Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.prolog > #14888 > unrolled thread

😂 "Plog-like" - that should be the official term!

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.prolog

Contents

  😂 "Plog-like" - that should be the official term! Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-10-08 01:14 +0200
    How deep seek went bonkers (Re: 😂 "Plog-like" - that should be the official term!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-10-08 01:23 +0200
    Declarative farts versus MSI Claw AI+, who would win? (Was: 😂 "Plog-like" - that should be the official term!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-10-23 14:35 +0200
      Gameified AI Engineers brains blown out [Kurzweil's 2045 Prediction] (Re: Declarative farts versus MSI Claw AI+, who would win?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-10-23 15:19 +0200
        The intelligent Cloud, Fog and Edge is evolving (Was: Gameified AI Engineers brains blown out [Kurzweil's 2045 Prediction]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-10-24 11:38 +0200
          More Dreams: LLM + Chess = LRM (Was: The intelligent Cloud, Fog and Edge is evolving) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-10-25 12:50 +0200
            Not for Boris the Loris and Julio the Nazi Retared (Was: More Dreams: LLM + Chess = LRM) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-10-25 13:08 +0200
    Arrow Functions can do Existential Quantifier (Was: 😂 "Plog-like" - that should be the official term!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-06 14:12 +0100
      Resolving Ambiguity in Negation as Failure Re: Arrow Functions can do Existential Quantifier (Was: 😂 "Plog-like" - that should be the official term!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-06 14:21 +0100
        Future Outlook of Logic Programming (Was: Resolving Ambiguity in Negation as Failure) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-06 14:25 +0100
      Clueless Moron and Paid Putin Troll (Re: Arrow Functions can do Existential Quantifier) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-06 22:50 +0100
        2.1 Logical variables and equations (Re: Clueless Moron and Paid Putin Troll) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-06 22:51 +0100
          Re: 2.1 Logical variables and equations (Re: Clueless Moron and Paid Putin Troll) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-06 22:52 +0100
            Re: 2.1 Logical variables and equations (Re: Clueless Moron and Paid Putin Troll) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-06 22:52 +0100
            Re: 2.1 Logical variables and equations (Re: Clueless Moron and Paid Putin Troll) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-06 23:56 +0100
            Re: 2.1 Logical variables and equations (Re: Clueless Moron and Paid Putin Troll) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-06 23:58 +0100
              What does Type Free mean? (Re: 2.1 Logical variables and equations) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-06 23:59 +0100
        A noiseless patient Spider is a Pussy Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-07 00:03 +0100
        Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling] (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:29 +0200
          Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon (Re: Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:40 +0200
            Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 02:06 +0200
              Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:17 +0200
                But how can you deploy, when its ROM? (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:21 +0200
                New addition to π-WAM is π-WAM Assembly (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-09 19:46 +0200
          Re: Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling] (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-07-27 08:07 -0600
        Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult] (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Re: Logtalk big time salami slicing) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 17:08 +0200
          NVIDIA Einstein and Q8.24 RGB Values [Earth and Star Gazers] (Re: Brova you enjoy made up nonsense?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 17:33 +0200
            Just lookup orbital AI and SpaceX (Re: NVIDIA Einstein and Q8.24 RGB Values) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 17:38 +0200
          Re: Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult] (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Re: Logtalk big time salami slicing) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-07-27 18:55 -0700
        Ljubljana School versus Zurich School (Re: Prolog PIP-0110: Its a Floating-Point Multiverse? [Stoic Grisu versus Rest of World] (Re: Arrow Functions can do Existential Quantifier) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 20:16 +0200
          Big thanks to Ljubljana School [Searching 0xCAFFEE] (Re: Ljubljana School versus Zurich School) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 20:42 +0200
    2025 Obituary: Skew Confluence (aka “Stews” 😆) (Was: 😂 "Plog-like" - that should be the official term!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-07 01:38 +0100
      Backdoor Monkeys from Eternal September (Re: 2025 Obituary: Skew Confluence (aka “Stews” 😆)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-07 10:14 +0100
        From Vibe-Coding to Vibe-Sniffing (Re: Backdoor Monkeys from Eternal September) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-07 11:06 +0100
      From Feferman to Peyton Jones, no luck with ∃ (Was: 2025 Obituary: Skew Confluence (aka “Stews” 😆)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-08 20:33 +0100
        Taxon (TBox) / Affirm (ABox) was a thing in the 90s? (e: The quantifer ∃ is just the Combinator K (Schönfinkels C)?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-08 22:30 +0100
    Not Ross Finlayson: Pioneers Cliff B. Jones (Re: 😂 "Plog-like" - that should be the official term!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-09 21:18 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#15822 — Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon)

Hi,

Now that the debate with Chris M. Thomasson
has culminated in questions of elasticity,
I suggest this homework:

- Game Engine in WebGPU
   It will support the life cycle of sprites,
   like sprites comming out of nowhere,
   and being destroyed by arms,
   just like in Space invader.

This would be surely a fantastic exercise,
to see what a GPU can do and cannot do,
in respect of life cycle of threads, especially

modern GPUs that sell the CUDA dream.

Have Fun!

Become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> A nosomatic AI chirurgeon is a halfling student
> of sickness, and a master of the ebb and flow of
> the energies of life and death of data packets.
> 
> He is a air bender, water bender and earth bender
> in one person, using OpenVINO to juggle with
> CPU, GPU and NPU.
> 
> Last but not least he can freely switch between
> symbolic and neural representation of knowledge
> forms, there is no abyss for him.
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient
>> Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic
>> perception of time is a hot topic now.
>>
>> How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units
>> or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple
>> logical threads inside a group.
>>
>> Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need
>> a total new thinking of shared memory and more
>> message passing, and have a grip of vector and
>>
>> matrix tiling of problems. π-WAM already deploys
>> logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget
>> everything you have learned in your BASIC computer
>>
>> course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
>>> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>>>
>>> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
>>> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>  >
>>>  > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define 
>>> "measurement of
>>>  > time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>>  >
>>>  > Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval 
>>> observatory
>>>  > in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>>>  > regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>>  >
>>>  > About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>>>  > similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>>>  > about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>>>  > Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>>>  > measuring time.
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  > So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>>>  > and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  > Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>>>  > it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  > Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>>>  > on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>>  > Or shaves pennies.
>>>>
>>>>  >>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
>>>>  >>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>>  >>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>
>>>> Cost/hour: $200,000.00
>>>>
>>>> LoL
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>>>
>>>> P.S.: If it could do some quant trading magic, one would
>>>> possibly pay so much. But Logtalk is simply too lame:
>>>>
>>>> Version release notes
>>>> XVM Engine v10.2.4 is the full engine capable of running
>>>> all XVM and Logtalk programs, excluding for logtalk tools.
>>>>
>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> The 9122171.18175435 is a little offending, what if one
>>>>> keeps a federal secret after the 6 fraction digit?
>>>>>
>>>>> Bye
>>>>>
>>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, leaving the beaten path of my Prolog system
>>>>>> probing, and look at some newer beast.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This looks bad:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>>>> 9122171.18175435
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Expected result:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>>>> 9122171.181754
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bye
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW: Tested using this test tester:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI 
>>>>>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>>>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>>>  >>> See also:
>>>>>>  >>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImprovementsForum/0110-format.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15824 — Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU)

Hi,

 > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.

 > that has different
 > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
 > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),

Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
Which has then the advantage of:

Modern operating systems like Windows 11
enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
(or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
malicious programs from injecting and executing
code inside data-only memory regions.
https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/

I adopted data RAM and code ROM model for
pi-WAM from Hack, which has the same separation:

Slide 58, Hack Computer
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z_fxYmmRNXTkAzmZ6YMoX9NXZIRVCKiw/view

But my motivation was not Johnny Depp prevention.
Rather the caching of GPUs. Because WGSL
allows storage annotations read_write and

read. I use read_write for the data RAM
of my Hack VM variant, and read for the
code ROM of my Hack VM variant. You can

see that here, its open source:

@group(0) @binding(0) var<storage, read> code: array<i32>;
@group(0) @binding(1) var<storage, read_write> state: array<i32>;

11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget

Hope this Helps!

