Friam

Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Classic

List

Threaded

67 messages Options

1234

thompnickson2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Frank,

You also KNEW David Krech, right?

If I say that {(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)} is a right triangle, then that’s what a right triangle is (for my research) and there is nothing more to say about it.

You have been spending too much time with mathematicians. Oh. Wait a minute. YOU ARE ONE! How could you not S spend lots of time with one? Even on my account, you have privileged access to the mind of a mathematician.

Doesn’t every mathematical proof begin with

Let X = [AFTISII]

From which it follows that:

X = [AFTISII]

At which point, Hywel says calmly, “Math is ok, but sometimes you need to know what you are talking about”.

Where is Hywel when we need him. DARN!

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 8:59 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Excellent, Jon.

On that basis, in answer to Nick's claim that I have never seen a right triangle, here's a classic one

{(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)}

and here's a manifold

{(x,y,z) in R^3: x*x+y*y+z*z = 1} where the open sets are the open sets of S^2.

Note these are not physical objects.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Fri, May 29, 2020, 11:17 AM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Frank, Steve,

My favored approach is to say that space is like a manifold.
For me, space is a thing and a manifold is an object. The former
I can experience free from my models of it, I can continue to
learn facts(?) about space not derived by deduction alone
(consider Nick's posts on inductive and abductive reasoning).
I concede here that we talk about an objectified space, but
I am not intending to. I am using the term space as a place-
holder for the thing I am physically moving about in. OTOH
manifolds are fully objectified, they exist by virtue of their
formality. Any meaningful question about a manifold itself
is derived deductively from its construction. Neither in their
own right are metaphors, the metaphor is created when we
treat space as if it were a manifold. Just my two cents.

At the beginning of MacLane's Geometrical Mechanics, (a book
I have held many times, but never found an inexpensive copy
to buy) MacLane opens his lecture's with 'The slogan is: Kinetic
energy is a Riemann metric on configuration space'. What a baller.

Glen,

I love that you mention the <placeholder>, ultimately reducing
the argument to a snowclone. Because the title of the thread
actually implicates a discussion of metaphor, and because I may
have missed your point about xyz, please allow me this question.
Do you feel that snowclones are necessarily templates for making
metaphors, or do you feel that a snowclone is somehow different?

Jon

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

I did not know David Kresh. Did he say that? Very similar to what I said.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sat, May 30, 2020, 9:27 AM <[hidden email]> wrote:

Frank,

You also KNEW David Krech, right?

If I say that {(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)} is a right triangle, then that’s what a right triangle is (for my research) and there is nothing more to say about it.

You have been spending too much time with mathematicians. Oh. Wait a minute. YOU ARE ONE! How could you not S spend lots of time with one? Even on my account, you have privileged access to the mind of a mathematician.

Doesn’t every mathematical proof begin with
Let X = [AFTISII]

From which it follows that:

X = [AFTISII]

At which point, Hywel says calmly, “Math is ok, but sometimes you need to know what you are talking about”.

Where is Hywel when we need him. DARN!

N

Nick

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 8:59 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Excellent, Jon.

On that basis, in answer to Nick's claim that I have never seen a right triangle, here's a classic one

{(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)}

and here's a manifold

{(x,y,z) in R^3: x*x+y*y+z*z = 1} where the open sets are the open sets of S^2.

Note these are not physical objects.
---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Fri, May 29, 2020, 11:17 AM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:
Frank, Steve,

My favored approach is to say that space is like a manifold.
For me, space is a thing and a manifold is an object. The former
I can experience free from my models of it, I can continue to
learn facts(?) about space not derived by deduction alone
(consider Nick's posts on inductive and abductive reasoning).
I concede here that we talk about an objectified space, but
I am not intending to. I am using the term space as a place-
holder for the thing I am physically moving about in. OTOH
manifolds are fully objectified, they exist by virtue of their
formality. Any meaningful question about a manifold itself
is derived deductively from its construction. Neither in their
own right are metaphors, the metaphor is created when we
treat space as if it were a manifold. Just my two cents.

