Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Patrick Lockerby | April 4th 2009 11:25 AM | 23 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More The Chatter Box articles

All

About Patrick Lockerby

Retired engineer, 60+ years young.
Computer builder and programmer.
Linguist specialising in language acquisition and computational linguistics.
Interested in every human endeavour except the... Full Bio

Part 1, which begins our examination of the question 'what is time?' can be viewed here.
Part 2 Some travels through time can be viewed  here.
Part 3 discussing language, sequence and order, can be viewed  here.

A Theory of Time Part 4 : Steno, Foucault and Allais

What, at the Most Fundamental Level, is a Clock?

A clock, as Gerhard Adam so astutely observes is a means by which any two observers can  connect their observations to a common frame of reference. In his terms it is an  independent source to which all adherents can relate their event.  To paraphrase the wording of biochemist Michael White: you can line up the causal chains detected by the observers, and you can see the similarities.

Any device, natural or artificial, which can generate a simple causal chain, can be used as a clock. The accuracy of any specific type of clock, in terms of lack of frequency drift, for example, can be assessed by overlaying sections of the chains which have been output by a number of such clocks.   Objectively, synchronising any two clocks is a process that can be reduced mathematically to the same paradigm as dendrochronology.   Time in the abstract is not necessary to the process:  it is simply a matter of pattern matching.

We humans agree on a shared causal chain model which we agree to call a clock. We compare our clocks in order to make sure that they march in step. But then we move from the particular to the general:
The clock paradigm works for us.
We can build mathematical models which replicate causal chains in a clock-like way.
Those mathematical models work for us in explaining cosmic scale and atomic scale events.
It follows that time must have a real existence.


This is a non sequiteur, from the Latin: it does not follow.
...................................................................
Other Types of Clock:  Rings, Layers and the LIFO Stack

Nicholas Steno came to geology from a backgound in anatomy and the scientific method. In 1666 he examined the head of a recently caught shark. He observed that the shark's tooth structure resembled certain rocks - glossopetrae - which were at that time being discussed in academia.   He deduced that the glossopetrae resembled shark's teeth simply because they were, in fact, shark's teeth.  Steno's studies of rock formations, and the glossopetrae finding, led him to deduce a theory about rock formations: layers on top of a set of strata conform to the shape of lower layers, therefore, the top layers must be youngest and the bottom layers must be oldest.  This is exactly the fundamental model of a LIFO stack.

The Steno Clock.

A proposed modification to Steno's law of superposition, for the purposes of this discussion:
Rock layers, where not upheaved by geological forces, are layed down as a LIFO stack, the last rock layer formed being the first to be eroded away by meteorological forces.

A plot of rock layer characteristics can be taken, and an attempt made to match that causal chain to rock layers anywhere else on Earth. This method, which I would call LIFO alignment, is one of the foundations of plate tectonics. Where such matching is inaccurate or infeasible, radiometric age dating is possible. But again, this process is but a pattern matching exercise - the causal chains of nuclear processes are matched. Time is not a necessary factor in the comparative measurement of the age of rocks. By means of such geochronolgy, it has been possible to show that widely separated geographic areas were once united in the Earth's history.

For an example of the methodology, see e.g. Geochronology of West Indonesia and its
implication on plate tectonics
, John A. Katili , referenced in Mataloko Geothermal Prospect

Erosion is the 'First Out' aspect of rock layers as a LIFO stack. Erosion has many causes, but water and CO2 seem to be the major players. The fact that water, especially as frost and as ice, can erode rock is widely known. The erosion of rock due to carbonic acid - dissolved CO2 is also widely known. Less widely studied is the erosion of rock by cavitation involving CO2.

Bite-Sized Time.

Like trees, teeth grow in layers. By counting the layers it is possible to established the age of a tree or a tooth. If the tooth coexists with other remains, it is possible to determine the creature's age at death. This is a pure counting process: in the determination of age, time is not a necessary factor.
For a paper on alternating tooth laminations see : Growth Layer Groups (GLGs) in the Teeth of an Adult Belukha Whale (Delphinapterus Leucas) Of Known Age: Evidence for Two Annual Layers, multiple authors.

