by Niall Douglas. Last updated . This page has been accessed 5,058 times since the 22nd September 2004.
|View this page in:||English||Any language:
Translation to non-English languages provided by Google Language
You are connecting to the IPv4 version of this website from the IP address 184.108.40.206. You can try the IPv6-only version if you want.
You can quickly jump into the
index using this quick navigation bar:
Tuesday 20th July 2004: 12:16am. In the shower tonight after spending an afternoon powerhosing my father's boat I was thinking that it would be useful to be able to mathematically model the behaviour of computer software fully integrating the high-level (widespread collection of myriad bits of software working together) with the low-level (the actual implementation of the software). If it's possible, one could use it to conclusively prove that Tn enables to a much greater degree the evolution of computer systems and thus considerably increase the magnification effect of computers upon human activity, thus enabling humans to achieve more in less time - or as economics would call it, substantial economic growth. Put simply, Tn makes everyone lots of money.
However, such a modelling system wouldn't be limited to just that. It could also unify the macro and micro economic models by allowing one to be fully expressible in the other, something which would almost certainly earn me a Nobel prize. Such a development would have radical effects on the world at large - never mind vast changes in western economic policy, but also the social changes which would come from having economic policy finally reflecting the quantum mechanical reality of the universe.
Of course the maths would likely be heinous, assuming that the incompleteness of number theory wouldn't render it impossible (in which case possibly combination of non-Euclidean number spaces may yield a workable approximation). And proving it via demonstration terribly imprecise which is why all attempts for the last 400 years have failed. However, while economic systems are too unquantifiable to use a test bed, computer software has the advantage of being pure logic and thus partially outside number theory and furthermore, I understand them considerably better so that my intuitive intelligence can come to my aid. After all, most of Tn was designed by feeling ...
As always, the key to merging the high-level and low-level viewpoints is 100% using the right perception. If as within Tn one views computer software as like all tools a magnifier of human capacity to cause change, and that the high-level viewpoint being almost entirely a pure ecosystem of human endeavour, then the non linear mathematics which generate chaotic attractors and fractals is a good starting point. I have a feeling that chaotic attractors fall into groups - I'm only guessing this because subatomic particles fall into groups much as the periodic table of elements does, so surely one could take an abstraction of chaotic attractors - say six basic types and then combine them in various logical ways to produce a model which consists of simple logical steps when you look closely but behaves like an ecosystem when looked at from afar. Well, I'm not a mathematician nor a subatomic particle physicist so I don't really know, but I'll keep an eye out during my upcoming degree.
More powerhosing comes tomorrow, plus I've made a few hundred euro last few weeks doing odd jobs but unfortunately my Spanish friend is nowhere to be contacted and so I've no idea about what I'm doing in August. Time to send another reminder email. Be happy!