At the beginning of MacLane's Geometrical Mechanics, (a book
I have held many times, but never found an inexpensive copy
to buy) MacLane opens his lecture's with 'The slogan is: Kinetic
energy is a Riemann metric on configuration space'. What a baller.

Glen,

I love that you mention the <placeholder>, ultimately reducing
the argument to a snowclone. Because the title of the thread
actually implicates a discussion of metaphor, and because I may
have missed your point about xyz, please allow me this question.
Do you feel that snowclones are necessarily templates for making
metaphors, or do you feel that a snowclone is somehow different?

Jon

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

thompnickson2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

I think you were at Berkeley when he was Chairman of the Department.

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 9:30 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

I did not know David Kresh. Did he say that? Very similar to what I said.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sat, May 30, 2020, 9:27 AM <[hidden email]> wrote:

Frank,

You also KNEW David Krech, right?

If I say that {(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)} is a right triangle, then that’s what a right triangle is (for my research) and there is nothing more to say about it.

You have been spending too much time with mathematicians. Oh. Wait a minute. YOU ARE ONE! How could you not S spend lots of time with one? Even on my account, you have privileged access to the mind of a mathematician.

Doesn’t every mathematical proof begin with
Let X = [AFTISII]

From which it follows that:

X = [AFTISII]

At which point, Hywel says calmly, “Math is ok, but sometimes you need to know what you are talking about”.

Where is Hywel when we need him. DARN!

N

Nick

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 8:59 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Excellent, Jon.

On that basis, in answer to Nick's claim that I have never seen a right triangle, here's a classic one

{(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)}

and here's a manifold

{(x,y,z) in R^3: x*x+y*y+z*z = 1} where the open sets are the open sets of S^2.

Note these are not physical objects.
---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Fri, May 29, 2020, 11:17 AM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:
Frank, Steve,

My favored approach is to say that space is like a manifold.
For me, space is a thing and a manifold is an object. The former
I can experience free from my models of it, I can continue to
learn facts(?) about space not derived by deduction alone
(consider Nick's posts on inductive and abductive reasoning).
I concede here that we talk about an objectified space, but
I am not intending to. I am using the term space as a place-
holder for the thing I am physically moving about in. OTOH
manifolds are fully objectified, they exist by virtue of their
formality. Any meaningful question about a manifold itself
is derived deductively from its construction. Neither in their
own right are metaphors, the metaphor is created when we
treat space as if it were a manifold. Just my two cents.

At the beginning of MacLane's Geometrical Mechanics, (a book
I have held many times, but never found an inexpensive copy
to buy) MacLane opens his lecture's with 'The slogan is: Kinetic
energy is a Riemann metric on configuration space'. What a baller.

Glen,

I love that you mention the <placeholder>, ultimately reducing
the argument to a snowclone. Because the title of the thread
actually implicates a discussion of metaphor, and because I may
have missed your point about xyz, please allow me this question.
Do you feel that snowclones are necessarily templates for making
metaphors, or do you feel that a snowclone is somehow different?

Jon

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Nick,

I was a math major at Berkeley and had no contact with the Psychology Department. Consulting my carefully preserved Catalog from that era I see he was a full professor of Psychology.

Frank

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sat, May 30, 2020, 9:34 AM <[hidden email]> wrote:

I think you were at Berkeley when he was Chairman of the Department.

N

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 9:30 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

I did not know David Kresh. Did he say that? Very similar to what I said.
---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sat, May 30, 2020, 9:27 AM <[hidden email]> wrote:
Frank,

You also KNEW David Krech, right?

If I say that {(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)} is a right triangle, then that’s what a right triangle is (for my research) and there is nothing more to say about it.

You have been spending too much time with mathematicians. Oh. Wait a minute. YOU ARE ONE! How could you not S spend lots of time with one? Even on my account, you have privileged access to the mind of a mathematician.