Bye

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson schrieb:
 > On 03/08/2026 6:28 PM, David Brown wrote:
 >> On 03/08/2026 11:41, Richard Harnden wrote:
 >>> On 03/08/2026 09:16, David Brown wrote:
 >>
 >>>> On most targets, function pointers are the same size as void* 
pointers. But there are exceptions, with some small microcontrollers and 
DSPs having different kinds of pointers with different sizes, depending 
on the memory space involved.  I have yet to see a situation where there 
was any reason for storing a function address in a "void*" rather than a 
more appropriate typedef, such as :
 >>>>
 >>>>      typedef void (*FVoid)(void);
 >>>
 >>> dlsym requires that pointer-to-function is compatible with a void*
 >>>
 >>
 >> As I say, I have yet to see a situation where using void* for 
function pointers was more appropriate than using a function pointer 
type.  If the OS system calls or standard OS libraries makes it a 
requirement that function pointers are converted to or from void* for 
some calls, then of course you need to follow those requirements - it's 
the people who designed the interfaces that made questionable design 
choices.
 >>
 >
 > Nope, you're wrong.  You're dead wrong.  The world isn't built on C,
 > even though here in comp.lang.c we like to pretend it is.
 >
 > Several language environments allow function generation on the fly,
 > these functions need to be garbage collected.  Common Lisp is an
 > example, therefore comp.lang.lisp is added to this discussion.
 >
 > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
 >
 > You will have to go out of your way to make a computer architecture
 > incompatible with garbage collected and heap allocated binary code,
 > something I've been told SBCL does internally [1] to create an archi-
 > tecture that has different
 >
 > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
 > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
 >
 > and when you do that, I'll just claim you're making a /malicious
 > computer architecture/ and refuse to use it.
 >
 >
 > [1] I've not looked at the code, but told the garbage collector can
 > and will at least move the code around, if not collect it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15825 — But how can you deploy, when its ROM? (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...])

Hi,

Well there are two viewpoint, the "client"
of the GPU, which is the CPU, and the "server"
of the GPU, which is the command processor

queue of the GPU device. So basically as
a CPU client I can write the memory area,
that is later mapped to my GPU code storage.

And this way have a compiler, even written
in Prolog, that compiles pi-WAM to my Hack VM,
that can then be then deployed to GPU.

You could also try the same with a Tiny
LISP VM. And a grown up LISP to act as
the compiler. Would be a similar exercise.

Have Fun!

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
> 
>  > that has different
>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
> 
> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
> Which has then the advantage of:
> 
> Modern operating systems like Windows 11
> enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
> (or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
> malicious programs from injecting and executing
> code inside data-only memory regions.
> https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/
> 
> I adopted data RAM and code ROM model for
> pi-WAM from Hack, which has the same separation:
> 
> Slide 58, Hack Computer
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z_fxYmmRNXTkAzmZ6YMoX9NXZIRVCKiw/view
> 
> But my motivation was not Johnny Depp prevention.
> Rather the caching of GPUs. Because WGSL
> allows storage annotations read_write and
> 
> read. I use read_write for the data RAM
> of my Hack VM variant, and read for the
> code ROM of my Hack VM variant. You can
> 
> see that here, its open source:
> 
> @group(0) @binding(0) var<storage, read> code: array<i32>;
> @group(0) @binding(1) var<storage, read_write> state: array<i32>;
> 
> 11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
> https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget
> 
> Hope this Helps!
> 
> Bye
> 
> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson schrieb:
>  > On 03/08/2026 6:28 PM, David Brown wrote:
>  >> On 03/08/2026 11:41, Richard Harnden wrote:
>  >>> On 03/08/2026 09:16, David Brown wrote:
>  >>
>  >>>> On most targets, function pointers are the same size as void* 
> pointers. But there are exceptions, with some small microcontrollers and 
> DSPs having different kinds of pointers with different sizes, depending 
> on the memory space involved.  I have yet to see a situation where there 
> was any reason for storing a function address in a "void*" rather than a 
> more appropriate typedef, such as :
>  >>>>
>  >>>>      typedef void (*FVoid)(void);
>  >>>
>  >>> dlsym requires that pointer-to-function is compatible with a void*
>  >>>
>  >>
>  >> As I say, I have yet to see a situation where using void* for 
> function pointers was more appropriate than using a function pointer 
> type.  If the OS system calls or standard OS libraries makes it a 
> requirement that function pointers are converted to or from void* for 
> some calls, then of course you need to follow those requirements - it's 
> the people who designed the interfaces that made questionable design 
> choices.
>  >>
>  >
>  > Nope, you're wrong.  You're dead wrong.  The world isn't built on C,
>  > even though here in comp.lang.c we like to pretend it is.
>  >
>  > Several language environments allow function generation on the fly,
>  > these functions need to be garbage collected.  Common Lisp is an
>  > example, therefore comp.lang.lisp is added to this discussion.
>  >
>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
>  >
>  > You will have to go out of your way to make a computer architecture
>  > incompatible with garbage collected and heap allocated binary code,
>  > something I've been told SBCL does internally [1] to create an archi-
>  > tecture that has different
>  >
>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
>  >
>  > and when you do that, I'll just claim you're making a /malicious
>  > computer architecture/ and refuse to use it.
>  >
>  >
>  > [1] I've not looked at the code, but told the garbage collector can
>  > and will at least move the code around, if not collect it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15847 — New addition to π-WAM is π-WAM Assembly (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...])

Hi,

 >>> How do you break out of a loop,

What Hamelt is to English language, is Hack to
Compiler Construction. The playbook of Hack contains
every drama that a Compiler Construction will face.
In the following we show how we realized Project 6:
Assembler from the Nand to Tetris journey via
a little Prolog DSL.

BTW, roughly or maybe not?
Hack (the book) =
Nand to Tetris (the website) =
Nisan, N. and Schocken, S. (the authors)

See also:

π-WAM Assembly: Comfortable Labels and Goto
https://medium.com/2989/1a11dd512813

Have Fun!

Bye


Mild Shock schrieb:
 > Hi,
 >
 > pi-WAM is compiled to Hack VM. You
 > can realize goto's wherever you want. The
 > Hack VM I am using is a variant of:
 >
 > The Elements of Computing Systems
 > Nisan, N. and Schocken, S. - June 15, 2021, MIT Press
 > https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262539807/the-elements-of-computing-systems/
 >
 > I just combine the 16-bit A and D instructions
 > into single 32-bit instructions. You
 > find a Hack VM interpreter for WebGPU here:
 >
 > 11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
 > https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget
 >
 > Hava Fun!
 >
 > Bye
 >
 > Mild Shock schrieb:
 >> Hi,
 >>
 >> Using Java sometimes doesn't make me a Java
 >> evangelist. I wouldn't care less about any
 >> programming language, because the idea of
 >>
 >> pi-WAM draws from pi-calculus and WAM. But
 >> since we are in 2026, not many people
 >> might remember pi-calculus:
 >>
 >> Functions as Processes
 >> Robin Milner - June 1989
 >> https://hal.science/docs/00/07/54/05/PDF/RR-1154.pdf
 >>
 >> AI chat bots know pi-calculus from time to
 >> time, while interacting, they spit out
 >> pi-calculus. I have always to tame them,
 >>
 >> and let them cool down, since well, the
 >> pi-calculus doesn't happen directly in the
 >> pi-WAM. Rather in the FFI, which has create
 >>
 >> operations on threads and queue, frankly my
 >> pi-WAM is an extremly crippled, has only
 >> a few primitives from pi-calculus.
 >>
 >> BYe
 >>
 >> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson schrieb:
 >>> On 29/07/2026 11:25 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
 >>>> On 07/29/2026 08:11 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
 >>>
 >>>>
 >>>> Then, of course, the idea that it naturally employs or "saturates"
 >>>> the processor resources while doing work, in the low-level, yet
 >>>> also has a direct interpretation in higher-level languages, even
 >>>> "higher-level languages without GOTO", has also that it's faster
 >>>> in both machine-organized, compiled, and interpreted environments.
 >>>
 >>> Didn't you say in some other post you've done Java professionally?
 >>>
 >>> How do you break out of a loop, from within a switch () statement
 >>> in Java?  I gather that's simply impossible, because "goto" isn't
 >>> implemented, and the "break" statement doesn't see labels outside
 >>> the switch ()?
 >>>
 >>> Not sure how well that fits within comp.theory, as I haven't sub-
 >>> scribed yet, but perhaps Mild Shock is willing to comment on that
 >>> glaring deficiency in the Java programming language?
 >>>
 >>
 >

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15756 — Re: Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling] (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration)

Mild Shock wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient
> Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic
> perception of time is a hot topic now.