And so the links are established between causal chains in trees, teeth and rocks, all can be used as clocks.
.............................................................
The Slinky

A slinky is a springy coil of wire, sold as a toy.  It is a useful demonstration of gravity and momentum.  Its wave-like motion when not constrained by gravity was demonstrated during a shuttle mission.  In its end over end motion the slinky has a fairly regular rhythm, and so may be considered as exhibiting a causal chain behaviour.  Hence, it may be categorised with clocks.  In addition, if the two ends of the slinky are painted different colours, its behaviour is a useful demonstration of a  LIFO stack in physics.
.............................................................
Foucault, Allais and the Metronome : a Brief  Introduction

The Mechanical Metronome

A metronome is any device which can produce a causal chain with insignificant drift, with usually an output as sound.  It is a clock with an emphasised tick.  It is brought in to the discussion to demonstrate a variant clock and its application, and to demonstrate an example of the inverted pendulum .  The inverted pendulum is important to later developments of this theory of time.

Foucault's Pendulum

Leon Foucault demonstrated an experiment using an extremely long wire with a large mass suspended at its end, in February 1851 in the Paris Observatory.  The Foucault Pendulum , during the course of the day, appears to change its path in relation to Earth.  This precession effect of the deviation is due to the Earth's rotation.  Descriptions of this pendulum's behaviour suggest that at the poles, the pendulum's path deviates across the ground at the same rate as the Earth's rotation, and that there is no deviation at the equator.
"The challenge is to explain the behavior of a Foucault pendulum that it is not located on either the poles or the equator."   Source

I would suggest that it is only by performing high-precision experiments at the poles and the equator that we may observe small perturbations so as to eliminate them from observations at other locations.

Maurice Allais

In 1954 the Nobel Laureate Maurice Allais was performing experiments on the Foucault pendulum when he noted an anomalous precession.  He noted another during the 1959 solar eclipse and wrote a report on this behaviour.  The effect, which has come to be known as the The Allais Effect is a matter of considerable controversy.
"Allais' pendulum experiments have never even been repeated, let alone improved upon, although Prof. Latham of Imperial College, London made a valiant effort around 1980. Yet the expense and effort involved would be quite trifling upon the general scale of modern physical research. We think that the main barriers have been informational and institutional. The fact that almost all Prof. Allais's original reports have remained (until now) in the French language has undoubtedly been an impediment. "

"unfortunately, we were not able to perform proper determinations during the solar eclipse which took place over Alaska on 14 October 2004 which (as is quite usual) preceded the lunar eclipse of 28 October by a fortnight - but the observations we made are interesting upon the anecdotal level. However, from about the start of November, we were able to conduct a number of twelve-hour runs which showed most interesting systematic disturbances of the pendulums, clearly not due to chance, which we have not as yet been able to explain;"

Sources:
www.allais.info
Nasa overview of the Allais effect
..............................................................................................
The Coriolis Effect, explained towards the foot of the page on this educational site must be considered in any discussion of the Foucault pendulum and the Allais effect.

I will suspend the discussion here.  There is much room for comments before I move on to a deeper investigation into the nature of time.

Recommended Further Reading:
www.space-time.info

A review of conventional explanations of anomalous observations during solar eclipses -
Chris P. Duif

........................................................................................
The discussion of Foucault, Allais and the Inverted Pendulum
will be developed further in 'A Theory of Time Part 5'.

Comments

Gerhard Adam's picture

It's sort of an incomplete thought at the moment, but another variation in how one can think of time ....

We've been talking about changes occurring which mark the progression of time, and the role of clocks in offering more precision in how these intervals are measured.  We've also talked about the principle of entropy with respect to an arrow of time, but consider this interpretation ....

We experience a "positive" progression of time because we accumulate information.  In other words, the "changes" that we see are actually pieces of information that we accumulate so that our past is marked by less information than our future.  By analogy, this is similar to the concept of the number line where we begin at an origin 0, and move in a positive direction since all of our experience is based on "adding" to our existing pool of information. 

Anyway .... just an initial thought



logicman's picture
We experience a "positive" progression of time because we accumulate
information.  In other words, the "changes" that we see are actually
pieces of information that we accumulate so that our past is marked by
less information than our future.

Something on the lines of lossy compression, Gerhard?

You inspired me to look again at the rock layer analogy.  The deeper a layer is, the more compression, the more lossy it is.  The arrow of time as loss of information was always there in the rocks, and many other mechanisms: something which I like to call the 'Humpty Dumpty' effect.  But until this moment I didn't have an intuitive model for how the mind could model the arrow.

