[ math_91_Topology.html ]
[ intro_note.html ]
The correction is in one of the most incomplete area
[ math_94_Calculus.html ]
of the MATHS language -- the calculus.
Mentally reviewing the script for "Names2dictionary" that I use to index all
the pages in a directory I realized that is will not index items that are not unique.
So the two deffinitions of "Update" in the page below will not be indexed.
Note: The MATHS language would give them different follow qualified names because
they are defined in different contexts. But the tool is a dumb shell script that can not
handle context dependencies...
I will now fix the page to use different names:-(
Wondering why some defined operations in
[ logic_44_n-aryrelations.html ]
are not indexed correctly.
This is the time in the year when I revisit the topic of how to use simple
set theory to document operations in a use case...
[ math_43_Algebras.html ]
Discovered that headings and definitions with greek symbols
\Sigma
Σ for example were not being indexed correctly. This area is very skimpy.
[ math_62_Strings.html#EVENT ]
[ math_63_Languages.html ]
[ logic_25_Proofs.html#algebraic_step ]
This allows you to combine equations with algebraic operations ... It follows
from Euclid's Laws...
Please review
[ math_81_Probabillity.html ]
and contact me with corrections!
[ notn_16_Classification.html ]
(Classifications and Venn Diagrams).
[ logic_30_Sets.html#Conveniences ]
(Defining the meaning of a unary complement ~A when A
is a subset of elements of type T).
[ notn_5_Form.html ]
[ logic_8_Natural_Language.html#Even%20more%20unbaked%20ideas%20on%20time%20and%20events ]
[ logic_30_Sets.html ]
[ math_12_Structure.html ]
Lots nore work to be done with permutations and cycles:-)
[ math_34_Groups.html ]
[ math_45_Three_Operators.html#Matrices ]
After reading the discussion on StackOverflow/Mathematics of the definition
of a topological space I added some notes and results concerned with expressions like
"|{}" and "&{}".
[ logic_30_Sets.html ]
[ logic_31_Families_of_Sets.html ]
[ math_85_Statistics.html ]
I watched this
[ abstract-algebra ]
which is a video from Harvard University that introduces groups by reviewing matrices
and linear algebra... which led me to review my own notes
[ math_31_One_Associative_Op.html ]
[ math_32_Semigroups.html ]
[ math_33_Monoids.html ]
[ math_34_Groups.html ]
and make some small changes.
[ math_12_Structure.html ]
[ intro_objects.html ]
[ logic_6_Numbers..Strings.html#Models of numbers ]
[ math_71_Auto...Systems.html ]
Fixed a stupid error
- x^1 = 1 ???
in
[ math.syntax.html ]
while thinking about changing the syntax of subscripts and citations.
In the original vision of MATHS (or PINAPL as I called it) I thought that
a special syntax would be needed for
citations and references:
[ Author Year Letter ]
but the invention of the ".See" directive, the "$" link and the notation
(citation): reference.
the original is starting to look obsolete. It also makes the rendering of subscripts
a lot harder. This needs thinking through...
Just extended the bare-bones definition
- {f(a)|| a:A, W(a)} = {y||for some a:A (y=f(a) and W(a))},
to
- {e || x:X, y:Y, ... , W}
in
[ logic_30_Sets.html ]
and corrected a tale of relational operators in
[ logic_44_n-aryrelations.html ]
[ logic_11_Equality_etc.html ]
Working on links in
[ math_21_Order.html ]
[ logic_30_Sets.html#Finite_sets ]
and improving
[ type.html#Finite_sets ]
While thinking about the ontological proof of the existence of God I reread my notes
on orders and found and fixed some typographical errors:
[ math_21_Order.html ]
I also added a couple of humrorous only serious links to
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html ]
about the length of proofs.
[ logic_2_Proofs.html ]
[ types.html ]
Moving things between
[ logic_9_Modalities.html ]
and
[ logic_8_Natural_Language.html ]
plus linking to relations and automata...
[ logic_9_Modalities.html ]
-- I've made a subtle change to bring it in line with older temporal logics like LTL and CTL.
If you have a reference to SIMPLE_TEMPORAL_LOGIC or SIMPLE_DISCRETE_TEMPORAL_LOGIC please
check to see if my change has invalidated your work.
[ logic_9_Modalities.html#LTL ]
Just expanded my notes on documenting classifications and ontologies
[ notn_16_Classification.html ]
by showing how simple subsets lead to complex partitions of a universe of discourse.