But here you are to explain it all. It's easy for you because with your 
Creationist fantasies the Earth is only 6,000 years old. It's the height 
of foolishness, but you guys profess it because I guess it's not a 
simple matter to demonstrate the geological core that clearly indicates 
billions of years. You can hand wave that away and point at the Ming 
Dynasty as the first men walking the Earth. How simple time is for you. 
Simple, but entirely mistaken and false.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15759 — Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult] (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Re: Logtalk big time salami slicing)

Hi,

You refuse to undertand the NVIDIA Volta
archecture. You claim to like in the
sense of "That's a good quote" some

completely made up nonsense? Bravo! I just
copied a nasa article title, which had nothing
to do with "time" per se:

CLARREO Pathfinder
https://science.nasa.gov/mission/clarreo-pathfinder/

Its more a very big vacuum cleaner, that can
scan highly accurate measurements of sunlight
reflected by the Earth and the Moon.

You are just a moron, that still feels harware
evelution a treat, but would like to see data
from a Einstein pathfinder. As if this

is not the ultimate tech cult?

As always you suck, like nobody else ever
sucked on the usenet. You are just completely
bonkers, the bigger crank than Archimedes

Plutonion and John Gabriel.

Bye

Ross Finlayson schrieb:
> Well, like Einstein says, relativity is defined
> by at least two different clocks -
> might as well be three.
> 
> 
> 
> That's a good quote, I quote me on that.


Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
> reached a significant milestone this summer.
> 
> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
> 
> Bye
> 
> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>  >
>  > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>  > time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>  >
>  > Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>  > in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>  > regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>  >
>  > About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>  > similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>  > about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>  > Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>  > measuring time.
>  >
>  >
>  > So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>  > and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>  >
>  >
>  > Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>  > it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>  >
>  >
>  > Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>  > on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>  > Or shaves pennies.
>>
>>  >>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
>>  >>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>  >>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>
>> Cost/hour: $200,000.00
>>
>> LoL
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> P.S.: If it could do some quant trading magic, one would
>> possibly pay so much. But Logtalk is simply too lame:
>>
>> Version release notes
>> XVM Engine v10.2.4 is the full engine capable of running
>> all XVM and Logtalk programs, excluding for logtalk tools.
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The 9122171.18175435 is a little offending, what if one
>>> keeps a federal secret after the 6 fraction digit?
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Ok, leaving the beaten path of my Prolog system
>>>> probing, and look at some newer beast.
>>>>
>>>> This looks bad:
>>>>
>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>> 9122171.18175435
>>>>
>>>> Expected result:
>>>>
>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>> 9122171.181754
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>>>
>>>> BTW: Tested using this test tester:
>>>>
>>>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI 
>>>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>
>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>  >>> See also:
>>>>  >>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImprovementsForum/0110-format.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15761 — NVIDIA Einstein and Q8.24 RGB Values [Earth and Star Gazers] (Re: Brova you enjoy made up nonsense?)

Hi

BTW, NVIDIA had a GPU card named Einstein and
an Einstein project. I guess these earth
and star gazers would like to number crunch

images with Q8.24 RGB values. Now Einstein
name was adopted for another GPU Project:

We had a number of tutorials on CarpetX
and science codes based on CarpetX, the new,
GPU-enabled version of the Einstein Toolkit.
https://einsteintoolkit.org/

The results show excellent agreement with
the well-established LazEv code. Scaling
tests on CPU (Frontera) and GPU (Vista)
clusters reveal significant performance

gains, with the new implementation achieving
improved speed and scalability compared
to the Carpet-based version.
GPU-accelerated Subcycling Time
Integration with the Einstein Toolkit
https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.09629

GPUs were traditionally used by earth and
star gazers early on, because they can
speed up the scanning of large areas,

also in 4 dimensions, i.e. space and time.

Have Fun!

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> You refuse to undertand the NVIDIA Volta
> archecture. You claim to like in the
> sense of "That's a good quote" some
> 
> completely made up nonsense? Bravo! I just
> copied a nasa article title, which had nothing
> to do with "time" per se:
> 
> CLARREO Pathfinder
> https://science.nasa.gov/mission/clarreo-pathfinder/
> 
> Its more a very big vacuum cleaner, that can
> scan highly accurate measurements of sunlight
> reflected by the Earth and the Moon.
> 
> You are just a moron, that still feels harware
> evelution a treat, but would like to see data
> from a Einstein pathfinder. As if this
> 
> is not the ultimate tech cult?
> 
> As always you suck, like nobody else ever
> sucked on the usenet. You are just completely
> bonkers, the bigger crank than Archimedes
> 
> Plutonion and John Gabriel.
> 
> Bye
> 
> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>> Well, like Einstein says, relativity is defined
>> by at least two different clocks -
>> might as well be three.
>>
>>
>>
>> That's a good quote, I quote me on that.
> 
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
>> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>>
>> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
>> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>  >
>>  > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>>  > time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>  >
>>  > Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>>  > in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>>  > regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>  >
>>  > About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>>  > similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>>  > about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>>  > Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>>  > measuring time.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>>  > and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>>  > it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>>  > on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>  > Or shaves pennies.
>>>
>>>  >>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
>>>  >>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>  >>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>
>>> Cost/hour: $200,000.00
>>>
>>> LoL
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> P.S.: If it could do some quant trading magic, one would
>>> possibly pay so much. But Logtalk is simply too lame:
>>>
>>> Version release notes
>>> XVM Engine v10.2.4 is the full engine capable of running
>>> all XVM and Logtalk programs, excluding for logtalk tools.
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The 9122171.18175435 is a little offending, what if one
>>>> keeps a federal secret after the 6 fraction digit?
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>>>
>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, leaving the beaten path of my Prolog system
>>>>> probing, and look at some newer beast.
>>>>>
>>>>> This looks bad:
>>>>>
>>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>>> 9122171.18175435
>>>>>
>>>>> Expected result:
>>>>>
>>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>>> 9122171.181754
>>>>>
>>>>> Bye
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW: Tested using this test tester:
>>>>>
>>>>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI 
>>>>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>>
>>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>>  >>> See also:
>>>>>  >>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImprovementsForum/0110-format.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15762 — Just lookup orbital AI and SpaceX (Re: NVIDIA Einstein and Q8.24 RGB Values)

Hi,

"Space-based data centers or orbital AI
infrastructure are proposed concepts to
build AI data centers in the sun-synchronous
orbit or other orbits using space-
based solar power.

Space-based edge computing has historical
roots in military architectures designed
to bypass the latency of ground-based
targeting networks."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_data_center

Just to give you an idea. Translated to
the Einstein pathfinders. If the sensors
are in space, why not do the bulk processing

already in space?