Thank you!  Sincerely  :)

Gerhard Adam's picture
Actually what set me thinking was the issue of Special Relativity where information can't travel faster than the speed of light.  Which made me wonder whether this "speed" actually anything to do with light beyond being an incidental quality of it.

Perhaps it should more aptly be called the "speed of information".  Then it would also make sense that a photon (which actually travels at that speed) could never accumulate information nor experience time.  Hence zero time and zero distance for any point in the universe.

It could also suggest that moving "backwards in time" is actually information loss.

One of the things I'm trying to think about right now is what "information" actually is.   I've got an idea that I'm working through

logicman's picture
Perhaps it should more aptly be called the "speed of information". 
Then it would also make sense that a photon (which actually travels at
that speed) could never accumulate information nor experience time. 
Hence zero time and zero distance for any point in the universe.

I like your thinking on that aspect, Gerhard.  Between us, we might end up with a half-decent theory of everything.  :)
It could also suggest that moving "backwards in time" is actually information loss.

I would say that the inability to go back in time is the effect , with  information loss as the cause.  Imagine reading an information stream in one dimension, but with access restricted to  just the point where it is fed into a computationally efficient shredder.  That would be one view of the arrow of time concept. Where, however, the bits of information are fed into a storage device, then you have a reversible equation, chemical reaction, etc.  Except that only in pure math can a process be indefinitely reversible.  In all of real matter and energy there is loss.

Ultimate lossy encryption of n bits = ultimate lossy compression of n bits = 1 bit.
One of the things I'm trying to think about right now is what
"information" actually is.   I've got an idea that I'm working through

I can hardly wait! 
My bottom line here is the philosophical basis of all knowledge:
A <> B  -  A is not B
A >> B -  A is the immediate precursor and cause of B
Perhaps information is some stored or "memorised" form of these?
But, in the cosmic scale of things, by what mechanism?  And why is it universally lossy?

Gerhard Adam's picture

When we consider information we tend to think of it as something we utilize as knowledge, but at a more fundamental level (i.e. particle), it doesn't really make any sense.  In other words, it doesn't mean anything to suggest that a photon or an electron can actually accumulate information.

Therefore, my thinking is to suggest that perhaps these fundamental particles ARE the information.  Whenever there is a state change, information is being "created" and therefore the accumulation of information (to us) is the accumulation of these state changes in the macroscopic world.

What this suggests to me, is that the border between the quantum state and the classical world, is when a state change has occurred that converts a "non-information" quantum entity into an information bearing "particle".  In other words, the collapse of a wavefunction is actually the conversion of that quantum state into a classical expression of "information".

In particular where I'm somewhat intrigued by this is that for any quantum particle this would suggest that there is no time, since no information can be exchanged until a particular final state is reached.  Therefore the concept of "entanglement" is actually the interaction of two quantity's histories until one definitive measurement occurs which establishes the "information" that now describes both states (the wavefunction collapse).  

 



logicman's picture
it doesn't mean anything to suggest that a photon or an electron can actually accumulate information.

Gerhard:  what about the graphenes, fullerenes, crystal lattices etc.?

That's just a sample.  Look at DNA as encoding information in a remarkable parallel to human languages.  It has words, grammar, syntax and  stops.  Also, huge redundancy as non-coding elements.  Just take one word: helicopter.  Just how many non-linguists decode that as helix + wing? It has become just another arbitrary label for 'one of these things'. That's an example of non-coding functions in language.

I'll leave it there for a while, as far as the physics goes. 

By way of letting my brain have a rest, I interleave my studies of topics.
I've posted two items on etymology and am working on two follow-ups. They are actually related to the lossy processes of history as reflected in language.  I'm leading towards the ancient Greek version of the deluge myth, how it ties in with the epic of Gilgamesh and Noah and how data may be recovered from badly copied original ideas.

Windbag the Sailor about the origin of 'spinning a yarn'
True History of a Windbag the origin of 'windbag' in bronze age Greece.
I'm working on Scylla and Charybdis as related to the stone giants and the 'waters of death' in the epic of Gilgamesh. That ties the Ulysses myth to the flood myth via various sagas and myths from other cultures.