I finally had time to remove the deprecated old notation
that allowed multiple definitions in a line. I had to rewite one or two of
these in about 20 files/pages in this web site.
I fixed this years ago and then lost the fix after a crash... and lost
energy to redo it until now.
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html#Proofs come after the thinking and experimentation ]
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html#Problems with Word Problems ]
Working on using formal methods and MATHS within Craig Larman's UP to
express Domain Model contracts for steps leads me to work on
[ math_12_Structure.html#Partly Baked Idea -- Operations on Objects ]
it may need major modification and possible removal in time.
I want to make sure that
[ math_14_Dynamics.html ]
includes the kind of operation contracts that turn up in Z and
Use case realizations...
[ types.mth ]
[ math_11_STANDARD.html#Infix operations ]
more work to do...
Avoid these for the nonce:
notn_12_Expressions.mth
math_63_Languages.mth
notn_13_Docn_Syntax.mth
notn_3_Conveniences.mth,
sorry for any inconvenience.... just patching a 11 year old hole.
My tools automatically log changes in ".Q.log" and I'm
going to publish it as
[ log.txt ]
in this directory.
[ logic_30_Sets.html#subsets ]
I've gone back to the original
[ ../monograph/ ]
to improve
[ intro_grammar.html ]
and
[ math_63_Languages.html ]
on Context Free Grammars in particular.
I wanted there to be a way to include natural language into
the predicate calculus....
[ logic_10_PC_LPC.html#Roadworks ]
any thoughts would be welcome.... this is still an PBI -- Partly
Baked Idea.
My notes on topology
[ math_91_Topology.html ]
are based on some note I wrote 3 or 4 decades ago.... and never used. But I may need
them for working on, of all things, cellular automata. SO a quick trip to the Wikipedia.
Like Lewis Carrol I control my personal demons when I can't get to sleep by
mulling of mathematics. It usually sends me straight to sleep. In this case
I went to sleep thinking about reasoning with non-unique
definite descriptions. Could you get a paradox by allowing Euclid's
"Substitute equals for equals" when one of the terms was not unique:
- "The present King of France"
- "The pen on my desk"
And I awoke remembering a little booklet full of mathematical paradoxes from
my childhod in Guildford, Surrey, England. It was a Euclidean proof of
a ridiculous result that is distroyed when your try to draw the construction. This
shows you that one of the points can not exist....
So I have hardened the rules for equality -- now you should establish uniqueness
before doing algebra...
[ logic_11_Equality_etc.html ]
I've added a bibliographic item for "the logic book" to
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html ]
about proving thinsg.
While looking over some documents from the 1990's that have just
been regurgitated from the Faculty RPT system I discovered
some fun definitions of addition, multiplication, and power
in terms of adding and subtracting 1...
[ intro_function.html#Arithmetic_operators ]
, enjoy!
In memory of Dr. Stephen E. Toulmin who died on December 4th I've revised my notes
[ notn_5_Form.html#Toulmin Arguments and Rationales ]
on them. He sounds like a good man who I wish I had known...
I added the definition of terms like "given" and "goal" to
[ math_11_STANDARD.html ]
and improved my notes on penguins and rebuttals
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html#polya ]
and
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html#Arguments ]
Becuase "~>" was overloaded ofr relations and temporal logic, and this might be
confusing.... I've chosen to change "~>" to "~~>" in
[ logic_9_Modalities.html#SIMPLE_TEMPORAL_LOGIC ]
and I hope this doesn't cause any problems.... Let me know if it does.
[ log.txt ]
for a series of small changes linking different pages.
STREAMS->STRINGS->STANDARD.
I've recovered some definitions of automata (acceptors, generators,
and filters) from an old project:
[ math_71_Auto...Systems.html#Structured Automata ]
[ math_71_Auto...Systems.html#Protocols ]
[ logic_8_Natural_Language.html#Tenses, Time, and Temporal modalities ]
Rediscovered the need for a more obvious, if longer word for
repetition:
[ logic_41_HomogenRelations.html#iterate ]
[ intro_relation.html#do ]
I've added some notes on modelling subsets of sets -- example
tall people vs short people:
[ notn_16_Classification.html ]
[ logic_10_PC_LPC.html ]
I hadn't noticed the '<>' was implicitly defined for propositions
as the 'xor' or non-equivalent operator.
Also add a table summarizing the commonest propositional operators.
Noticed and corrected an error
in
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html ]
where I had miscalculated some elementary algebra.
More evidence for the need of a proof checker.
