ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

## Re: [ontolog-forum] Oooh, FOL is too hard to learn.

 To: "[ontolog-forum]" FERENC KOVACS Tue, 19 Oct 2010 12:46:56 +0100 (BST) <295271.97445.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 ```Well, before I shut up again, let me suggest that 1. the so called algebraic operations when represented as physical changes in reality (when they are visualized) indicate that addition is incremental growth in one direction starting from an origo. Since origo is a finite point, the increase cannot go on infinitely but must reach a point where the end point is determined by another line crossing the original straight line. The values are in AND connection. If at any moment of time you change direction (by turning, say 90 degrees), you have an OR relation for that location from which you may choce to go on as in addition and you can carry on ad infinitum, unéess you are omn the surface of a sphere. Substraction should be trivial as going in the opposite direction. Production or multiplication (of integers, natural, rational numbers that can be used to label objects in the real wordl) cannopt be done by humans unless he is helped by physical forces such as the case in fusion and splitting.Rmemebr that properties are the product of abstarction and cannor beseparated from the objects, and so on.So here products which are represneted by 1x1 or 1/1, but the point is that such an object is always one, a whole. This s best sen in a shere which grows in space in every direction, rather than in one or two or three. Just check out how bubbles illustrate the process by having one large than blown into a number of small ones in DIVISION, and so on. Obviously, there are at least three forces in action there to be noticed. 2. Does anybody know why the defintion of meaning in Wordnet is limited to  two senses only? Or why John Sowa believes that semantics covers just what he likes it to be defined in formal logic? Why semiotics is forgotten about not to mention many other ways of communication whioch all carry meaning? Like what abot spatial semantics, biosemiotics, etc?  Regards, ferenc     (01) _________________________________________________________________ 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    (02) ```
 Current Thread Re: [ontolog-forum] Oooh, FOL is too hard to learn., FERENC KOVACS <= Re: [ontolog-forum] Oooh, FOL is too hard to learn., John F. Sowa Re: [ontolog-forum] Oooh, FOL is too hard to learn., FERENC KOVACS