Human language is extremely democratic: it keeps only the popular bits long term.  But that means that the 'non-coding' bits tend to drop out over time, so that it becomes ever more difficult to extract cultural influences from language samples.  But it can be done.

Gerhard Adam's picture
Everything you've mentioned including DNA is already a defined quantum state.  The actual creation of the information occurred when the atoms, electrons, etc. interacted.  Those established the states which gave rise to all the properties of these higher structures.

logicman's picture
Everything you've mentioned including DNA is already a defined quantum
state.  The actual creation of the information occurred when the atoms,
electrons, etc. interacted.  Those established the states which gave
rise to all the properties of these higher structures.

I'm trying to focus initially on the Galilean-Newtonian-Euclidean model on which relativity and quantum theory were built.  What happens to the model if time is not real?  Does it affect the model, if only minutely?  At the moment I have some notes about the way that some experiments like the Foucault pendulum and the Michelson-Morley experiments inspired people to search for explanations for unexpected observations.  I have also been pondering the much-debated Allais effect.  Michelson and Morley were looking for an 'ether'.  Allais continues to believe in its existence.  Einstein ignored the question.  Personally, I don't see the need to consider it as an explanation for action at a distance.  In fact, sticking to the old GNE model leads to problems in cosmology such as the mass to light ratio.  We need a model which, rather than modelling the effects of gravity, explains its cause.  So far, there is none.

Gerhard Adam's picture
"...action at a distance..."

My point is that this phrase already denotes information and time.  "Action" being used to describe a state change or the exchange of information.  "Distance" having meaning only within the context of time.

If information hasn't been established, then no history exists for a particle, and hence no "present" or "future".  To a photon, there can be no distance since there is no time, so all points are equidistant.

If a particle's history hasn't been set, then it stands to reason that a measurement establishes it as a piece of information, which, by creating a "history" also creates a "present" state.  The two are inextricably linked and don't require the transfer of information in order to make that known.

Becky Jungbauer's picture
Gerhard and Patrick, I am really enjoying your thoughtful and detailed discussion of this subject. We take the concept of time for granted, but there is so much more to it! I also really like the idea of time as the accumulation of information - that's something I think most people can grasp, even if they can't follow the rest of your thoughts!

Patrick:
(1) have you read Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum?
(2) I finally found what I've been looking for since your first post on time - I couldn't recall exactly where my copy was, but found it in the wee hours of the morning when I couldn't sleep last night. For your reading pleasure:

Time present and time past
Are both perhaps present in time future,
And time future contained in time past.
If all time is eternally present
All time is unredeemable.
What might have been is an abstraction
Remaining a perpetual possibility
Only in a world of speculation.
What might have been and what has been
Point to one end, which is always present.
...
Only through time time is conquered.


Gerhard Adam's picture

As an analogy, I'm suggesting that the quantum states of particles are like the 0's and 1's in a computer system.  By themselves, they don't indicate anything except the state of a particular circuit, however, it is their combinations which produce information. 

If we consider something similar in particles, then ultimately we're taking about the state of a particular particle and how it interacts with others.  So by stretching the analogy, we could, for example, consider that when two hydrogen atoms join with an oxygen and the entire bundle is held together by the shared electrons, there is a definite state at which all of these particles are "linked" together.   In this view, they collectively provide that "information" that we identify as water.

Now that may sound a bit strange, but it's intended to be an example of how something can only have a real (classical) existence, when the quantum states of the particles that are involved, have been confined to a particular state.  Therefore this particle now has a definite "history" and "future" unless (or until) some state change occurs.  If this molecule suddenly took on another oxygen atom (and all the configuration changes that such an event would entail), we suddenly have a hydrogen peroxide molecule.  There is no "history" of water.  Everything is essentially transformed to a completely different history and future since there is no way to identify any aspect of the consituent particles from the originals.  (In other words, it would be meaningless to suggest that the Hydrogen atoms had any recollection of ever having belonged to a water molecule).

This would suggest that not only are these particles fundamental building blocks, they are the fundamental building blocks of information as well. 

Anyway ... that's kind of where I'm going with this.



Becky Jungbauer's picture
Man,that brings back (bad) memories of trying to trace a radiolabeled carbon through the Krebs cycle in biochemistry exams...

logicman's picture
Gehard: that's about as fundamental as we need to get in the GNE model, although we can add in isotopes.