[ intro_relation.html ]
[ logic_25_Proofs.html ]
[ math_10_Intro.html ]
[ notn_13_Docn_Syntax.html ]
[ intro_dynamics.html ]
[ math_14_Dynamics.html ]
[ math_75_Programs.html ]
Added notation
?? (s.l'=n) ::= (s'=s~l|n)
from
[ todo.html ]
my "to do" list
[ notn_11_Expressions.html ]
[ notn_12_Expressions.html#Free Variables ]
[ math_73_Process_algebra.html ]
Alejandro has found an omission in
[ logic_9_Modalities.html#AW ]
describing the Computational Tree Logic.
I fixed it and left a Footnote.... .
[ logic_8_Natural_Language.html#Stuff ]
[ logic_9_Modalities.html ]
I've taken my personal notes of Problems, Partly Baked Ideas,
and To Be Dones from my old Palm Pilot and into
[ todo.html ]
so I can refer to it from my new iPod....
Tidied up the back references in
[ math_49_Dimensioned_numbers.html ]
and made some small improvements.
I also extend my mth2html to recognize and render ".{" and ".}"
as well as ".(" and ".)". More in the item below.
I've hacked my personal copy of mth2html to translate ".(" and ".)"
directives into Ordered Lists with class="Formula", and added
this rule to my standard style sheet
OL .Formula{
list-style-type : none;
}
I think the effect is quite pleasing. Here is the formula
[ notn_14_Docn_Semantics.html#Translation into a Z Schema ]
rewritten using this convention -- first rendered
and second as source
- For In:Net, Net_to_Z(In)::=with{signature, axioms:Sets} following
(
- (signature, axioms) := ({},{});
- do
(
- with{piece:piece_of_documentations}
(
- piece:?In;
(
- piece in declaration; signature:|declaration_to_Z(piece)
- | piece in wff; axioms:|wff_to_Z(piece)
- | piece in definition; signature:|definition_to_Z_declaration(piece); axioms:|definition_to_Z_equality(piece)
- | piece in (theorem | comment)
)
)
);
- end(In);
- output_Z_schema(signature, axioms);
).
For In:Net, Net_to_Z(In) ::=with{signature, axioms:Sets} following
.(
(signature, axioms) := ({},{});
do
.(with{piece:piece_of_documentations}
.(
piece:?In;
.( piece in declaration; signature:|declaration_to_Z(piece)
| piece in wff; axioms:|wff_to_Z(piece)
| piece in definition; signature:|definition_to_Z_declaration(piece); axioms:|definition_to_Z_equality(piece)
| piece in (theorem | comment)
.)
.)
.);
end(In);
output_Z_schema(signature, axioms);
.).
This idea now goes into a trial use period. Comments would help.
I'll either retract the idea or put it into the online m2h tool
in a week or two. Watch this blog for the next exciting episode!
I am disatisfied with the expression of algorithms in MATHS. There
is a formal semantics in terms of an extension to the
calculus of relations. This makes algorithms a special kind
of formula. But to make them readable -- structured even -- is another
matter -- basically you need to use the .List and .Set directives
to show the block structure. An example is
[ notn_14_Docn_Semantics.html#Translation into a Z Schema ]
from the description of the meaning of a piece of MATHS documentation.
This morning it occured to me that a natural notation would be
to allow directives like: ".(", ".)" and perhaps even ".[", ".{", etc.
The sematics is of "(...)". But the rendering should be
as an indented subexpression. More on this when I've had a chance to
do some more thinking. Any opinions can be sent to me here
[ hole.html ]
and will get full credit.
Several modern programming languages -- Python and Ruby, for example --
use what is called "Duck Typing". This means that behavior of an object
defines its type, rather than an explicit definition.
It turns out, to my surprise, that my MATHS language has a kind of
Duck Typing because the type of an object is the universal set in which the object is
defined. And the type defined by a Net of variables, axioms, definitions, etc.
is the type of the unconstrained objects -- the simple Net associated with
the original Net...
Details and changes in
[ notn_14_Docn_Semantics.html ]
and
[ notn_16_Classification.html ]
As always -- click here
[click here
if you can fill this hole]
to submit your thoughts.
Not a real change of meaning.... just cleaned up the definitions
and noted that
- A->B->C
is not clearly defined and should be avoided.
Still a long way to go in
[ math_94_Calculus.html ]
before we have a complete page.
