There is an alternative approach in which the individual exists for all
time, but the physical characteristics (including whether the individual is
alive) are determined by time periods, or alternatively by situations that
happen to exist during known time periods, but can still be represented even
when the time periods are unknown. Try a google search on "situation
calculus" (01)
Jim Rhyne
Software Renovation Consulting
Los Gatos, California
http://www.enterprisesoftwarerenovation.com/ (02)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Matthew West
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 9:10 AM
To: '[ontolog-forum] '
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Re Foundation ontology, CYC, and Mapping (03)
Dear PatC, (04)
I'm afraid this does not work. (05)
> > > MW: What I would expect to see is some relation that affirmed this.
> > For 3D this would be some identity relation and for 4D this would be
> a
> > temporal whole/part relation. I'm not quite sure how you make a
> relation
> > ambiguous enough that it could be either.
> >
> > A relation could be defined to express this, but not given a
> semantics
> > in the 3D-4D agnostic world. It would be given different semantics
> in
> > each theory.
> >
>
> I am unclear why not. If you define a relation:
> "isTheSameIndividualAs" it
> could
> Relate a particular instance of endurant at all times, and also relate
> all
> time slices of a 4D object. What problem do you see? (06)
MW: In 4D they are not the same individual. In fact you have 4 individuals,
the egg state, the tadpole state the frog state and the whole life of the
egg/tadpole/frog. The relation that links them is temporal whole part, where
the states are temporal parts of the whole life object. This is very
different from being the same individual. (07)
>
> Pat
>
> PS - Pat Hayes has already (in this forum) presented a set of axioms
> relating 3D and 4D objects - is this discussion due to some inadequacy
> of
> that formulation? (08)
MW: This is a different approach trying to follow the idea of an
underspecified ontology to which 3D and 4D (and other) flavours can be
added. PatH's approach was a mapping between the native approaches. I think
the under specification may have value where it results in something that
seems natural natively in either dialect, but not where it does not, and I
think working with individuals is a place where it does not work very well. (09)
Regards (010)
Matthew West
Information Junction
Tel: +44 560 302 3685
Mobile: +44 750 3385279
matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/ (011)
This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
and Wales No. 6632177.
Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE. (012)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (013)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (014)
|