On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 22:06 +0000, Obrst, Leo J. wrote: (01)
> The goal might be for one object to partially penetrate another
> object. A more general pattern keeps that goal but broadens it. Hit X
> to Y to move Y. Croquet or golf, etc. A more specific pattern: Hit X
> to Y when Y is held stationary, with such force that a back portion of
> Y ignites to propel a front portion of Y. A gun and bullet, with a
> slight modification, a rocket. Or perhaps a shift analogically to a
> social organization ontology, and here is where metaphors help. Hit
> conservative-social-values to the electorate to move the electorate
> rightward into the nation-state’s governance.
> (02)
Well if you're going that far in abstraction, why not go all the way to
R.B. Fuller's six fundamental unique patterns of system interference:
Tangential avoidance
Modulated noninterference
Reflection
Refraction
Smash-up (explosion)
Critical Proximity (minimum knot) (03)
(Fuller, Synergetics, 517.10) (04)
Special cases (instances) only vary in their parameters. These patterns
go a long way toward fitting most physical and communication systems. (05)
Regards,
--Paul (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (07)
|