[ math_13_Data_Bases.html#DataBase ]
Which in turn lead to an extension of the notation for discriminated types
[ types.html#type_disciminated_union ]
I had to shuffle the definitions of Node, Places, and Transitions
in
[ math_76_Concurency.html#PETRI ]
so that it is clear that Places and Transitions are the same type of
thing and so validating the definition
- Arcs::@(Places><Transitions) | @(Transitions><Places)=given.
The bibliography
[ ../lab.html ]
has evolved a notation for citations that was not a part of
my original design for MATHS. Similarly the "hole.php" uses
the Source directive in an unexpected way. See
[ notn_15_Naming_Documentn.html ]
for the kludge. The older BNF syntax may be removed or be replaced
in time -- it is now deprecated.
The following quotes were sent to me by
Sonesh Rawat
via the Contact/comment button on this part of my website:
- He who seeks for methods without having a definite problem in mind seeks for the most part in vain.
- One should study mathematics because it is only through mathematics that nature can be conceived in harmonious form.
- Just as a mountaineer climbs a mountain- because it is there,so a good mathematics students studies new material because it is there.
I'd like to cap them with a thought of Sigmund Freud:
- Man climbs highest when he doesn't know where he is going.
By the way just fixed the broken link on Systems English below.
[ math_63_Languages.html ]
Systems English is a tiny subset of Basic English designed to
describe systems:
[ logic_8_Natural_Language.html#Systems English ]
Somehow I've never gathered any notes of topos theory
and topoi. I'm just moting the following link
to a simple motivational introduction:
- topos::= See http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/topos.html
at the nearby University of California Riverside.
When developed the notes would be in
[ math_25_Categories.html ]
and I will plant a hole there for future expansion.
[ math 91 Topology.html#Subspaces and relative topologies ]
As a result of thinking about a wikipedia article I tripped over the
fact that
- /Card(n)
-- the sets with cardinallity n,
is a typically ambiguous expression. As a result runs the risk
of introducing a paradox into the system if not used carefully.
So
I'm changing the definition from
- Card:@T->Nat0= map[X](|X|)
to
- For Type T, Card[T]::@T->Nat0= map[X:@T](|X|).
- For Type T, X:@T, Card(X)::Nat0= Card[T](X).
- For Type T, A:@T, n:Nat0, A@n = { X:@T || Card[T](X) = n }.
(Subsets of a given size).
Here are the pages where changes were made as a result
[ types.html ]
[ math_25_Categories.html ]
[ logic_30_Sets.html ]
[ intro_sets.html ]
[ intro_standard.html ]
[ notn_12_Expressions.html ]
I wonder if I need a way to express the idea that some expression is not
defined in addition to having a way to define things?
[click here
undefinitions if you can fill this hole]
- But me no Buts!
I've decided to introduce a simple way to annotate an argument
that attempts to rebut the previous argument. Commonly arguments
and proofs in MATHS start ".Let" and end ".Close.Let". A Rebuttal
will be an argument that is placed between
.But
and
.Close.But
For example
Let
- (let)|-It is raining.
- (let)|-If it rains then I shall get wet.
- (-1, -2)|-I shall get wet.
(Close Let )
But
- I carry an umbrella.
- (-1)|-I keep dry.
But- In August,
- I forgot the umbrella,
- (-1)|-I got wet.
(Close But )
(Close But )
Today I'll be working on
[ notn_5_Form.html ]
to describe informal argumentation.
This is the result of seeing the same reference in two papers in IEEE Transactions
on Software Engineering and in "Wittgenstein's Poker".
More later...
[ math_81_Probabillity.html ]
(sorry for the mis-spelling in this link).
This span off from Principia Mathematica Section *42 (and there is more below).
I added the definition of prefix union and intersection to
[ logic_30_Sets.html ]
and explicitly linked
[ logic_31_Families_of_Sets.html ]
back to logic_30.
- 8:35
Added the (missing) syntax for prefixed union and intersection
operators. Also added some quick examples of the syntax.
- 5:13 pm
Added a nonstandard translation of part of PM's Chapter 42:
[ logic_30_Sets.html#Chapter_42 ]
(enter here at your own risk).
[ constructive_dilemma in logic_25_Proofs ]
Until last night I've never worried about sets of sets of sets. But they
are used in Principia Mathematica's section *42 -- definitely
not the answer to life's persistent questions.
This lead me to discover an ambiguity in expressions like
- +((1,2), (3,4)).
Plus is a SERIAL operator so it means
- (1,2) + (3,4).
And + is overloaded to combine maps and lists so that its value is
- (1+3, 2+4) = (4,6).