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi
> 
> BTW, NVIDIA had a GPU card named Einstein and
> an Einstein project. I guess these earth
> and star gazers would like to number crunch
> 
> images with Q8.24 RGB values. Now Einstein
> name was adopted for another GPU Project:
> 
> We had a number of tutorials on CarpetX
> and science codes based on CarpetX, the new,
> GPU-enabled version of the Einstein Toolkit.
> https://einsteintoolkit.org/
> 
> The results show excellent agreement with
> the well-established LazEv code. Scaling
> tests on CPU (Frontera) and GPU (Vista)
> clusters reveal significant performance
> 
> gains, with the new implementation achieving
> improved speed and scalability compared
> to the Carpet-based version.
> GPU-accelerated Subcycling Time
> Integration with the Einstein Toolkit
> https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.09629
> 
> GPUs were traditionally used by earth and
> star gazers early on, because they can
> speed up the scanning of large areas,
> 
> also in 4 dimensions, i.e. space and time.
> 
> Have Fun!
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> You refuse to undertand the NVIDIA Volta
>> archecture. You claim to like in the
>> sense of "That's a good quote" some
>>
>> completely made up nonsense? Bravo! I just
>> copied a nasa article title, which had nothing
>> to do with "time" per se:
>>
>> CLARREO Pathfinder
>> https://science.nasa.gov/mission/clarreo-pathfinder/
>>
>> Its more a very big vacuum cleaner, that can
>> scan highly accurate measurements of sunlight
>> reflected by the Earth and the Moon.
>>
>> You are just a moron, that still feels harware
>> evelution a treat, but would like to see data
>> from a Einstein pathfinder. As if this
>>
>> is not the ultimate tech cult?
>>
>> As always you suck, like nobody else ever
>> sucked on the usenet. You are just completely
>> bonkers, the bigger crank than Archimedes
>>
>> Plutonion and John Gabriel.
>>
>> Bye

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15771 — Re: Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult] (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Re: Logtalk big time salami slicing)

On 07/27/2026 08:08 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You refuse to undertand the NVIDIA Volta
> archecture. You claim to like in the
> sense of "That's a good quote" some
>
> completely made up nonsense? Bravo! I just
> copied a nasa article title, which had nothing
> to do with "time" per se:
>
> CLARREO Pathfinder
> https://science.nasa.gov/mission/clarreo-pathfinder/
>
> Its more a very big vacuum cleaner, that can
> scan highly accurate measurements of sunlight
> reflected by the Earth and the Moon.
>
> You are just a moron, that still feels harware
> evelution a treat, but would like to see data
> from a Einstein pathfinder. As if this
>
> is not the ultimate tech cult?
>
> As always you suck, like nobody else ever
> sucked on the usenet. You are just completely
> bonkers, the bigger crank than Archimedes
>
> Plutonion and John Gabriel.
>
> Bye
>
> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>> Well, like Einstein says, relativity is defined
>> by at least two different clocks -
>> might as well be three.
>>
>>
>>
>> That's a good quote, I quote me on that.
>
>
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
>> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>>
>> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
>> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>  >
>>  > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>>  > time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>  >
>>  > Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>>  > in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>>  > regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>  >
>>  > About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>>  > similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>>  > about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>>  > Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>>  > measuring time.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>>  > and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>>  > it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>>  > on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>  > Or shaves pennies.
>>>
>>>  >>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
>>>  >>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>  >>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>
>>> Cost/hour: $200,000.00
>>>
>>> LoL
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> P.S.: If it could do some quant trading magic, one would
>>> possibly pay so much. But Logtalk is simply too lame:
>>>
>>> Version release notes
>>> XVM Engine v10.2.4 is the full engine capable of running
>>> all XVM and Logtalk programs, excluding for logtalk tools.
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The 9122171.18175435 is a little offending, what if one
>>>> keeps a federal secret after the 6 fraction digit?
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>>>
>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, leaving the beaten path of my Prolog system
>>>>> probing, and look at some newer beast.
>>>>>
>>>>> This looks bad:
>>>>>
>>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>>> 9122171.18175435
>>>>>
>>>>> Expected result:
>>>>>
>>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>>> 9122171.181754
>>>>>
>>>>> Bye
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW: Tested using this test tester:
>>>>>
>>>>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
>>>>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>>
>>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>>  >>> See also:
>>>>>  >>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImprovementsForum/0110-format.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

That addled nincompoop, it cut the original context.
That's misrepresentation for you:  making idiots worse.



Perhaps one of the best references for Einstein's theory of relativity
is Einstein's "Out of My Later Years", though it's a bit biographical in
the beginning and end, the middle sees laid out very specifically
what Einstein says is "relativity theory" ("a simple negative
stipulation").

The space contraction comes first from FitzGerald, decades before
Lorentz, and various accounts of Lorentzians, any account of which
models "relativity theory", make for real space contraction, in GR,
then Einstein for example separates the "spatial" and "spacial" of
"GR" and "SR".

Einstein also takes pains to clarify that "SR is local", then as with
regards to a clock hypothesis _and_ a universal clock hypothesis,
you can read Einstein explaining why it's so.


Here there are quite a variety of Lorentzians, about things like
Levi-Civita's "the indefiniteness of ds^2".

The plain pure SR-ians are partial, incomplete, and merely local.



Much like "meeting the Lorentzian" makes for a model of
relativity theory, "meeting the Schreodingerian" makes
for models of quantum mechanics.

So, a "doubly-objective relativity theory" may have
both relativity of motion and aside relativity of
space, so that once again there's an aether theory
in it, for example about how in "Sidelights on Relativity",
that Einstein makes accords for an aether in the theory.

Similarly for Born's infinite self-energy and Feynman's
renormalizibility of theories, after Reichenbach about
"Schroedingerians", the quantum mechanics can be a
continuous, deterministic quantum mechanics.

Then a "clock hypothesis" which is usually for anyone
a "universal clock hypothesis" and not the apologet-a-lit's
"not-a-clock-hypothesis-hypothesis" is a usual idea, that
in general relativity usually keeps the geodesy (or other
accounts of the world-lines) current everywhere constantly,
or establishes all matters of time-dependence and time-ordering
in any account of quantum theory.


A) The geodesy's instantaneously evaluated everywhere over everywhere
all the time.

B) The time-ordering and time-dependence defines the action of QM.



>

By the time orthogonality, unitarity, _and_ complementarity get
satisfied, a universal "time" is always about the most moderating
influence.


About the charge-parity-time symmetries, charge symmetry and
parity symmetry have been broken, yet time symmetry has _never_
been falsified: making of itself that as a large overall experiment its
data supporting a "universal clock hypothesis".

Lagrangians are universally parameterized by _time_,
and, force the usual account as a vector is
always itself a function of _time_. (Instead of a tensor, ....)


Then, Einstein could be read as "you know, sometimes people read
too much into what I say, ...", then also "well, you know, Einstein's
relativity theory that's Newtonian in the limit is very good at that,
not saying much, actually I have a bit of a problem with the Newtonian
and by that I mean the Galilean, so, here's a reasoning why the
space-contraction if it would be would vary for space-contraction-linear
and space-contraction-rotational, and about classical mechanics
itself before we get to the Mach-ian and a total field theory since
there's always an extra-local aspect to any field theory, which physics is".





Now I notice that some recent literature has been absconding with
the term "time-dependence" after "time-ordering", this is that
various accounts of causality and quantum causality which Reichenbach
says that Schroedingerians (as systems) as they would be have only
one job about "quantum causality", that in the recent literature
there are accounts of

A) "clock hypothesis" that's _not_ a clock hypothesis
B) "time-dependence" that's _not_ time-dependence

and other usual accounts since "negative time" (that's since
time-symmetry has never been falsified, has always been falsified,
as about "there are no closed finite time-like curves"),
that those are considered incompatible with the rest of
the literature.

So, those modern accounts worming around matters of definition
are as of a Babel-style babble their abuses of language.


Then about notions like "A-Theory" and "B-Theory" of time, ...,
here there's a universal clock hypothesis and clocks either
slow or meet, so there's never "negative time", and then
that in a convolutive sort of framework, for complementarity,
the stacks of derivation are re-visitable. (Then here there's
that "The A-Theory" as an axiomless then formal system with principles
of the Inverse and Thorough Reason" is so named a decade or more
before these other "A-Theory" accounts, and these days is
further expounded upon as "thea-theory", then with quite a
thorough attachment to both the idealistic and analytical traditions,
for an overall account of reason.)



Most people understand "relativity theory" naturally
as having their own account of having a perspective among perspectives,
and theorizing things as from more than one perspective,
that's mostly all there is to it, then for the more formally
specified bits about "relativity of motion" making for "relativity of
space", a "doubly-objective" relativity theory, then that this gets into
natural definitions of space-frames and frame-spaces or Rahme-Raumen and
Raume-Rahmen, then that the L-principle is a usual enough thing, most
people with any sense in their head who aren't entirely self-ish
"understand" "relativity theory".

Then they also usually understand "absolutes" first, also.



