Is it at least worth a shot?
You have some legitimate questions, and a "massive" amount can be learned about philosophy just though studying a dictionary and thesaurus.

One way to look at it is that all words are synthetic, they exist as the medial points to other words; hence to visualize the connective properties of words we are left with words as point space where each word is an origin of another word...a center point so to speak.
I agree with you about studying the dictionary and thesaurus yet I think this is the next logical step.
I am trying to understand your second point. It's just that words do have meaning to us. They describe what we think, do, and say. I think that this dictionary simulation visual model would be able to differentiate those words which have true meaning and the words that exist as ideas but not in reality. (My hope is that "ugly" is not real, for instance.) But distinguishing what is real from that which is not is one example of an ultimate Truth. I am curious to find out which values are core values and which are simply derivatives. I am curious as to how this model of reality would influence our decision-making.

We could also do the same exercise with an alien dictionary, in which we have no understanding of any of the words. This would likewise present an arguably extraordinary visual model of their language but would not be useful until the words could be identified with their true essence. On the other hand, given two dictionaries of the same species, this could be used as part of a universal translator.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

https://youtu.be/fCn8zs912OE

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4112
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

Logik wrote:
Wed Dec 19, 2018 12:35 pm

https://youtu.be/fCn8zs912OE
Does it take into account the progressive change in language over time, as well as the various languages in cultures, etc.?

For example, I may have "x" amount of constant words being used in one time/space of the language progression.

It may be the same "x" amount for another time/space of the language progression.

However the two different time/spaces of the language contain different sets of words, so we are left with a constant number of words being used by increasing number of words over time.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3299
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

### Re: Dictionaries and Mathematics

TryingMyBest wrote:
We describe our world by using words . I see value in letting those words and definitions work for us so
that we may uncover Truth that we werent even looking for . Will it work ? Is it at least worth a shot ?
We use language to describe what we perceive to be reality but it is important not to confuse the map with the actual territory
And because the map is not the territory it is possible it may be wrong [ least in part ] and so this needs to be remembered too

Impenitent
Posts: 2318
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm