Been busy

Working hard on stuff.

SOM classification problem

When using the SOM model of systems I tend to go from the top system down, and I have ran into a problem with that. I don’t specifically know how many levels up I am so it is impossible to classify a SOM to a level and name it correctly when first starting out at top level. For example: I have an object, I classify the top level SSysOp and then later on I realize that I am at Op level and I need to add another level. What do I with that situation?

I have thought and debated about it with myself and I have came up with the following syntax:

SysOpx(name)

SysOp -obvious, just declaring that it is a system of operations

x -a number; instead of starting up and going down you would start down and go up: 1,2,3,…

(name) -optional; a name for the operation.

This is the syntax for all operational levels now. 🙂

Mathematical logic

  I must ask anybody who reads this, what is (1/9)*9. 1/9 is 0.111… with ones forever. 9 can be though of as 9/1. So (1/9)*9 is (1/9)*(9/1) the nines cancel each other out and you obtain 1/1 which is just 1. Now I must ask, what is 0.999… with nines forever? If I wanted to find this as a fraction I would say 9/9 which is 1, but 0.999… isn’t 1, it is 0.999…, but mathematically 0.999… will always equal 1. So how can a number be equal to another number that varies by an infinitesimal amount. 1 and 0.999… are still two different numbers!

  Our mathematics system is severely flawed if even the simplest calculation cannot produce the difference between 0.999… and 1. Our mathematics system will say that 1-0.999…= 0, which doesn’t make sense. Dealing with probability it is especially horrible, the most probable thing possible will only be 99.999…% likely to happen, according to our mathematics system this means it is 100% probable to happen, so something that is almost always likely to occur will always occur.

  Advanced mathematics maybe can solve this problem but someone shouldn’t have to rely on advanced mathematics to solve a simple problem. Everything relies on tiny variations, even the most probable things have an infinitesimal likelihood to not occur, and even the most improbable things will have an infinitesimal likelihood to occur. Due to certain concepts in the universe a simple variation in a system will vary the system vastly in the future, so even the most infinitesimal changes can add up to be astronomical (hypothetically, I still can’t figure that part out because our mathematics system is so flawed).

  Dealing with quantified mathematics will always give you quantified results! Infinite isn’t a number it is a direction, but people persist in saying infinite+1 or infinite-1 or infinite/2. There are those numbers that must not be complex, real, rational, or irrational, there must be numbers that explain the phenomenon of (1/9)*9. There should be a number system where a number in it can be manipulated logically between different types of numbers. Infinite is similar to infinitesimal they both cannot apparently be explained in discrete number systems.

  Sorry for rambling and probably horrible grammar, I just don’t agree with 9/9 being equal to (1/9)*9

Projection of Arithmetic with SOM

Firefox is the way to go

This had been originally a post on the projection of arithmetical values, but since i’m on a computer in a computer lab at school, and I have to use internet explorer, and internet explorer crashed because it is lame, I couldn’t get that post up, and it was a good post. Later on today I will post a OpenOfficeDraw image.

I implore everyone to use Firefox, you never get viruses (at least I don’t) It hardly ever crashes, and its extremely customizable.

Modifier Variables

Hypothetically it is possible to build a small program that has even smaller programs inside of it, a hierarchy could develope going from very complex to extremely simple.

I will use my SOM model to illustrate:

SSysOp:

SysOp:

Op:

Realistically It would look something like this:

var=

var0.0=

var0.0.0-Do something

var1.o-Do var0.0.0 & then Do var1.0.0

var1.0.0-break var

var is a variable, and var0.0, var0.0.0, var1.0, & var1.0.0 are all modifier variables. A modifier variable is an operation that isn’t the top level in the SOM. An analogy would be a gun; When I shoot a gun, I pull the trigger, the action forces the primer to explode, which forces the gunpowder to explode, which forces the bullet out of the barrel. The trigger, the action, the primer, the gunpowder, the barrel, and the bullet are all modifier variables. If I were to write this out I would say:

gun=

gun(trigger)

gun(trigger)0.0-if received input from human do gun(action)

gun(trigger)0.1-

gun(action)

gun(action)0.0-do gun(primer)

gun(primer)

gun(primer)0.0-do gun(gunpowder)

gun(gunpowder)

gun(gunpowder)0.0-do gun(bullet)

gun(gunpowder)0.1-gun(var)0.0 (heat)=(heat)+300

gun(barrel)

gun(barrel)0.0-gun(bullet)0.0 travels on this path

gun(bullet)

gun(bullet)0.0-fire bullet

gun(var)

gun(var)()0.0- variable: heat | variable: power | variable: speed |

gun(set)

gun(set)0.0-heat=heat-1degre/ms|power=500W|speed=500 m/s

This is a gun- you do the trigger, it does the action, the action does the primer, the primer does the gunpowder, the gunpowder does the bullet which is oriented by the barrel. The gunpowder also holds “heat” which is stored as a variable in gun(var) it is reduced by 1 every millisecond, and since gunpowder adds 300 heat units that is: 300° degrees/1ms= 300ms to dissipate heat, this is 3/10 seconds. gun(set) is an initiator for the variables.

I shall refer to Modifer Variables from now on as MV.

Loosely defined, a MV is any operation that is embedded into a higher SOM. My head is embedded into my body, this keyboard is embedded into this computer. My body is the higher system of managment so my head is an MV, the computer is also the higher SOM so the keyboard is an MV

Incredibly busy

I have been very very busy over the past couple weeks with school, I have also been sick with the flu or something. I have had some really good Ideas and will apply them just as soon as I get healthy again.

Concept art with blocks

Started on how the simulation will work

Here is how the simulation will work. It’s NOT done; will change a lot.

The words are really small, and are some are impossible to read in the above picture. If anyone wants the Open Document Drawing file, just ask.

Modularization of blocks

I think that the coordination system should be a matrix of sub-block (sB, blocks(B), and super-blocks(SB). sBs would hold small articles like roads and item units, as well as building geometry. Bs would hold buildings and large items. SBs would hold larger items like clouds, large mountainous things, and when zoomed out, they could transfer into new SBs while using the old SBs as Bs in the SBs.

This concept I like to call zoom levels (ZL).  ZL1 would house regular SB1s with Bs in them, and then the Bs will have sBs in them. Whereas ZL2 will house SB2s with SB1s in them, and then the SB1s will have Bs in them.

—

-ZL1->(SB1[  B{  sB

-ZL2->(SB2[  SB1{  B

-ZL3->(SB3[  SB2{  SB1

—

/n

^^Here is a concept for the coordination system