Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Inorganic numbers

  1. Mar 25, 2004 #1

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Let S be a set, define S <= T if there is a n injection from S to T.

    For finite sets let |S| denote the class of sets {T} where T<=S<=T

    For each |S| where S is finite, let G, denote the set of all binary operations from pairs of elemnts of S to S satisfying the axioms we know from Group Theory.

    Therefore we have made the "correct" paradigm of the natural numbers.

    What do you reckon Organic?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 25, 2004 #2
    Matt,

    Please Define a set.
     
  4. Mar 25, 2004 #3

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    It is the same notion of set as the ones you use to construct your objects too. We will work in the model of ZFC that you are most comfortable with.
     
  5. Mar 25, 2004 #4
    You did not understand me.

    Do you agree with that?

    A set is a finite or infinite collection of objects in which order has no significance, and multiplicity is generally also ignored (unlike a list or multiset).

    Some examples :

    set: {a,b,c} = {b,a,c}

    multiset: {a,a,a,a,b,b,c} = {b,a,a,c,a,b,a}
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2004
  6. Mar 26, 2004 #5

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Yes and no.

    A class of objects is a "set" if it is a set in a model of ZFC.
     
  7. Mar 26, 2004 #6
    Then what is a class of objects?
     
  8. Mar 26, 2004 #7

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Oh, that's just some collection of objects. You want to define collection? Go look it up in the dictionary. There naturally has to be some point at which we stop playing the silly recursive define every term in you definition game. Besides you as always fail to understand that when we say 'define symmetry degree' or something, we mean: tell us which objects might possess this property, what we look for when we look at one of these objects and how we then decide what its symmetry degree is (it is something that has units) or whether or not has a degree of symmetry. We don't want you to talk about symmetry breaking and the inherent beauty of nature. We just want to know how to use this damn thing.


    For instance, using your nested set notation:

    ((1,1),(1,1))

    suppose that is one of the valid objects in the set of quantity 4.

    How can I tell if there is any uncertainty or redundancy in that? What is its vageness or symmetry degree.
     
  9. Mar 26, 2004 #8
    Why not?

    Let us take the trees that included in quantity 3:

    {1,1,1} , {{1,1},1} , {{{1},1},1}

    The first is a multiset and the last is a "normal" set.

    For example let us say that there is a piano with 3 notes and we call it 3-system :
    Code (Text):

    DO=D , RE=R , MI=M

    The highest unclear information of 3-system is the most left information's-tree,
    where each key has no unique value of its own, and vice versa.

    <-Redundancy->
        M   M   M  ^<----Uncertainty
        R   R   R  |    R   R
        D   D   D  |    D   D   M       D   R   M
        .   .   .  v    .   .   .       .   .   .
        |   |   |       |   |   |       |   |   |
    3 = |   |   |       |___|_  |       |___|   |
        |   |   |       |       |       |       |
        |___|___|_      |_______|       |_______|
        |               |               |    
     

    An example of 4-notes piano (DO=D , RE=R , MI=M , FA=F):

    ------------>>>

        F  F  F  F           F  F           F  F
        M  M  M  M           M  M           M  M
        R  R  R  R     R  R  R  R           R  R     R  R  R  R
        D  D  D  D     D  D  D  D     D  R  D  D     D  D  D  D
        .  .  .  .     .  .  .  .     .  .  .  .     .  .  .  .
        |  |  |  |     |  |  |  |     |  |  |  |     |  |  |  |
        |  |  |  |     |__|_ |  |     |__|  |  |     |__|_ |__|_
        |  |  |  |     |     |  |     |     |  |     |     |
        |  |  |  |     |     |  |     |     |  |     |     |
        |  |  |  |     |     |  |     |     |  |     |     |
        |__|__|__|_    |_____|__|_    |_____|__|_    |_____|____
        |              |              |              |

    4 =
                                       M  M  M
              R  R                     R  R  R        R  R
        D  R  D  D      D  R  D  R     D  D  D  F     D  D  M  F
        .  .  .  .      .  .  .  .     .  .  .  .     .  .  .  .
        |  |  |  |      |  |  |  |     |  |  |  |     |  |  |  |
        |__|  |__|_     |__|  |__|     |  |  |  |     |__|_ |  |
        |     |         |     |        |  |  |  |     |     |  |
        |     |         |     |        |__|__|_ |     |_____|  |
        |     |         |     |        |        |     |        |
        |_____|____     |_____|____    |________|     |________|
        |               |              |              |


        D  R  M  F
        .  .  .  .
        |  |  |  |
        |__|  |  |
        |     |  |
        |_____|  |
        |        |
        |________|
        |    
     
     
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2004
  10. Mar 26, 2004 #9

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I don't need you to talk about symmetry breaking in order for me to be able to recognize symmetry degree. As it is your mathematical descriptions do not illuminate the objects you are talking about to other people. We are still completely unable to state what symmetry degree is, and how one identifies it or works it out, or even the types of object which might display this "thing".