Doesn’t every mathematical proof begin with
Let X = [AFTISII]

From which it follows that:

X = [AFTISII]

At which point, Hywel says calmly, “Math is ok, but sometimes you need to know what you are talking about”.

Where is Hywel when we need him. DARN!

N

Nick

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 8:59 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Excellent, Jon.

On that basis, in answer to Nick's claim that I have never seen a right triangle, here's a classic one

{(0, 0), (1,0), (0,1)}

and here's a manifold

{(x,y,z) in R^3: x*x+y*y+z*z = 1} where the open sets are the open sets of S^2.

Note these are not physical objects.
---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Fri, May 29, 2020, 11:17 AM Jon Zingale <[hidden email]> wrote:
Frank, Steve,

My favored approach is to say that space is like a manifold.
For me, space is a thing and a manifold is an object. The former
I can experience free from my models of it, I can continue to
learn facts(?) about space not derived by deduction alone
(consider Nick's posts on inductive and abductive reasoning).
I concede here that we talk about an objectified space, but
I am not intending to. I am using the term space as a place-
holder for the thing I am physically moving about in. OTOH
manifolds are fully objectified, they exist by virtue of their
formality. Any meaningful question about a manifold itself
is derived deductively from its construction. Neither in their
own right are metaphors, the metaphor is created when we
treat space as if it were a manifold. Just my two cents.

At the beginning of MacLane's Geometrical Mechanics, (a book
I have held many times, but never found an inexpensive copy
to buy) MacLane opens his lecture's with 'The slogan is: Kinetic
energy is a Riemann metric on configuration space'. What a baller.

Glen,

I love that you mention the <placeholder>, ultimately reducing
the argument to a snowclone. Because the title of the thread
actually implicates a discussion of metaphor, and because I may
have missed your point about xyz, please allow me this question.
Do you feel that snowclones are necessarily templates for making
metaphors, or do you feel that a snowclone is somehow different?

Jon

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

jon zingale

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

Frank, Nick,

Here's a non-manifold

[(x, y) | (x, y) <- C², y² - x² == x³]

It was great when Frank or I were not connecting the physics

to the mathematics in Baez, Hywel was there to talk neutrinos

and the flavors of quarks. I think it was his brother(-in-law?)

that had come to Friam, wasn't he a constructivist mathematician?

Jon

jon zingale

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

Continuing along the line of presenting possible case studies in privacy
(or knowing another's mind), I submit the following:

As many of you know, D&D podcasts have become all the rage with the kids
these days. Arguably, king among these is the Critical Role podcast. For
the last five years, this group of professional voice actors has streamed
their home D&D sessions every Thursday. Since the lockdowns and in lieu

of their regularly scheduled campaign, they post a weekly game of

Narrative Telephone.

First, a participant thinks up and recites a story. Once finished, they send
a video of the story's performance to another member. The next participant
watches the video exactly once and then in turn passes a video of their
performance to another. This process is repeated until it iterates through
the entire group, each attempting to steelman(?) the story they hear.
Finally, the group assembles and listens to each take in order. All the
while giving a Mystery Science Theater 3000 critique/show-and-tell of the
performances. Included here is the 4th attempt, each attempt offering more
opportunities for analysis than I feel I can post about alone. It is amazing
to get the opportunity to see how bad they (and likely we) are at capturing
the essence of another's narrative. Stories seem to reach a thermal
equilibrium within two steps, and like thermal equilibrium, one can
be surprised to find details recovered that were lost in earlier tellings!

Jon

thompnickson2

Re: Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

Another Interesting example, Jon.

I am into the Weinsteins’ podcast and I am riveted by it. I am hoping they will eventually let me know what happened. The younger brother is a student of two of the most radical members of the radical genist conception of the forces propelling evolution, so I will be glued to the podcast until I find out whether he is a black hat or a white hat.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jon Zingale
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 7:42 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

of their regularly scheduled campaign, they post a weekly game of

Jon

1234