Pat, (01)
As your comment " better, it is a relationship between the object and a
temperature. It is, however, not the property which we commonly call 'the
temperature of the object'." indicates, the kind of relationship is
different. (02)
One 'understanding' issue is that properties such a simple temperature are
seen as direct (to use Matthew's term) properties of the object, that can be
measured directly.
However, if one considers these indirect properties, then they are not
measured in the same way. So, at first blush, they seem to be different
kinds of properties.
They seem to be like Cambridge properties, in as much as it is not clear how
mere examination of the object will reveal (the value of) the property. So
some kind of explanation of the relation is needed to understand it. (03)
At the practical engineering level, the normal interpretations of scale
operations such as addition (e.g. in the case of mass, putting both objects
with the mass on the same scale) and so on do not seem to work in the same
way. (04)
(and hence) At a practical programming level, one has to use different
constraints when adding and multiplying the numbers. (05)
I really do not want to engage in any discussion of this next point with you
(can we have a truce), but in my discussions of these kinds of properties
with people who procure aircraft (max operational speed, etc.) the contract
clauses they devise to define these properties are extremely good examples
of the kinds of ceteris paribus discussions that come up in the philosophic
analysis of dispositions. So my view (and I know it won't be yours) is that
we can cherry pick some stuff to help elucidate (understand) these
'dispositional' qualities. And so understand how we aggregate, etc. them. (06)
Of course, if no-one wishes to know what kind of arithmetical (scale)
properties the quantities have (or that they have consistent arithmetical
properties) then you are right to say "I see no problem here that needs
anything special to be done or discussed." However, this was the context in
which Matthew raised the issue. (07)
BTW It was Matthew who not only raised this point here, but also first made
me aware of it some time ago. As an engineer, he can quote you chapter and
verse on this topic. As I recall it, David (Leal) - another engineer - can
as well. (08)
Regards,
Chris Partridge
Chief Ontologist (09)
Mobile: +44 790 5167263
Phone: +44 20 81331891
Fax: +44 20 7855 0268
E-Mail: partridgec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (010)
BORO Centre Limited
Website: www.BOROCentre.com
Registered in England No: 04418581
Registered Office: 25 Hart Street, Henley on Thames,
Oxfordshire RG9 2AR (011)
This email message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. It may be
privileged and/or confidential. If you are not an intended named recipient
of this email then you should not copy it or use it for any purpose, nor
disclose its contents to any other person. You should contact BORO Centre
Limited as shown above so that we can take appropriate action at no cost to
yourself. All BORO Centre Limited outgoing E-mails are checked using Anti
Virus software. (012)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pat Hayes [mailto:phayes@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: 30 September 2009 16:43
> To: uom-ontology-std
> Cc: Chris Partridge
> Subject: Re: [uom-ontology-std] What is mass?
>
>
> On Sep 29, 2009, at 4:18 PM, Chris Partridge wrote:
>
> > Gunther,
> >
> > Maximum allowable temperature is a disposition of the object.
> > The object may reach never reach that temperature, or may reach it,
> > even
> > exceed it, but that does not have much, in itself, to do with the
> > property.
> >
> > The property is something like: other things being equal, if you
> > stay below
> > this temperature the object (more often, a type of object) will
> > operate as
> > specified - if you go above it then it may not.
> >
> > (Allowable is probably not the best example, as one could try and
> > cash this
> > out by saying that one is defining two states that the object can be
> > in -
> > below (or equal) to the maximum and above the maximum. But that
> > would ignore
> > the intention that staying within the 'allowable' range should
> > provide some
> > guarantee of normal operation.)
> >
> > So, the object has (or does not have) this property whatever its
> > actual
> > temperature.
>
> OK, but this does not contradict anything anyone has said. It is a
> property of the object, and its value is a temperature (better, it is
> a relationship between the object and a temperature.) It is, however,
> not the property which we commonly call 'the temperature of the
> object'. I see no problem here that needs anything special to be done
> or discussed.
>
> Pat H.
>
>
> >
> > I suppose one could argue that these are not quantities at all - but
> > then (I
> > am told) most useful engineering measures would be excluded.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Chris Partridge
> > Chief Ontologist
> >
> > Mobile: +44 790 5167263
> > Phone: +44 20 81331891
> > Fax: +44 20 7855 0268
> > E-Mail: partridgec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > BORO Centre Limited
> > Website: www.BOROCentre.com
> > Registered in England No: 04418581
> > Registered Office: 25 Hart Street, Henley on Thames,
> > Oxfordshire RG9 2AR
> >
> > This email message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. It
> > may be
> > privileged and/or confidential. If you are not an intended named
> > recipient
> > of this email then you should not copy it or use it for any purpose,
> > nor
> > disclose its contents to any other person. You should contact BORO
> > Centre
> > Limited as shown above so that we can take appropriate action at no
> > cost to
> > yourself. All BORO Centre Limited outgoing E-mails are checked using
> > Anti
> > Virus software.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: uom-ontology-std-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:uom-ontology-std-
> >> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gunther Schadow
> >> Sent: 29 September 2009 21:51
> >> To: uom-ontology-std
> >> Subject: Re: [uom-ontology-std] What is mass?
> >>
> >> Matthew West wrote:
> >>> Dear Ingvar,
> >>>
> >>> This sounds like an interesting challenge.
> >>>
> >>>> I am as aware of the contents of VIM as of the SI brochure, and
> >>>> your
> >>>> "n.b." makes exactly my point. What you might call "newton-meter as
> >>>> a unit
> >>>> alone", I prefer to call "nominal newton-meter". However, note that
> >>>> only
> >>>> some units can be called nominal units and tied to more than one
> >>>> kind-of-quantity; many units are unambiguously tied only to one
> >>>> kind-of-quantity.
> >>>
> >>> Could you give me a unit (or two) that you think only applies to one
> >>> kind-of-quantity, and I'll see if I can identify another?
> >>>
> >>> Engineering is full of things like Maximum Allowable Working
> >>> Temperature, which is certainly not a temperature (try measuring
> >>> it with
> >>> a thermometer).
> >>
> >>
> >> Why is maximum allowable temperature not a temperature? Just because
> >> it isn't realized? It is a temperature specification. It is a
> >> quantity
> >> even if it doesn't exist anywhere at any particular moment in time.
> >>
> >> But of course that is another issue and I still agree that a maximum
> >> allowable temperature of this machine can not be well compared with
> >> the water temperature of my pool -- but then they can if the machine
> >> is meant to go into my pool (which I don't have)
> >>
> >> -Gunther
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Gunther Schadow, M.D., Ph.D.
> >> gschadow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Associate Professor Indiana University School of
> >> Informatics
> >> Regenstrief Institute, Inc. Indiana University School of
> >> Medicine
> >> tel:1(317)423-5521 http://
> >> aurora.regenstrief.org
> >>
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
> >> Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Config/Unsubscribe:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
> >> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
> >> Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard
> >>
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
> > Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Config/Unsubscribe:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-
> std/
> > Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
> > Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
> 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
> Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
> FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>
>
> (013)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard (014)
|