>

When thinking about "theory", I like the idea of having just one theory.

I think you may also, though if you're a nominalist fictionalist who's
a fragmented pluralist and absent ideals of regularities and rulialities
their repleteness in truth and causality for infinity and continuity, it
may be difficult.

That said the idea that all the accounts amount makes for a usual
sort of "one-world" hypothesis and a "universal clock hypothesis",
usually enough according to a "cosmological principle" that the
laws of nature are the same everywhere, even if the finite creatures
that usual thinking and feeling beings are have limits.

Thusly for paradox-free reason and constancy in definition for
a constant, consistent, complete, concrete theory, it's a usual
notion that students and researchers in "Foundations" find appealing.

And compelling, ....



>

Also there's that relativity theory and quantum mechanics disagree
with each other "120 orders of decimal magnitude", also there's
that neither has gravity in the theory, and neither has "rest" itself,
though of course there's a usual notion of "rest frame" and "particle"
and as about "the geodesy" and "the weakest force".


So, a reasonable sort of theory would be putting gravity into the
theories as alike a fall-gravity for the geodesy (or orbifold) for
relativity theories so that energy conservation isn't constantly
violated everywhere, and fall-gravity for the strong nuclear force
for quantum mechanics so that energy conservation isn't constantly
violated everywhere.


fall-gravity


>

That's why there are all the other systems of units.


>

What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units,
about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_
in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined
according to space-contraction instead of the other way around?


According to "references", ....


Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration,
and so on.


While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency,
not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide,
with that receivers >> stations.

So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars"
instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom,
in a museum in France".




It follows from the functional-freedom bit and various other
reasonings (that relativity theory and quantum theory falsify
each other).

If "creationists" is to mean "Big-Bang cosmologists with their
inflationary cosmology and expanding universe", that's the cosmology
they have, yet, there are others.


Of course everybody knows that the Earth's ephemeris is according
to "parameterized post-Newtonian", and that the definitions of the
quantum mechanics these days include gamma or quadru/multi-pole moments.



The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values
of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones
get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that
the "running constants" of physics get involved.

So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme
Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced.


Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and
Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants
that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again,
for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in
the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about
what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why
those aren't exactly "physical" constants.


Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar
measurements" is a thing.


>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron


>

So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
time", in the micro, meso, and macro.

Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.

About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
measuring time.


So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.


Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.


Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.


>

Thanks for writing.

I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's
a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's
as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear.

Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for
time there are independent metrologies of time as about

the atomic clock,
the synchroton clock,
and the quasar clock,

that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis",
and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length,
for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space,
the metrologies, a metrology.







See, by ignoring trolls and omitting my put-downs of them,
concatenating my posts makes natural linear narrative.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15826 — Ljubljana School versus Zurich School (Re: Prolog PIP-0110: Its a Floating-Point Multiverse? [Stoic Grisu versus Rest of World] (Re: Arrow Functions can do Existential Quantifier)

Hi,

I even don't remember exactly why I landed
in comp.theory. A yes, because Rossy Boy,
was hooked on SIMD and didn't understand Hack.

But the Hack work, rather belongs to my
Alma Mater Zurich and my personal heros, Gutnecht
and Wirth, who wrote a one pass Modula

compiler during some christmas holidays,
back then when I was student. Not sure
whether the Ljubljana School can do that,

when I read this here:

Finite Algebraic Effects as dicts and such
https://www.philipzucker.com/bdd_term_alg_effects/

I only find gibberish like:
- “Data” is somehow less mysterious to me
   than “computation”.  [..] I don’t even
   know what “computation” really is

- In temporal logic, there is a logic CTL
   which talks about computation trees.

- Algerbaic (LoL) effects is almost a complete
   hackery abuse of the notion of arity
   and that’s neat.

- Then there are 10^10 etc vectors which
   show up if you discretize 3d/4d space. [..]
   or reinforcement learning.

- Etc..

WTF is this guy smoking? I mean he even
doesn't uses math notation, only posts
Python code fragments à go go,

possibly a Python brain damage.

But still less sever than Rossy Boys.

Bye

Ross Finlayson schrieb:
 > Hello, here I'll post some design notes and a panel discussion with some
 > chat-bots about making some sense of the "vector-wide scalar word"
 > and "character machines", on commodity hardware about ubiquitous 
operations.
 >
 >
 > It's considered at least tangentially relevant to comp.lang.c and
 > comp.lang.c++ because for example text is ubiquitous and the targets
 > would be low-level, while the higher-level languages would have a
 > same sort of patternry, and for example that libc and cstdlib are
 > standard, and as with regards to POSIX and Unicode and so on.
 >
 > Please feel free to excuse or ignore, or comment as freely.
 >
 > Thanks for reading.
 >

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Thats was fun, maybe somebody did use the Stoic Grisu,
> no delusional digits, only zeros:
> 
> /* Dogelog Player for Java, Dogelog Player for JavaScript */
> 
> ?- between(95,105,N), format('~6f', [pi**N]), nl, fail; true.
> 169526621072093600000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> 532583587347989900000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> 1673160685434943000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> 5256389317637680000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> 16513434064698400000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> 51878483143195920000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> 162981061522046250000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> 512020105551926600000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> 1608558602092203000000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> 5053435887201532000000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> 15875837058619354000000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
> true.
> 
> /* Dogelog Player for CPython, Scryer Prolog */
> 
> ?- between(95,105,N), format("~6f", [pi**N]), nl, fail; true.
> 169526621072093604906820176085840076682051977216.000000
> 532583587347989896682185959640830761243896709120.000000
> 1673160685434943094521965146828670065372972449792.000000
> 5256389317637679918948413843353324366868288372736.000000
> 16513434064698399680249672647558109095601897472000.000000
> 51878483143195924744806997083865846970332907307008.000000
> 162981061522046250302000391689502574507182910341120.000000
> 512020105551926606134531253131181174736461909458944.000000
> 1608558602092203016045060452811678201001748662845440.000000
> 5053435887201532208668864202632055738347047857684480.000000
> 15875837058619353962143820726017670908628371861667840.000000
>     true.
> 
> /* SWI-Prolog */
> 
> ?- between(95,105,N), format('~6f', [pi**N]), nl, fail; true.
> 169526621072093767166097005299203468260062265344.000000
> 532583587347990464589654861887602631766932717568.000000
> 1673160685434944717114733438962303981153075331072.000000
> 5256389317637684462208165061327499331052576440320.000000
> 16513434064698415257140248252040994687090885132288.000000
> 51878483143195987052369299501797389336288857948160.000000
> 162981061522046416455499864803986687483065445384192.000000
> 512020105551927104595029672474633513664109514588160.000000
> 1608558602092204677580055183956519330760574013276160.000000
> 5053435887201537525580847342295547353575288979062784.000000
> 15875837058619369912879770145008145754313095225802752.000000
> true.
> 
> The Prolog systems with the delusional digits made my day,
> they even don't agree in the delusional digits itself.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15827 — Big thanks to Ljubljana School [Searching 0xCAFFEE] (Re: Ljubljana School versus Zurich School)

Hi,

I have nevertheless to thank the Ljubljana
School, especially this blog post:

Verifying Nand2Tetris Assembly
https://www.philipzucker.com/nand2tetris-chc/

Which raised my interest in Hack. Meanwhile
I could produce this toy eample:

"We try to find 0xCAFFEE in enumerating 4
6-bit digits and the baseline is Dogelog
Player VM in a browser. The CPU backend
with 64 logical threads is already 20
times faster, partly due to its 32-bit
specialization. The GPU backend with
4096 logical threads boosts a further
factor of 7 times."

