Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:59 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 12:46 am But what defines what logic works and what does not without using logic? Logic is used to define logic thus necessitating a fundamental root to logic which exists beyond programmability.
WHO defines logic?

The programmer.
Yet logic is used to define what the programmer is/is not/maybe
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:58 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 12:44 am Yes, no, maybe (possibility), none of the above (no possibility), yes maybe, no maybe, maybe maybe, not yes maybe or no maybe, etc.

The states are boundless.
So you are like Buridan's ass?
We are the judgements we make. To live without judgement is to live in a boundless state.
Skepdick
Posts: 14362
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:43 am Yet logic is used to define what the programmer is/is not/maybe
It isn't. The creator of logic came before logic.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by attofishpi »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:34 am
attofishpi wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:28 am So let's keep it simple - show me an example where a logical operator used in C ...can provide a non-predetermined result (without changing the way the operator functions)
First question: Why are you prescribing a compiled language (C) why can't I use an interpreted language (Ruby)?
Why the **** not!?? Never heard of Ruby - done some C many moons ago.

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:34 am2nd question: Why was my example of the Time.now function insufficient?
Glanced at it, looked like bollocks.

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:34 am The result of Time.now is not pre-determined. It's determined EXACTLY at the time when the operator is called.

Finally, what is the pre-determined result of rand() ?

Code: Select all

➜  ~ cat rand.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>

int main () {
   srand(time(NULL));
   printf("%d\n", rand() % 1000000);
   return(0);
}
➜  ~ gcc rand.c -o rand
➜  ~ ./rand
988055
➜  ~ ./rand
21669
srand is a function!! - you keep diverting from my point!! :idea:

Please, again, ...let's keep it simple - show me an example where a logical operator used in C ...can provide a non-predetermined result (without changing the way the operator functions)
Skepdick
Posts: 14362
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:56 am srand is a function!! - you keep diverting from my point!! :idea:
All the boolean operators are functions!

Does it matter if I write A and B, A && B, A ∧ B, (and A B), or and(A, B)? That's just syntax/notation! It expresses the same thing.

The C compiler will turn it into x86 assembly anyway!
attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:56 am Please, again, ...let's keep it simple - show me an example where a logical operator used in C ...can provide a non-predetermined result (without changing the way the operator functions)
What's wrong with rand() ?
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by attofishpi »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:01 am
attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:56 am srand is a function!! - you keep diverting from my point!! :idea:
All the boolean operators are functions!

Does it matter if I write it as A ∧ B, (and A B), or and(A, B)? That's just syntax/notation!

The C compiler will turn it into a x86 assembly anyway!
Ok, call them a function at the 2nd level that C sits upon (assembly - then machine), fine.

You understand what I mean as far as an actual logical operator in C results in a pre-determined outcome - BINARILY - the condition will be met as TRUE or FALSE.



attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:56 am Please, again, ...let's keep it simple - show me an example where a logical operator used in C ...can provide a non-predetermined result (without changing the way the operator functions)
What's wrong with rand() ?
[/quote]

rand() would require many steps logical operators contained within - and is not an example of something where the result can be predetermined. This is a sidetrack. (unless of course you make ask for some random integer between 5 and 5 for example!
Skepdick
Posts: 14362
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:18 am You understand what I mean as far as an actual logical operator in C results in a pre-determined outcome - BINARILY - the condition will be met as TRUE or FALSE.
Obviously. Because the DESIGNERS of the C programming language made it work that way.

That's why they are called Boolean operators. And it's because they have a pre-determined outcome is why we call them deterministic.
attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:18 am rand() would require many steps logical operators contained within
At the assembly level. Not at the symbolic level. Then again - the same is true with any Boolean operator.

There are many steps inside the CPU to perform an AND on multi-byte input.

attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:18 am - and is not an example of something where the result can be predetermined. This is a sidetrack. (unless of course you make ask for some random integer between 5 and 5 for example!
Then I have no idea what you are asking. You want non-determinism from a deterministic function?
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by attofishpi »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:26 am
attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:18 am You understand what I mean as far as an actual logical operator in C results in a pre-determined outcome - BINARILY - the condition will be met as TRUE or FALSE.
Obviously. Because the DESIGNERS of the C programming language made it work that way.

That's why they are called Boolean operators. And it's because they have a pre-determined outcome is why we call them deterministic.
attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:18 am rand() would require many steps logical operators contained within
At the assembly level. Not at the symbolic level. Then again - the same is true with any Boolean operator.

There are many steps inside the CPU to perform an AND on multi-byte input.

attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:18 am - and is not an example of something where the result can be predetermined. This is a sidetrack. (unless of course you make ask for some random integer between 5 and 5 for example!
Then I have no idea what you are asking. You want non-determinism from a deterministic function?
Should atto bugger off, cook dinner, and attempt to make his life worthwhile = TRUE;
Skepdick
Posts: 14362
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:31 am Should atto bugger off, cook dinner, and attempt to make his life worthwhile = TRUE;
Why did you choose that conclusion? ;)
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by attofishpi »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:33 am
attofishpi wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:31 am Should atto bugger off, cook dinner, and attempt to make his life worthwhile = TRUE;
Why did you choose that conclusion? ;)


..the more I read just this page that resulted in your statement with an appropriate wink, the more I find it funnier. (there is much to con cider, my final one is rather apple_in)

Since you ask, the final conclusion is:-

function hasattobinbuggered() {
if(attobutthole != anentry)
.........return FALSE;
else
.........return TRUE;
}

(so conclusion perhaps - is, is there time to lose my mangina virginity before I have dinner and make my life worthwhile)
:mrgreen:
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:52 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:43 am Yet logic is used to define what the programmer is/is not/maybe
It isn't. The creator of logic came before logic.
Yet the creator is defined by a source of logic as to what it is/is not/maybe.

Logic and creation coexist side by side.
Skepdick
Posts: 14362
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 4:50 am Yet the creator is defined by a source of logic as to what it is/is not/maybe.
Doesn't have to be. Logic is just one of the many things the creator created.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 4:50 am Logic and creation coexist side by side.
That wasn't always true.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 5:40 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 4:50 am Yet the creator is defined by a source of logic as to what it is/is not/maybe.
Doesn't have to be. Logic is just one of the many things the creator created.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 4:50 am Logic and creation coexist side by side.
That wasn't always true.
Yet there is a logic behind how the creator creates. Yes, No, maybe, 1, 0, possible 1 or 0 necessitates a format through which the creator creates.
Skepdick
Posts: 14362
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Skepdick »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 8:35 pm Yet there is a logic behind how the creator creates.
If you are going to allude it, specify the logic.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Is logic at its root fundamentally programmable?

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:32 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 8:35 pm Yet there is a logic behind how the creator creates.
If you are going to allude it, specify the logic.
The individuation of one assertion to another with the cycling of said assertions into newer forms which are empty in themselves given they are dependent upon another form from which to progress.

The individuation of assertions, the cycling of assertions and the emptiness of assertions is the root of logic.

A machine is dependent upon the process of individuation which exists before it as the machine itself is an act of individuation from its source (the creator). The same occurs with cycling, the machine is a replication of the cycles found in nature. Thus for both the machine is dependent upon phenomenon which exist before it therefore the totality of these phenomenon, individuation and cycling, cannot be programmed.

However emptiness cannot be programmed at all.
Post Reply