# Talk:Introduction to Inquiry Driven Systems

## Notes & Queries

Jon Awbrey 06:30, 17 May 2007 (PDT)

## TeX Test

### Umpire Operators : HTML

In order to get a handle on the space of higher order propositions and eventually to carry out a functional approach to quantification theory, it serves to construct some specialized tools. Specifically, I define a higher order operator Υ, called the "umpire operator", which takes up to three propositions as arguments and returns a single truth value as the result. Formally, this so-called "multi-grade" property of Υ can be expressed as a union of function types, in the following manner:

Υ : (m = 1, 2, 3) ((BkB)mB).

In contexts of application the intended sense can be discerned by the number of arguments that actually appear in the argument list. Often, the first and last arguments appear as indices, the one in the middle being treated as the main argument while the other two arguments serve to modify the sense of the operation in question. Thus, we have the following forms:

Υpr q = Υ(p, q, r)
Υpr : (BkB) → B

The intention of this operator is that we evaluate the proposition q on each model of the proposition p and combine the results according to the method indicated by the connective parameter r. In principle, the index r might specify any connective on as many as 2k arguments, but usually we have in mind a much simpler form of combination, most often either collective products or collective sums. By convention, each of the accessory indices p, r is assigned a default value that is understood to be in force when the corresponding argument place is left blank, specifically, the constant proposition 1 : BkB for the lower index p, and the continued conjunction or continued product operation Π for the upper index r. Taking the upper default value gives license to the following readings:

 1 Υp q = Υ(p, q) = Υ(p, q, Π). 2 Υp = Υ(p, __, Π) : (Bk → B) → B.

This means that Υp q = 1 if and only if q holds for all models of p. In propositional terms, this is tantamount to the assertion that pq, or that _(p (q))_ = 1.

Throwing in the lower default value permits the following abbreviations:

 3 Υq = Υ(q) = Υ1 q = Υ(1, q, Π). 4 Υ = Υ(1, __, Π) : (Bk → B) → B.

This means that Υq = 1 if and only if q holds for the whole universe of discourse in question, that is, if and only q is the constantly true proposition 1 : BkB. The ambiguities of this usage are not a problem so long as we distinguish the context of definition from the context of application and restrict all shorthand notations to the latter.

### Umpire Operators : TeX

In order to get a handle on the space of higher order propositions and eventually to carry out a functional approach to quantification theory, it serves to construct some specialized tools. Specifically, I define a higher order operator Υ, called the "umpire operator", which takes up to three propositions as arguments and returns a single truth value as the result. Formally, this so-called "multi-grade" property of $$\Upsilon\!$$ can be expressed as a union of function types, in the following manner:

$\Upsilon : \cup^{m = 1, 2, 3}((\mathbb{B}^k \to \mathbb{B})^m \to \mathbb{B}).$

In contexts of application the intended sense can be discerned by the number of arguments that actually appear in the argument list. Often, the first and last arguments appear as indices, the one in the middle being treated as the main argument while the other two arguments serve to modify the sense of the operation in question. Thus, we have the following forms:

Υpr q = Υ(p, q, r)
Υpr : (BkB) → B

The intention of this operator is that we evaluate the proposition q on each model of the proposition p and combine the results according to the method indicated by the connective parameter r. In principle, the index r might specify any connective on as many as 2k arguments, but usually we have in mind a much simpler form of combination, most often either collective products or collective sums. By convention, each of the accessory indices p, r is assigned a default value that is understood to be in force when the corresponding argument place is left blank, specifically, the constant proposition 1 : BkB for the lower index p, and the continued conjunction or continued product operation Π for the upper index r. Taking the upper default value gives license to the following readings:

 1 Υp q = Υ(p, q) = Υ(p, q, Π). 2 Υp = Υ(p, __, Π) : (Bk → B) → B.

This means that Υp q = 1 if and only if q holds for all models of p. In propositional terms, this is tantamount to the assertion that pq, or that _(p (q))_ = 1.

Throwing in the lower default value permits the following abbreviations:

 3 Υq = Υ(q) = Υ1 q = Υ(1, q, Π). 4 Υ = Υ(1, __, Π) : (Bk → B) → B.

This means that Υq = 1 if and only if q holds for the whole universe of discourse in question, that is, if and only q is the constantly true proposition 1 : BkB. The ambiguities of this usage are not a problem so long as we distinguish the context of definition from the context of application and restrict all shorthand notations to the latter.

## This is welcome content

Jon, this is welcome content here on Centiare. If you are interested in discovering how to get this essay to "pop" more readily on Google searches, we might have a discussion about that. Centiare and its semantic tagging seem to get a lot of "love" from Google. --MyWikiBiz 06:51, 17 May 2007 (PDT)

JA: Hiya, Froggy, jes thought I'd try it out. Ettention is such a powerful ephrodizziac that I'm really gonna try to resist extraneous ehancements until the mere creation of ettractive content fails to gather any.

JA: My main concern at present is being able to use the LaTeX facilities of MediaWiki, the stuff that's called by '''$$...$$''' tags. If there's an easy way to load that up, that'd be super. Jon Awbrey 07:04, 17 May 2007 (PDT)

One of the easiest & most effective ways to pop Google rankings is by creating inter-wiki links between directory/user listings & main space articles. I went ahead and took the liberty of adding a few sem tags to your user page to link to this article via aficionados. There's all sorts of other tricks that MWB can demo/help out with if you're interested.
And yes, we'll get '''[itex]''' going. Snerfling 07:09, 17 May 2007 (PDT)
Jon, one important thing to consider -- you notice how Snerfling (that's Centiare's founder) and I (Centiare's co-developer) have been making edits to this essay? It's not a function of our having sysop rights -- this article is in Centiare's Main Space, so it's going to be subject to community editing. So, uses of the word "I" and "my" throughout the essay may eventually get edited out of form (not that we have myriad users champing at the bit to get at this highly esoteric material). If you want to keep complete control and mastery over this article (except for possible sysop intervention, which we always hope will be helpful), this should be moved into Centiare's Directory Space, or as a sub-page of your User space. --MyWikiBiz 08:37, 17 May 2007 (PDT)

JA: I'm somewhat used to genuine collaborative work, so long as it's more genu-wine than genral-whine, so I'd eventually be 3rd-personifying this anyway. I'll/We'll just see what sorts of bees gather and go from there. Jon Awbrey 08:46, 17 May 2007 (PDT)

There's two other options: we could protect it as an ERB article with proper accreditation, or you could drop a non-NPOV version in your protected directory space. Snerfling 09:03, 17 May 2007 (PDT)

JA: 2much2fast … I started to read about those two options, but it's kind of a blur — this is just experimental for me, so whatever you think makes the best fit. Jon Awbrey 09:12, 17 May 2007 (PDT)

### Java/Flash Scripts

Jon, you might have noticed that we allow users to include java/flash scripts ie gadgets, widgets, et al. (In fact, we have a whole host lined up in our featured content.) While many other sites consider these types of external applications as potentially too "dangerous", we allow them due to our stringent registration requirements. (Knock on wood, but to date, we haven't yet had one vandalism revert and/or banned user.) Snerfling 07:30, 17 May 2007 (PDT)

JA: I don't have anything that fancy in the works at present, but maybe someday, so it's good to know. Jon Awbrey 08:51, 17 May 2007 (PDT)