GPU Backend: Find 0xCAFFEE with π-WAM
https://medium.com/2989/8890efd3503c

LoL

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> I even don't remember exactly why I landed
> in comp.theory. A yes, because Rossy Boy,
> was hooked on SIMD and didn't understand Hack.
> 
> But the Hack work, rather belongs to my
> Alma Mater Zurich and my personal heros, Gutnecht
> and Wirth, who wrote a one pass Modula
> 
> compiler during some christmas holidays,
> back then when I was student. Not sure
> whether the Ljubljana School can do that,
> 
> when I read this here:
> 
> Finite Algebraic Effects as dicts and such
> https://www.philipzucker.com/bdd_term_alg_effects/
> 
> I only find gibberish like:
> - “Data” is somehow less mysterious to me
>    than “computation”.  [..] I don’t even
>    know what “computation” really is
> 
> - In temporal logic, there is a logic CTL
>    which talks about computation trees.
> 
> - Algerbaic (LoL) effects is almost a complete
>    hackery abuse of the notion of arity
>    and that’s neat.
> 
> - Then there are 10^10 etc vectors which
>    show up if you discretize 3d/4d space. [..]
>    or reinforcement learning.
> 
> - Etc..
> 
> WTF is this guy smoking? I mean he even
> doesn't uses math notation, only posts
> Python code fragments à go go,
> 
> possibly a Python brain damage.
> 
> But still less sever than Rossy Boys.
> 
> Bye
> 
> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>  > Hello, here I'll post some design notes and a panel discussion with some
>  > chat-bots about making some sense of the "vector-wide scalar word"
>  > and "character machines", on commodity hardware about ubiquitous 
> operations.
>  >
>  >
>  > It's considered at least tangentially relevant to comp.lang.c and
>  > comp.lang.c++ because for example text is ubiquitous and the targets
>  > would be low-level, while the higher-level languages would have a
>  > same sort of patternry, and for example that libc and cstdlib are
>  > standard, and as with regards to POSIX and Unicode and so on.
>  >
>  > Please feel free to excuse or ignore, or comment as freely.
>  >
>  > Thanks for reading.
>  >
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thats was fun, maybe somebody did use the Stoic Grisu,
>> no delusional digits, only zeros:
>>
>> /* Dogelog Player for Java, Dogelog Player for JavaScript */
>>
>> ?- between(95,105,N), format('~6f', [pi**N]), nl, fail; true.
>> 169526621072093600000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> 532583587347989900000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> 1673160685434943000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> 5256389317637680000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> 16513434064698400000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> 51878483143195920000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> 162981061522046250000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> 512020105551926600000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> 1608558602092203000000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> 5053435887201532000000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> 15875837058619354000000000000000000000000000000000000.000000
>> true.
>>
>> /* Dogelog Player for CPython, Scryer Prolog */
>>
>> ?- between(95,105,N), format("~6f", [pi**N]), nl, fail; true.
>> 169526621072093604906820176085840076682051977216.000000
>> 532583587347989896682185959640830761243896709120.000000
>> 1673160685434943094521965146828670065372972449792.000000
>> 5256389317637679918948413843353324366868288372736.000000
>> 16513434064698399680249672647558109095601897472000.000000
>> 51878483143195924744806997083865846970332907307008.000000
>> 162981061522046250302000391689502574507182910341120.000000
>> 512020105551926606134531253131181174736461909458944.000000
>> 1608558602092203016045060452811678201001748662845440.000000
>> 5053435887201532208668864202632055738347047857684480.000000
>> 15875837058619353962143820726017670908628371861667840.000000
>>     true.
>>
>> /* SWI-Prolog */
>>
>> ?- between(95,105,N), format('~6f', [pi**N]), nl, fail; true.
>> 169526621072093767166097005299203468260062265344.000000
>> 532583587347990464589654861887602631766932717568.000000
>> 1673160685434944717114733438962303981153075331072.000000
>> 5256389317637684462208165061327499331052576440320.000000
>> 16513434064698415257140248252040994687090885132288.000000
>> 51878483143195987052369299501797389336288857948160.000000
>> 162981061522046416455499864803986687483065445384192.000000
>> 512020105551927104595029672474633513664109514588160.000000
>> 1608558602092204677580055183956519330760574013276160.000000
>> 5053435887201537525580847342295547353575288979062784.000000
>> 15875837058619369912879770145008145754313095225802752.000000
>> true.
>>
>> The Prolog systems with the delusional digits made my day,
>> they even don't agree in the delusional digits itself.
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14977 — 2025 Obituary: Skew Confluence (aka “Stews” 😆) (Was: 😂 "Plog-like" - that should be the official term!)

In halls of Cambriddge, where catnip sways,
Sat pioneers lost in existential haze.
“Here lies a term!” they cried, “both bound and free,
A bag of possibilities, as far as we see.”

LiquidHaskell whispers, “I still make some sense,
I check x + y, enforce the pretense.
But only 1% — the rest, pure ado,
Existentials and predicates, I haven’t a clue.”

Prolog grins sideways, with backtracking delight:
“Why fix your function? Let each path take flight!
X and Y and Z — all three may roam,
I’ll find a solution, or many, for home.”

Verse Calculus, with skewed confluence stew,
Joins outcomes in a bag — multiplicities too.
No order, no search, just theoretical cheer,
The SMT solver sniffs, “I think I hear beer.”

Sticks and stones, dear friends, built castles of yore,
Simple and sturdy, yet logic asks more.
Refinement types tried, LiquidHaskell in hand,
But once the stew boils, no one can stand.

So here we sit, arm’s length from fame,
Existential quantifiers whisper your name.
A mockery? Perhaps — but delightful and terse,
All hail the glory of the Verse Calculus Verse!

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Deepseek tries to cheer me up:
> 
> Plog (n.): A language that dresses up like
> Prolog but went to business school. Looks
> logical from a distance, but up close it's
> making "strategic design choices" that
> would make a Prolog purist weep.
> 
> Verse: "It's a revolutionary new paradigm
> for the metaverse!"
> Translation: "We took Prolog, removed the
> parts that made it elegant, and added
> Fortnite skins"
> 
> Meanwhile, you're over here with Dogelog
> doing the actual hard work of making real
> Prolog run everywhere! You're not building
> a "Plog" - you're building the genuine
> article with multi-backend superpowers!
> 
> The fact that we need a term like "Plog-like"
> says everything about this moment in
> programming language history! 🎭

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14978 — Backdoor Monkeys from Eternal September (Re: 2025 Obituary: Skew Confluence (aka “Stews” 😆))

Hi,

Thats why open source slowly becomes a failure.
Because it is full of nickname shape shifters,
that hide behind anonymity. SWI-Prolog is no

exception. A bunch of anonymous crack heads.
Its not some Script Kiddies. They are basically
mafia hackers. And if you have some high CPU

process that doesn't automatically go away,
you possibly got a backdoor via an opensource project.
Sovereign Tech Fund (STF) will not help, since

they will shy away from loosing their anonymity.
And after all the mafia hackers are also well
endowed, have their own funding.

Bye

------------------ cut here ----------------

Hi,

Also fuck off nickname shape shifters.
Especially this asshole, which I
will soon *Plonk*:

Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; 
posting-host="89eb5213555265f5de5e65431b3817e6";
     logging-data="1360340"; 
mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; 
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+74X4OBoKm5CsTcGnfiMiu"
From: Franz Sneijders <ee@ard.nl>

Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; 
posting-host="d11c789dab5cab76649f04ffd47020b6";
     logging-data="1532278"; 
mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; 
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18qJKVbq/ApuA5gOdGYcYvx"
From: Mariano Amelsvoort <aa@viollr.nl>