If  we make H2O with one oxygen isotope, and convert it to H2O2 with  a different isotope, then at least notionally we can recover the original H2O.  But  your analogy remains perfectly valid - a structure, any structure, is a means of storing data.  In computing, we arrange specific groups of single digital elements and call them structures.  In fact, the members of a structure can be scattered in the physical space of the circuit, but that is irrelevant.  It goes back to what I was saying about the 'ignorance' model of intelligence.

Ordinary human language uses structures to store data for transmission or future use.  In linguistics, when I write a program to analyse text input, I don't look for grammar in any conventional sense.  The program looks for fairly abstract patterns of ASCII codes, and yet it consistently finds character and place names in books.  From being able to 'invent' categories, the program moves on to content.

The paradigm I use involves the notion of  the 'struct', a highly specified variant of 'structure'.  I use that to avoid entirely the need to mention clause, phrase, sentence, utterance  etc.  That is a convenience in linguistics, but it can be  extended to all forms of information processing.

A struct is any mechanism by means of which information may be encoded or compressed such that information losses due to entropy are minimised, and which can emit sufficient and necessary information when interrogated.
A mechanism which emits un-necessary information, or which does not emit sufficient information is not a struct.
Interrogation implies the use of at least some minimum quantity of energy to extract information.

Healthy DNA is a struct.  Damaged DNA is not a struct.
A seed is a struct.
An undamaged tennis ball is a struct.  Humpty Dumpty, you may guess, was not a struct.

'John went home.' is a struct, it contains sufficient and necessary information.
'John went           .' is not a struct, it does not contain sufficient information.
'John went by the way do you know what time it is home.'  - you get the picture.

Query: by what analogy can a tennis ball be said to contain error-correcting codes?

Your turn.  :)

Becky Jungbauer's picture
Well, perhaps if the tennis ball is eukaryotic, it enters tenn-escence. Or undergoes apoptennis. But to take a stab at your query, I'd think the elasticity of the rubber allows the tennis ball to reshape after being hit by a racket.

logicman's picture
Becky:  that's a whole new spin on the tennis ball model.  :)
Well done, lovely puns!  The fact that I didn't invent them will in no way prevent me from using them in future without accreditation.  ;)

My friend Aitch has reminded me that according to the mathematics of tennis, our punster score is
not 1:1 but 15:15 - he also reminds me that tennis counts using 15s and 10s, which I feel is positively schizophrenic.
I'd think the elasticity of the rubber allows the tennis ball to reshape after being hit by a racket.

Bellissima!   A++

Given:  a tennis ball is hit with a tennis racquet in space, free from all sources of friction, gravity etc. -
It follows:  the ball would not continue at constant speed!

1st testable hypothesis: due to the oscillations following impact,  there will be synchronous velocity oscillations as momentum is cyclicly stored as information and then released.

2nd testable hypothesis:  due to the entropy of information, the ball will radiate heat.  That exchange of energy into the environment will be at the expense of momentum. 

Although the breaking of molecular bonds needs to be explained at the sub-atomic or quantum level, the basic physics is sufficiently explained within the GNE model by the 2nd law of thermodynamics.  Hence:

3rd testable hypothesis: the equilibrium velocity of the ball will be measurably less than the velocity as calculated using only the math of Newtonian mechanics.

3rd testable hypothesis: an object at motion in a gravitational field will experience distortions from the differential effects of gravity at different points in the body due to the gravity gradient.  The object will radiate energy in some direct proportion to the steepness of the gravity gradient and the physical size of the body.

Discussion:  what might be the result of filming a Newton's cradle apparatus with an infra-red movie camera having a high-speed shutter?

Gerhard Adam's picture

I think you might be a bit too specific in this example of the tennis ball.  For example, you could argue that the required conditions you've described are to maintain a usable tennis ball, but even if it was significantly damaged it would still be recognizable as a tennis ball. 

Therefore from an information perspective, you need to define the boundaries concerning what you mean.  Even in your mention of damaged DNA suggests that if it is recognizable as DNA, then it still contains enough information to have conveyed that concept. 



logicman's picture
Gerhard: you are describing a purposeful, i.e. anthropocentric view of information. 