    I defined the degree of symmetry as what ever I did in the organic number thread. It is a simple rule that enables people to state the symetry degree of a tree. I don't need to explain the inherent ideas of symmetry in order to tell someone how to calculate it, or say, yes, the symmetry degree of that tree is 2/3. I've said it is defined for trees, and given the range of values it can take. If you want to justify it's name, then I suppose it has some relation to the subtrees and their properties.

    You see you've labelled things in that diagram with uncertainty and redundancy. Why? How? What is it that lets you know when you can write those words above a diagram and when you can't?
     
  11. Mar 26, 2004 #10
    Please refrash the screen, an look at my example in the previous post.
     
  12. Mar 26, 2004 #11

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I think I can now deduce from that that a diagram possess uncertainty if any of the columns of labels above one of the 'stems' has more than letter in it. Is that correct? We may if we choose then say that the number of stems that do not have a unique letter above them is the degree of uncertainty. That is just my artificial definition, you don't need to use it, or bother with it at all in fact.

    That would allow for there to be two diagrams for '4' that do not have any uncertainty, is that correct? The last one and the one second row second from the left.
     
  13. Mar 26, 2004 #12
    Code (Text):

    DO=D , RE=R , MI=M

    The highest unclear information of 3-system is the most left information's-tree,
    where each key has no unique value of its own, and vice versa.

    <-Redundancy->
        M   M   M  ^<----Uncertainty
        R   R   R  |    R   R
        D   D   D  |    D   D   M       D   R   M
        .   .   .  v    .   .   .       .   .   .
        |   |   |       |   |   |       |   |   |
    3 = |   |   |       |___|_  |       |___|   |
        |   |   |       |       |       |       |
        |___|___|_      |_______|       |_______|
        |               |               |    
     
    Well, I like to look at the connection between redundancy_AND_uncertainty as "a cloud of possibilities", you know like the possibilities that we have to some Quantum element.

    For example:

    Let C be a closed door.

    Let O be an opened door.

    Let # be XOR.

    Code (Text):

        C   C
        #   #    
        O   O    
        .   .  
        |   |  
        |___|_  
        |
       
        O   C    
        .   .  
        |   |  
        |___|  
        |
     
     
  14. Mar 27, 2004 #13

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    The questions I asked both needed a simple yes or no answer. So, yes or no? I don't need you to repost those pictures for the umpteenth time.
     
  15. Mar 27, 2004 #14
    Matt,

    Do you understand my previous post?

    Please answer by yes or no.
     
  16. Mar 27, 2004 #15

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    No.

    And I don't understand why you wrote it because I asked a simple question that requires a yes or no answer. Nor do I understand the assertions about a quantum element. Nor do I care about that right now. I asked a simple question. Is it too much to ask for you to answer it? Apparently so.
     
  17. Mar 27, 2004 #16

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Actually I 'd like to elaborate on that as: No, I don't know if I understand it. I asked a question about this materail which pertained to my understanding of it and you refused to tell me if I was correct or incorrect.
     
  18. Mar 27, 2004 #17
  19. Mar 27, 2004 #18

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Why are those little words the hardest for you to utter. YES or NO.
     
  20. Mar 27, 2004 #19
    You still do not understand it.

    Please see my new thread on this subject.
     
  21. Mar 27, 2004 #20

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    So the answer to my questions were both no; a tree does not display uncertainty and redundancy simply because there is more than one letter in each column above each stem. And that the diagram for 4 on the second row second from the left does have uncertainty. So what is it then about the diagram which implies uncertainty and redundancy?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Inorganic numbers
  1. Wave number (Replies: 1)

  2. Number of electrons (Replies: 11)

  3. Dimensionless numbers (Replies: 16)

Loading...