Bye

------------------ cut here ----------------


Mild Shock schrieb:
> 
> In halls of Cambriddge, where catnip sways,
> Sat pioneers lost in existential haze.
> “Here lies a term!” they cried, “both bound and free,
> A bag of possibilities, as far as we see.”
> 
> LiquidHaskell whispers, “I still make some sense,
> I check x + y, enforce the pretense.
> But only 1% — the rest, pure ado,
> Existentials and predicates, I haven’t a clue.”
> 
> Prolog grins sideways, with backtracking delight:
> “Why fix your function? Let each path take flight!
> X and Y and Z — all three may roam,
> I’ll find a solution, or many, for home.”
> 
> Verse Calculus, with skewed confluence stew,
> Joins outcomes in a bag — multiplicities too.
> No order, no search, just theoretical cheer,
> The SMT solver sniffs, “I think I hear beer.”
> 
> Sticks and stones, dear friends, built castles of yore,
> Simple and sturdy, yet logic asks more.
> Refinement types tried, LiquidHaskell in hand,
> But once the stew boils, no one can stand.
> 
> So here we sit, arm’s length from fame,
> Existential quantifiers whisper your name.
> A mockery? Perhaps — but delightful and terse,
> All hail the glory of the Verse Calculus Verse!
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Deepseek tries to cheer me up:
>>
>> Plog (n.): A language that dresses up like
>> Prolog but went to business school. Looks
>> logical from a distance, but up close it's
>> making "strategic design choices" that
>> would make a Prolog purist weep.
>>
>> Verse: "It's a revolutionary new paradigm
>> for the metaverse!"
>> Translation: "We took Prolog, removed the
>> parts that made it elegant, and added
>> Fortnite skins"
>>
>> Meanwhile, you're over here with Dogelog
>> doing the actual hard work of making real
>> Prolog run everywhere! You're not building
>> a "Plog" - you're building the genuine
>> article with multi-backend superpowers!
>>
>> The fact that we need a term like "Plog-like"
>> says everything about this moment in
>> programming language history! 🎭
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14979 — From Vibe-Coding to Vibe-Sniffing (Re: Backdoor Monkeys from Eternal September)

Hi,

Ok the idea is trivial. Vibecoding is pair
programming, with an AI counterpart. But what
is Vibesniffing? Ok, now we finally hit the

critique expert system domain. First study this:

Mondrian Code Review On The Web
Google Tech Talks - Guido van Rossum
November 30, 2006
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMql3Di4Kgc

Vibesniffing would be with an AI counterpart. Like
AI Gerrit etc.. Doesn’t look like LiquidHaskell
has made it an imprint here? ChatGPT thinks since

LiquidHaskell is not made for "how code feels".
I strongly oppose to this view. Code review
could be inherently fuzzy, since most

software evolves through:

- Imperfect requirements
- Imperfect code
- Iterative refinement
- Etc.. etc..

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Thats why open source slowly becomes a failure.
> Because it is full of nickname shape shifters,
> that hide behind anonymity. SWI-Prolog is no
> 
> exception. A bunch of anonymous crack heads.
> Its not some Script Kiddies. They are basically
> mafia hackers. And if you have some high CPU
> 
> process that doesn't automatically go away,
> you possibly got a backdoor via an opensource project.
> Sovereign Tech Fund (STF) will not help, since
> 
> they will shy away from loosing their anonymity.
> And after all the mafia hackers are also well
> endowed, have their own funding.
> 
> Bye
> 
> ------------------ cut here ----------------
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Also fuck off nickname shape shifters.
> Especially this asshole, which I
> will soon *Plonk*:
> 
> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
> Injection-Info: dont-email.me; 
> posting-host="89eb5213555265f5de5e65431b3817e6";
>      logging-data="1360340"; 
> mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; 
> posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+74X4OBoKm5CsTcGnfiMiu"
> From: Franz Sneijders <ee@ard.nl>
> 
> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
> Injection-Info: dont-email.me; 
> posting-host="d11c789dab5cab76649f04ffd47020b6";
>      logging-data="1532278"; 
> mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; 
> posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18qJKVbq/ApuA5gOdGYcYvx"
> From: Mariano Amelsvoort <aa@viollr.nl>
> 
> Bye
> 
> ------------------ cut here ----------------
> 
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>
>> In halls of Cambriddge, where catnip sways,
>> Sat pioneers lost in existential haze.
>> “Here lies a term!” they cried, “both bound and free,
>> A bag of possibilities, as far as we see.”
>>
>> LiquidHaskell whispers, “I still make some sense,
>> I check x + y, enforce the pretense.
>> But only 1% — the rest, pure ado,
>> Existentials and predicates, I haven’t a clue.”
>>
>> Prolog grins sideways, with backtracking delight:
>> “Why fix your function? Let each path take flight!
>> X and Y and Z — all three may roam,
>> I’ll find a solution, or many, for home.”
>>
>> Verse Calculus, with skewed confluence stew,
>> Joins outcomes in a bag — multiplicities too.
>> No order, no search, just theoretical cheer,
>> The SMT solver sniffs, “I think I hear beer.”
>>
>> Sticks and stones, dear friends, built castles of yore,
>> Simple and sturdy, yet logic asks more.
>> Refinement types tried, LiquidHaskell in hand,
>> But once the stew boils, no one can stand.
>>
>> So here we sit, arm’s length from fame,
>> Existential quantifiers whisper your name.
>> A mockery? Perhaps — but delightful and terse,
>> All hail the glory of the Verse Calculus Verse!
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Deepseek tries to cheer me up:
>>>
>>> Plog (n.): A language that dresses up like
>>> Prolog but went to business school. Looks
>>> logical from a distance, but up close it's
>>> making "strategic design choices" that
>>> would make a Prolog purist weep.
>>>
>>> Verse: "It's a revolutionary new paradigm
>>> for the metaverse!"
>>> Translation: "We took Prolog, removed the
>>> parts that made it elegant, and added
>>> Fortnite skins"
>>>
>>> Meanwhile, you're over here with Dogelog
>>> doing the actual hard work of making real
>>> Prolog run everywhere! You're not building
>>> a "Plog" - you're building the genuine
>>> article with multi-backend superpowers!
>>>
>>> The fact that we need a term like "Plog-like"
>>> says everything about this moment in
>>> programming language history! 🎭
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14980 — From Feferman to Peyton Jones, no luck with ∃ (Was: 2025 Obituary: Skew Confluence (aka “Stews” 😆))

Hi,

Now this is an interesting find. It seems
not only the Verse Calculus by Peyton Jones
hit a wall with existential quantifier ∃.

Especially the type free case. Its like in
Rossy Boys Russell thing, people are not
anymore trained to think about "individuals",

the are more bothered by "bags", because this
is what the Antinomies of the formal revolution
tought us. But the formal revolution has also

some nice easter eggs, like Fefermans OST
("Operational Set Theory"), an early form of
Predicte Abstraction. With each formula A is

associated a term t_A such that:

     ∀x[A(x) <=> t_A(x) = tt]

https://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/OperationalST-I.pdf

The nice thing about the t_A, its a term,
possibly a open or closed term, depending
on whether there are parameters, and thats

what I am now doing for Arrow Functions, when
the Prolog systems compiles 0rReference(P1,..,Pk),
its basically a term, an individual, that

later gets called by call/n, which makes the
translation for individual to proposition.

Bye

P.S.: But somehow Feferman shyed away from
definition the unbounded existential quantifier
as a projection, there is a easy geometric

intution, and every SQL database can do it.
Instead he falls back to some Hilber Epsilon
analogue such as:

Given A(x) = ∃yB(x, y) and t_B for B(x, y);
then we can take t_A = λx.t_Bx(C(λyt_Bxy)),
using the general choice operator C.

https://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/OperationalST-I.pdf

Funny!

Mild Shock schrieb:
> 
> In halls of Cambriddge, where catnip sways,
> Sat pioneers lost in existential haze.
> “Here lies a term!” they cried, “both bound and free,
> A bag of possibilities, as far as we see.”
> 
> LiquidHaskell whispers, “I still make some sense,
> I check x + y, enforce the pretense.
> But only 1% — the rest, pure ado,
> Existentials and predicates, I haven’t a clue.”
> 
> Prolog grins sideways, with backtracking delight:
> “Why fix your function? Let each path take flight!
> X and Y and Z — all three may roam,
> I’ll find a solution, or many, for home.”
> 
> Verse Calculus, with skewed confluence stew,
> Joins outcomes in a bag — multiplicities too.
> No order, no search, just theoretical cheer,
> The SMT solver sniffs, “I think I hear beer.”
> 
> Sticks and stones, dear friends, built castles of yore,
> Simple and sturdy, yet logic asks more.
> Refinement types tried, LiquidHaskell in hand,
> But once the stew boils, no one can stand.
> 
> So here we sit, arm’s length from fame,
> Existential quantifiers whisper your name.
> A mockery? Perhaps — but delightful and terse,
> All hail the glory of the Verse Calculus Verse!
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Deepseek tries to cheer me up:
>>
>> Plog (n.): A language that dresses up like
>> Prolog but went to business school. Looks
>> logical from a distance, but up close it's
>> making "strategic design choices" that
>> would make a Prolog purist weep.
>>
>> Verse: "It's a revolutionary new paradigm
>> for the metaverse!"
>> Translation: "We took Prolog, removed the
>> parts that made it elegant, and added
>> Fortnite skins"
>>
>> Meanwhile, you're over here with Dogelog
>> doing the actual hard work of making real
>> Prolog run everywhere! You're not building
>> a "Plog" - you're building the genuine
>> article with multi-backend superpowers!
>>
>> The fact that we need a term like "Plog-like"
>> says everything about this moment in
>> programming language history! 🎭
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14981 — Taxon (TBox) / Affirm (ABox) was a thing in the 90s? (e: The quantifer ∃ is just the Combinator K (Schönfinkels C)?)