I was describing inherent, causative information as an abstract concept with no implications of control or purpose.  Damaged DNA is simply DNA which cannot replicate the original struct that it coded.  No observer is needed.

In the case of Newton's cradle, we may grasp the idea of momentum exchange whilst failing to perceive the underlying informational mechanism of momentum.  By means of a model of elasticity as an energy or information exchange, with entropy, we may itemise all of the causes of the momentum decay.

Try another example: gravity.  Using an information-theoretic model, the n-body problem is a problem in the mutual exchanges of information about velocities and masses between bodies in space.  This reduces the n-body problem to an instance of the general class of network problems as exemplified by the travelling salesman problem.  Turn that latter problem inside out - it can be modelled as a lattice, network or struct of information stored in each town (node) regarding the route of a salesman through that town.  If the nodes exchange information then either the 'shortest route problem' is automatically solved in a struct, or there is a 'fuzzy' solution in which near solutions or alternate solutions are dynamically encoded in the struct.

Gerhard Adam's picture
I'm not quite sure where you're going with this, since information as you've described it is a property of the system (thereby establishing a context).  Therefore the exchange of information is utilizing that same context to simply deal with changes to the group within that "information exchange block".

This is essentially the role played by routers in modern networks, where a packet of data doesn't need to know the route, but effectively "learns" it by traversing the routers which may contain explicit, or implicit information about the required paths.  Of course, they in turn have the information exchange problem of keeping up to date, as well as responding to errors in the system.

logicman's picture
This is essentially the role played by routers in modern networks, where a packet of data doesn't need to know the route, but effectively "learns" it by traversing the routers which may contain explicit, or implicit information about the required paths.  Of course, they in turn have the information exchange problem of keeping up to date, as well as responding to errors in the system.

This routing problem is no different in kind from the travelling salesman problem and the n-body problem.  All such problems are problems in network optimisation.  They are all NP-complete problems.

From a perspective of information exchange these are instances of a single class of NP-complete network optimisation problem that could potentially be solved by application of a single,  general-purpose NP  heuristic.

Gerhard Adam's picture
Agreed.  That's why I'm not sure where you're going with this.

My own perspective is colored by the issue in quantum mechanics where:

1.  We are dealing with particles/waves that don't exist in any other form, so while they may participate in state changes, they themselves are either transformed, or they transform something else.  It is from that perspective that I'm considering information.  From this point of view, macro-structures like molecules are already well-established information networks.

2.  The second issue is transference of information (the action at a distance problem).  My contention is that if information isn't actually exchange (i.e. the entanglement issue), then there is no "speed of light" violation (or spooky action at a distance).  Coupled with the original time aspect which says that light experiences no time, the idea of a "past"/"Present" history link seems intriguing.

logicman's picture
Gerhard:  regarding your first point.  I am deferring quantum level events as explaining the mechanism of GNE model events which appear to be random,  i.e. impossible to predict mechanistically.
2.  The second issue is transference of information (the action at a
distance problem).  My contention is that if information isn't actually
exchange (i.e. the entanglement issue), then there is no "speed of
light" violation (or spooky action at a distance).  Coupled with the
original time aspect which says that light experiences no time, the
idea of a "past"/"Present" history link seems intriguing.

You are about two whole blogsworth of theory ahead of me on this.  For 'entanglement' read 'information sharing'.  If there is an information sharing mechanism to explain, e.g. gravitation, and it is different in kind from other information exchange mechanisms such as photons and electrons, then, being fundamentally different, it may not be required by existing theories to conform to c as a limiting velocity.

Although the photon is a carrier of information, it is a poor carrier of history.  At best, it can only encode the strength of the gravitational surface from which it was ejected, and the chemical nature of its source atom.

Gerhard Adam's picture
Understood.  That's why I said that my perspective is being affected by my focus at this point.  Using a computer analogy, I'm dealing with information in the form of 0's and 1's while you're dealing with issues like data coherency problems (not trying to put words into your mouth).

So, forgive me if I'm getting ahead of myself here.

logicman's picture
Gerhard:  Please do carry on getting ahead of yourself, and myself.  :)

I may not repond to specific points immediately, but I do take mental notes so that I can polish my writings of future parts of this discussion.  I am at my best when playing intellectual ping-pong.

And yes, data coherency is a factor in distributed-information systems, whether it is a planetary system or a rumour mill.

Your serve!

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.