Re: General semantics

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 18:38:43 -0300
Message-ID: <4bf5ab2b$0$11843$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>


Gene Wirchenko wrote:

> On Thu, 20 May 2010 13:52:24 -0700 (PDT), Tegiri Nenashi
> <tegirinenashi_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> 

>>On May 20, 9:24 am, Gene Wirchenko <ge..._at_ocis.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 19 May 2010 18:54:45 -0700 (PDT), Tegiri Nenashi
>>>
>>><tegirinena..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 19, 5:22 pm, paul c <toledobythe..._at_oohay.ac> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>... The message I got from the book, at least the practical conclusion, is
>>>>>that we must always think separately about a system and reality, ...
>>>
>>>>This is a recurring theme in many science endeavors. I remember a
>>>>story told by prof Mark Krasnoselski (RIP). "Here is a linear dynamic
>>>>system with a simple positive lookback. It converts an input x(t)
>                                                                   ^^^^
>      An input on x at time t?
> 
> 

>>>>into x(t-T). Think about it: it predicts the future! When this has
> ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > An input on x at time t-T? > What is T?

Graphically, T is the magnitude of the translation along the t axis.

> How does this follow?

It applies a tranformation (specifically a translation) in the time dimension. Received on Thu May 20 2010 - 23:38:43 CEST

Original text of this message