[Crm-sig] Space time volumes

Francesco Beretta francesco.beretta at cnrs.fr
Thu Mar 21 13:11:48 EET 2019


Dear Franco,

you find me in full agreement with your vision of things.

All the best

Francesco

Le 21.03.19 à 10:52, Franco Niccolucci a écrit :
> Dear Francesco
>
> I agree with your analysis. My comment last night aimed at showing in 
> Dan’s case the inconsistencies you explain in your message by a 
> reductio ad absurdum.
> My questions are:
> 1) which E2 is not an E4, even in a broad sense?
> 2) which E94 (relevant, and not just purely abstract) is not also an E4?
> 3) Does the scope note of E94 allow the existence of some instances 
> that are also E4, as implied by the subclass condition and described 
> in Dan’s examples?
> 4) What is the difference between P4/P7 and P160/P162?
> My answers are in the negative for all of the above, but I may be wrong.
> I am not sure that E94 should end in the waste basket; perhaps it 
> should go in the recycle bin and be repurposed as an abstract concept 
> like Time-span, Place and Dimension, at the same time freeing E4 from 
> dependence from it: E4 would occupy some E94, not be it.
>
> Best,
>
> Franco
>
> Il giorno gio 21 mar 2019 alle 08:30 Francesco Beretta 
> <francesco.beretta at cnrs.fr <mailto:francesco.beretta at cnrs.fr>> ha scritto:
>
>     Dear Dan, Franco, all,
>
>
>     in a nutshell:
>
>
>     Period – E4
>
>     P4 has time-span E52 Time-Span
>
>     P7 took place at E53 Place
>
>
>     Spacetime Volume – E92
>
>     P160 has temporal projection E52 Time-Span
>
>     P161 has spatial projection E53 Place
>
>
>     Period – E4 (phenomenal) Pxx has projection in Spacetime Volume –
>     E92 (‘region’)
>
>
>     If we keep Spacetime Volume – E92 in the model we should get rid
>     of /P4 has time-span/ and /P7 took place/ at because they are
>     redundant with /P160 has temporal projection/and /P161 has spatial
>     projection/, or apply the logical mechanism proposed by Martin
>     which is under discussion.
>
>
>     If we get rid of E92 (and properties) and clearly explain E4 is a
>     spacetime volume /by definition/, with temporal and spatial
>     projection (P4/P7), then the issue seems to be solved.
>
>
>     E4 being a subclass of E92 is in my opinion (and other’s also as
>     we know) inconsistent with the traditional modelling method, and
>     also misleading.
>
>
>     If E4 can be merged with E2 (E2 would always have a projection in
>     space, at least virtually, be this my brain the ‘place’ for my
>     belief), then E2 is a STV with projection in time and space.
>
>
>     This synthesis may be too simple not to be simplistic and I miss
>     some crucial point ?
>
>
>     All the best
>
>     Francesco
>
>
>
>     Le 21.03.19 à 00:05, Franco Niccolucci a écrit :
>>     (Dan, resist, the cavalry is arriving, do you hear the trumpets? )
>>
>>     Sorry, that’s not convincing.
>>
>>     E4 Period is a subclass of E92 Spacetime Volume, so every E4 is
>>     also an E92. There may theoretically be some E92 that are not E4,
>>     i.e. abstract subsets of R4 (sorry my email app does not allow
>>     superscrpits, R4 means the 4-dimensional space of real numbers x,
>>     y, z, t)
>>
>>     So Dan’s “Byzantine period” is rightfully also a Spacetime
>>     Volume, besides obviously being an E4 Period; same as it is an
>>     E1, the mother of all concepts. If it does not fit with the E92
>>     scope note, it is the latter that is misspelled and wrong, not
>>     Dan. Scope notes cannot override isA.
>>
>>     Also, since the domain of P160 & 161 is E92, they can be applied
>>     also to E4. Perhaps this makes P7 superfluous, but that’s another
>>     story.
>>
>>     In sum there is nothing “wrong” in Dan’s usage of E92 and the
>>     related properties.
>>
>>     I would also add that I find difficult to describe an E92 that is
>>     not an E4, besides artificial examples.
>>
>>     (Dan, nasty Indians are running away in debacle, you are safe...)
>>
>>     Finally, let me express some nightly gut feeling.
>>     I am not comfortable with the scope note of E2: “This class
>>     comprises all phenomena, such as the instances of E4 Periods, E5
>>     Events and states, which happen over a limited extent in time”.
>>     If these phenomena are happening, they happen somewhere, do you
