Elaborating on programming paradigms in the context of the observable

 For general information please refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_paradigm.

We perceive the objects in the universe as if they had intrinsic properties. Those intrinsic properties last a moment (“how long is now?” on one of Berlin’s houses). For this moment they have a value. If we “omit” now, then we say “flow”. “Flow” indicates that value of property changes in every moment and therefore, as such, can be modeled the way we do we it in hydrodynamics, with connected pipes. Constant flow. So, we either have objects with properties with values that characterize the “now”, or there is only the connection of pipes, and logic behind it. If we have the latter, then in every moment we have  objects with properties in current states, unless moment in given sense does not exist (but is still a good approximation for many of our use cases). But, even if we have the object with states, we might be interested about the flow rather than objects and their states, and then we way omit storing information of states. The big thing behind is that when we forget about states, we focus on the flow. If we focus on the flow, we focus on the bigger mechanism of interaction. We can then focus on more complex flows.

Focusing on the flow requires from us understanding the structure of the problem we deal with. A bigger picture is required before we start to deal with a problem. But also solutions are more like sculptures. Now, we will go both directions. But finally better solutions will be chosen. As long as we are not interested in current object properties and more in the logic behind the problem, we will focus on the flow.

A couple of examples. Focusing on processes is secondary since it is based on implicit feedback, i.e. they are derived from the fact that some problems have their data structure such that can be handled with parallel processing. Procedure is a general idea that an action can be encapsulated. But, as I mentioned before, either we care about the result or not. If not then we care about what comes next. Is it possible to turn every program that uses states into a program with no intermediary states?

If yes,  can we automatedly  learn about the flow of the problem based on its data structure and then heuristically model the solution, and finally iteratively arrive at final solution without states? If this is possible, then finding the formula for primes numbers would first involve learning about prime data set, learning about its informative features. Then re-learning about these informative features until we arrive at truly informative ones that enable us to see the final true picture. And then would we need states in between?

And now, which is the direction for augmented reality featured brains exploiting automated learning about data sets? And how to develop better learning methods and will arrive faster at what really informative is? One thing is that we can lie with statistics a lot, since most of people just see pictures “going up” or “going down”, or “clusters”. Iterative and automated learning for decreasing the amount of states used in between could be an interesting idea.

Advertisements

About misha

Imagine a story that one can't believe. Hi. Life changes here. Small things only.
This entry was posted in Mathematics. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s