It might be thought that because + is overloaded as a prefix function it
should be applied (by a second overloading) to the elements of the list
- +((1,2), (3,4)) <> ( +(1,2), +(3,4)) = (3, 7).
I've added notes to
[ notn_12_Expressions.html ]
that explain that the simplest parsings are used whenever possible.
Read chapter 38 of Principia Mathematica last night. Made me want
to review the equivalent definitions in MATHS. As a result I've
tidied up
[ math_11_STANDARD.html#Infix operations ]
which make the following equations correct:
- {1,2,3} * 3 = {3,6,9},
- {1,2}*{3,5} = {3,5,6,20},
- 4*(1,2,3) = {4,8,20),
- (3,4,5)*(1,2,3) = (3,8,15).
I've expanded on the reasons for proving something
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html#But Why Prove anything Anyway? ]
and what can be concluded after deriving some results from
some assumptions in
[ logic_25_Proofs.html#Block Structure ]
to clarify that you must include all the assumptions and any of
the results in the conclusion drawn from an argument.
- 11:06 Added a note on tables and relational data bases.
[ notn_9_Tables.html ]
I'm planning to record most changes to the files in this directory here.
Here is a quick list of recently changed pages in this part of my site.
Table
| Date | Page | Action
|
|---|
| May 5 10:29 | math_92_Metric_Spaces.html
| Added Notes on Hilbert spaces used in Quantum Theory
|
| May 7 17:58 | math_81_Probabillity.html
| Added notes on Expected values, means, variances etc.
|
| May 10 09:02 | logic_27_Tableaux.html
| Added a thought about using a table to express a set of cases
|
| May 13 07:23 | intro_records.html
| Added notes on optional and multiple parts in a record
|
| May 19 14:32 | logic_30_Sets.html
| Added to notes on the Axiom of Choice
|
| May 21 20:10 | logic_25_Proofs.html
| Added an example of using table to document proof by cases.
|
| May 23 06:49 | math_41_Two_Operators.html
| Added definition of a dioid
|
(Close Table)
Latest --
[ math_92_Metric_Spaces.html ]
[ math_5_Object_Theory.html ]
[ logic_10_PC_LPC.html ]
[ intro_records.html ]
(optional and multiple parts)
[ intro_objects.html ]
[ intro_copywrite.html ]
[ notn_14_Docn_Semantics.html ]
[ notn_13_Docn_Syntax.html ]
[ logic_25_Proofs.html ]
[ intro_function.html ]
[ math_95_Function_Spaces.html ]
[ math_45_Three_Operators.html ]
(Trying to understand Quantum Theory....)
-- Oldest
Latest --
[ logic_10_PC_LPC.html ]
(linking MATHS to Term Logic and Aristotlean Logic)
[ math_21_Order.html ]
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html ]
[ math_81_Probabillity.html ]
(Bayesian Probability matches abductive reasoning),
[ intro_objects.html ]
(exploring adding OO dynamics to Nets),
[ logic_30_Sets.html ]
[ logic_2_Proofs.html ]
[ intro_ebnf.html ]
[ math_21_Order.html ]
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html ]
-- Oldest
Latest --
[ notn_13_Docn_Syntax.html ]
[ intro_characters.html ]
[ math.lexicon.html ]
[ math.syntax.html ]
(changing notation to separate formula from bullet points/paragraphs),
[ logic_27_Tableaux.html ]
(Semantic tableax),
[ logic_2_Proofs.html ]
is now refactored into
[ logic_20_Proofs100.html ]
and
[ logic_25_Proofs.html ]
-- Oldest
[ logic_2_Proofs.html ]
(added more on semantic tableaux)
(2004): Latest --
[ logic_30_Sets.html ]
[ logic_8_Natural_Language.html ]
[ notn_14_Docn_Semantics.html ]
[ notn_12_Expressions.html ]
[ notn_16_Classification.html ]
[ notn_13_Docn_Syntax.html ]
[ notn_3_Conveniences.html ]
[ notn_2_Structure.html ]
[ notn_11_Names.html ]
[ math_77_Enumerations.html ]
[ math_25_Categories.html ]
-- Oldest
(2003): -- Latest
[ intro_standard.html ]
[ math_73_Process_algebra.html ]
[ math_82_MultiSets_and_Bags.html ]
[ math_83_Fuzzy_Sets.html ]
[ 00_overview.html ]
[ math_84_Spectra.html ]
[ notn_9_Tables.html ]
[ logic_9_Modalities.html ]
[ logic_41_HomogenRelations.html ]
-- Oldest
- MATHS::=./index.html