>>     know anything happening nowhere? so I would feel better by adding
>>     at the end of this sentence “in time AND SPACE”. Actually, all
>>     the examples of E2 mentioned in its scope note happen somewhere:
>>     the Bronze Age happened in a region (Europe, the Levant, etc. not
>>     in America); the Lisbon earthquake happend in Lisbon; the
>>     Peterhof Palace in ruins happened in Northern Russia. My gut
>>     feeling is that the scope notes of E2 and perhaps E4 were written
>>     before achieving the concept of E92, so they might be
>>     inconsistent or superfluous nowadays. My moonlight feeeling is
>>     that all temporal things are subclasses of E92; but this could be
>>     the effect of sad Brussels loneliness, where I am now, so don’t
>>     take it too seriously.
>>
>>     Best
>>
>>     Franco
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     Il giorno mer 20 mar 2019 alle 15:04 Dan Matei <Dan at cimec.ro
>>     <mailto:Dan at cimec.ro>> ha scritto:
>>
>>         Thanks Christian-Emil and Martin.
>>
>>         I will use then E4 and P7 (regretfully :-)
>>
>>         My impression is that the combination E92, P160 & P161 is a
>>         more elegant solution. But, rules are
>>         rules...
>>
>>         Best,
>>
>>         EDan
>>
>>         E2 and -----Original Message-----
>>         From: Martin Doerr <martin at ics.forth.gr
>>         <mailto:martin at ics.forth.gr>>
>>         Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 19:13:52 +0200
>>
>>         > As Christian-Emil also pointed out, this is a wrong use of E92.
>>         >
>>         > The scope note says: "This class comprises 4 dimensional
>>         point sets
>>         > (volumes) in physical spacetime....".
>>         >
>>         > Do you regard that what makes up the identity and substance
>>         of the
>>         > Byzantine Period is to be a set of points?
>>         >
>>         > best,
>>         >
>>         > Martin
>>         >
>>         > On 3/19/2019 10:27 AM, Dan Matei wrote:
>>         > > Hi fiends,
>>         > >
>>         > > On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 at 19:20, Martin Doerr
>>         <martin at ics.forth.gr <mailto:martin at ics.forth.gr>> wrote:
>>         > >
>>         > >> Nevertheless, we used the term informally in the CRM. We
>>         could name E92 as "abstract".
>>         > > For me, some E92 are not abstract. E.g. I instantiate
>>         "Byzantine
>>         > > Period" (it is somwhat difficult to place it in South
>>         America :-) :
>>         > >
>>         > > <#ByzantinePeriod> <isA> <crm:E92_Spacetime_Volume>
>>         > > <#ByzantinePeriod> <crm:P160_has_temporal_projection>
>>         <330-1700>
>>         > > <#ByzantinePeriod> <crm:P161_has_spatial_projection>
>>         <#EsternEurope>
>>         > > <#ByzantinePeriod> <crm:P161_has_spatial_projection>
>>         <#Levant>
>>         > > <#ByzantinePeriod> <crm:P161_has_spatial_projection>
>>         <#NorthAfrica>
>>         > >
>>         > > Also:
>>         > >
>>         > > <#BronzeAge1> <isA> <crm:E92_Spacetime_Volume>
>>         > > <#BronzeAge1> <crm:P2 has_type> <#BronzeAge-Concept>
>>         > > <#BronzeAge1> <crm:P160_has_temporal_projection> <p?1>
>>         > > <#BronzeAge1><crm:P161_has_spatial_projection>
>>         <#JapaneseIslands>
>>         > >
>>         > > <#BronzeAge2> <isA> <crm:E92_Spacetime_Volume>
>>         > > <#BronzeAge2> <crm:P2 has_type> <#BronzeAge-Concept>
>>         > > <#BronzeAge2> <crm:P160_has_temporal_projection> <p?2>
>>         > > <#BronzeAge2><crm:P161_has_spatial_projection> <#Scandinavia>
>>         > >
>>         > > Should I worry ?
>>         > >
>>         > > Dan
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Crm-sig mailing list
>>         Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
>>         http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Crm-sig mailing list
>>     Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr  <mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
>>     http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>     _______________________________________________
>     Crm-sig mailing list
>     Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
>     http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20190321/34b38268/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list