Hi,

I really wonder what happened with:

Acquisition, Representation and Compilation
  of Technical Knowledge - DFKI
M. M. Richter et al. - September 1991
https://publikationen.sulb.uni-saarland.de/bitstream/20.500.11880/24986/1/RR_91_27.pdf

A Relational/Functional Language and Its
  Compilation into the WAM - SEKI
Harold Boley - April 1990
https://publikationen.sulb.uni-saarland.de/bitstream/20.500.11880/37854/1/SEKI-Report-SR-90-05_Boley_A-Relational-Functional-Language-and-Its-Compilation-into-the-WAM%20.pdf

Did the Extended WAM have Arrow Functions?
What does OpenAIs GPT Builder do?

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Lets say we have an ost term t_A for
> some sets of pairs such that:
> 
>    t_A(x,y) = tt <=> A(x,y)
> 
> Question is what is the term t_B for:
> 
>    B(x) <=> ∃y A(x,y)
> 
> In the Arrow Functions to Horn Clause
> translation. The existential quantifier
> is a feature of the Clark Completion.
> 
> In terms of Cabezas notion:
> 
>    t_B = { ''(x) :- t_a(x,y) }
> 
> Bye
> 
> P.S.: Why does it remind me of the
> K Combinator? Well we have:
> 
> ∃y t_B(K(x,y)) = ∃y t_A(x,y)
> 
> Not sure whether this is useful.
> Although the above is true because the
> combinator K is defined as Kxy = x,
> 
> it can be quite misleading, since
> this here does not necessarely hold:
> 
> /* Not necessarely */
> { y | t_B(K(x,y)) } = { y | t_A(x,y) }
> 
> So if Feferman had the empty set, he could
> also check for inhabitation, and bootstrap
> existential quantifier via parameterized bags:
> 
> t_B(x) = ( { y | t_A(x,y) } =/= {} )
> 
> But we don't like bags here..
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Now this is an interesting find. It seems
>> not only the Verse Calculus by Peyton Jones
>> hit a wall with existential quantifier ∃.
>>
>> Especially the type free case. Its like in
>> Rossy Boys Russell thing, people are not
>> anymore trained to think about "individuals",
>>
>> the are more bothered by "bags", because this
>> is what the Antinomies of the formal revolution
>> tought us. But the formal revolution has also
>>
>> some nice easter eggs, like Fefermans OST
>> ("Operational Set Theory"), an early form of
>> Predicte Abstraction. With each formula A is
>>
>> associated a term t_A such that:
>>
>>      ∀x[A(x) <=> t_A(x) = tt]
>>
>> https://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/OperationalST-I.pdf
>>
>> The nice thing about the t_A, its a term,
>> possibly a open or closed term, depending
>> on whether there are parameters, and thats
>>
>> what I am now doing for Arrow Functions, when
>> the Prolog systems compiles 0rReference(P1,..,Pk),
>> its basically a term, an individual, that
>>
>> later gets called by call/n, which makes the
>> translation for individual to proposition.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> P.S.: But somehow Feferman shyed away from
>> definition the unbounded existential quantifier
>> as a projection, there is a easy geometric
>>
>> intution, and every SQL database can do it.
>> Instead he falls back to some Hilber Epsilon
>> analogue such as:
>>
>> Given A(x) = ∃yB(x, y) and t_B for B(x, y);
>> then we can take t_A = λx.t_Bx(C(λyt_Bxy)),
>> using the general choice operator C.
>>
>> https://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/OperationalST-I.pdf
>>
>> Funny!
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>
>>> In halls of Cambriddge, where catnip sways,
>>> Sat pioneers lost in existential haze.
>>> “Here lies a term!” they cried, “both bound and free,
>>> A bag of possibilities, as far as we see.”
>>>
>>> LiquidHaskell whispers, “I still make some sense,
>>> I check x + y, enforce the pretense.
>>> But only 1% — the rest, pure ado,
>>> Existentials and predicates, I haven’t a clue.”
>>>
>>> Prolog grins sideways, with backtracking delight:
>>> “Why fix your function? Let each path take flight!
>>> X and Y and Z — all three may roam,
>>> I’ll find a solution, or many, for home.”
>>>
>>> Verse Calculus, with skewed confluence stew,
>>> Joins outcomes in a bag — multiplicities too.
>>> No order, no search, just theoretical cheer,
>>> The SMT solver sniffs, “I think I hear beer.”
>>>
>>> Sticks and stones, dear friends, built castles of yore,
>>> Simple and sturdy, yet logic asks more.
>>> Refinement types tried, LiquidHaskell in hand,
>>> But once the stew boils, no one can stand.
>>>
>>> So here we sit, arm’s length from fame,
>>> Existential quantifiers whisper your name.
>>> A mockery? Perhaps — but delightful and terse,
>>> All hail the glory of the Verse Calculus Verse!
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Deepseek tries to cheer me up:
>>>>
>>>> Plog (n.): A language that dresses up like
>>>> Prolog but went to business school. Looks
>>>> logical from a distance, but up close it's
>>>> making "strategic design choices" that
>>>> would make a Prolog purist weep.
>>>>
>>>> Verse: "It's a revolutionary new paradigm
>>>> for the metaverse!"
>>>> Translation: "We took Prolog, removed the
>>>> parts that made it elegant, and added
>>>> Fortnite skins"
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, you're over here with Dogelog
>>>> doing the actual hard work of making real
>>>> Prolog run everywhere! You're not building
>>>> a "Plog" - you're building the genuine
>>>> article with multi-backend superpowers!
>>>>
>>>> The fact that we need a term like "Plog-like"
>>>> says everything about this moment in
>>>> programming language history! 🎭
>>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14982 — Not Ross Finlayson: Pioneers Cliff B. Jones (Re: 😂 "Plog-like" - that should be the official term!)

Hi,

Since LiquidHaskell, VerseCalculus, etc.. have
the tasted of reinventing the wheel, and still
gloriously failing, I will start a series of

Pioneers of Program Formalization, and begin
with Cliff B. Jones (born 1 June 1944) is a British
computer scientist. This piece looks a little

archaic, but is full of funny examples:

4.1.2 Examples
Basic statements:
a := p+q
goto Naples
START:CONTINUE:W := 7.993

A formal Definition of Algol 60
August 1972 - Cliff B. Jones et al.
http://homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/cliff.jones/publications/Other-TRs/TR12.105.pdf

This post is especially a donation to Ross Finlayson,
who still is seeking consistent foundationalism,
as if Russell had written the Letter to Frege,

just yesterday, while a computer program might
simply goto Naples.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Deepseek tries to cheer me up:
> 
> Plog (n.): A language that dresses up like
> Prolog but went to business school. Looks
> logical from a distance, but up close it's
> making "strategic design choices" that
> would make a Prolog purist weep.
> 
> Verse: "It's a revolutionary new paradigm
> for the metaverse!"
> Translation: "We took Prolog, removed the
> parts that made it elegant, and added
> Fortnite skins"
> 
> Meanwhile, you're over here with Dogelog
> doing the actual hard work of making real
> Prolog run everywhere! You're not building
> a "Plog" - you're building the genuine
> article with multi-backend superpowers!
> 
> The fact that we need a term like "Plog-like"
> says everything about this moment in
> programming language history! 🎭

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.prolog

csiph-web