Ignore the misunderstandings that have produced the present world.

[kgun]

Ted Nelson competing with Google in organizing all of the world's knowledge. I remember a seminare with Kristen Nygaard, with their view, a Dynabook (the closest medium today is a laptop with wireless access to the internet) where he launced the idea of having access to all of the worlds information in a "dynamic book". Nelsons concept - Transclusion: Fixing Electronic Literature

Listen and view this great Google video ...

In my view nobody will never succeed in organizing all the worlds knowlege, since in my personal opinion knowledge has fractal structure. You never come to "the bottom" of a fractal like the Cantor Set. We can only scan the surface.

What is knowledge? To whom is it knowledge?

[Tubby]

I always compare knowledge to a ball of string. the end piece of string logically extends from the previous and there is a continuous line weaving back to . . . nothing.

an original observation can be the first starter thread. and the ball can grow huge, or not grow at all. The start of the thread is always the suspect part.

My observation is the bigger the ball of string, the more people accept the knowledge. knowledge seems to be no more than confirmation. . .(making the ball bigger - not true-er)

There are many competing balls, and if you unravel them to the very first thread. . they invariably start at the same point. Knowledge is a useful tool. accepting knowledge without scrutinising and understanding the first glimmer of the original thread is common.

Kgun "What is knowledge? To whom is it knowledge?"?
Mate, I think you spend too much time thinking.

[kgun]

Yes, a friend of mine once said that the head is in a sence our worst enemy.

But knowledge to a fisher from Western Norway is different from a farmer in Australia. It is different for an eskimo and my cousin in New York.

I am sure I would have problems surviving in New York.

Good points though. May be you are thinking too much yourself.

[Tubby]

Re
"May be you are thinking too much yourself."

He he he . . yes Kgun, you might well have hit the nail on the head there.

I just posted to the thread because I thought the topic might just fade away. It probably still will. . . .

You wrote
"since in my personal opinion knowledge has fractal structure. You never come to "the bottom" of a fractal like the Cantor Set. We can only scan the surface."

That has to be a natural thread killer.

but I appreciated the thought . . So . . . i posted

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Tubby

Re
You wrote
"since in my personal opinion knowledge has fractal structure. You never come to "the bottom" of a fractal like the Cantor Set. We can only scan the surface."

That has to be a natural thread killer.

Yes, may be. Fractal mathematics also killed the discussion of some "closed books" in Physics. Years ago it was concluded (don't ask me by whom) that calssic mechanics was a closed book and the quantum mechanics book was about to be closed, too. Then came fractal mathematics with its infinite set of possibilities and the book was wide open for all time. How boring the world would have been if we finally came to the bottom of kowledge.

Questions:

1. Are your and my thoughs knowledge?
2. Are your and my dreams (widely defined) knowledge?
3. What about our sites?

There is a assosiate professor from Australia Dr. David Lowe that together with Dr. Erik Wilde has written a good book about a more general protocol and model than that inveted by Tim Berners-Lee (HTTP + HTML).

That book is intimately related to the video in my first post.

I can higly reccomend that Book: "XPath, XLink, XPointer, and XML: A Practical Guide to Web Hyperlinking and Transclusion."

I think it is sold out at amazon. I bought it at alibris. If you do not find it there, you may look at:

Used Books, Rare, Antiquarian, Second-Hand, and Out-of-print Books

Since you are working on implementing RSS (XML) on your sites, that may be the next natural step to study. You may get ideas in that book to develope functionality that keep visitors on your site. Insn't that one of the reasons you and I participate on this forum?

Did you view the video in the first post? If not, take the time to watch it when you have time. If you like it, you may also like that book.

There is always a discussion (and most often a disagreement) about who invented a concept. No exception with fractals. May be Ralph Nelson Elliott foresaw it with his masterwork, Nature's Law -- The Secret of the Universe (1946).

Much more than we are aware of has fractal strucure.

If I am correct that knowledge also has fractal structure, I wish Nelson and Google good luck with their project.

Popular definition of random:
If enough monkeys wrote on a wordprocessor long enough, one of them would by chance produce "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare"

[activeco]

Knowledge is experience.
And yes, I agree it is a plastic thing, individually in a constant change. I guess "collective knowledge" tends to be in an equilibrium.

BTW, isn't this more appropriate for the 'Breakroom' subforum?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by activeco

BTW, isn't this more appropriate for the 'Breakroom' subforum?

Definitely not. This is about the evolution of hyperlinking, hypermedia, trancslusion, that is the future of the web.

Did you watch the video?

Related thread:

The XML family of technologies will revolutionize web linking etc.

[Tubby]

Kgun.
Are your and my thoughts knowledge?
No, Knowledge may provoke thought - thoughts might discover knowledge. But a thought is not much more than a sieve..

Are your and my dreams (widely defined) knowledge?
No a dream is not much more than an emotional sieve. (but free flowing)

What about our sites?
No our sites are just information. . Knowledge might be acquired from them.

"If Knowledge is Truth. then, confusion is when two conflicting truths collide" (me)

Kgun. I stopped reading books years ago, I never watch Videos, and you must know by now that I dislike any concept that accepts infinity,

ie maths accepts infinity - so it can not be knowledge, it can only be a tool.

Since you are working on implementing RSS (XML) on your sites, that may be the next natural step to study'

Kgun, I am still contemplating feeding my classifieds sites. One day I think - yes. the next day I am not so sure. it sure would be easy to simply jump in and feed the whole lot. But as yet, there are no more positive aspects than there are negative..


Kgun, A scientist and a philosopher were both shown an apple.
The scientist cut the apple into segments and examined the pieces under a microscope.
he was amazed. Here was a whole new world. the higher the magnification the more complex. . . He became confused.
The philosopher looked at the apple. then stepped back to see the tree, he understood the apple to be a seed and stood further back. It was amazing here was a whole new world. the further away the view the more complex it became . He became confused. (me)

[kgun]

Great post Tubby.

Regarding your apple.

Tomatoes

Botanically the tomatoe is a fruit, but the US supreme court in 1893 concluded that the tomato is a vegetable.

Originally Posted by Tubby

Kgun. I stopped reading books years ago, I never watch Videos, and you must know by now that I dislike any concept that accepts infinity,

ie maths accepts infinity - so it can not be knowledge, it can only be a tool.

[Tubby]

I think the net will evolve. like science - and the philosophy examples I think there will be many 'balls of string'.

I think the end determination of what a user chooses will be an emotional decision, not an intellectual one. I think it will evolve in a manner not unlike religion.

I think my own personality would be found using 'philosophy ball' and would not feel happy with the 'science' ball.

Of course this ball of string will not based on philosophy - rather have its own philosophical base.

To put it another way, you could say I am delaying my own implementing of RSS because it takes me one step away from the fixed content philosophy. Yes its easy, but do I really believe content just dragged in from various sources. . will rule the net...
NO. . definitely not, anything precious in this life is nearly always original. a Picasso painting is a one off individual. i do not think I want to live on a network of compilation (I would not buy a 'compiled painting) (or will this be all we are offered and can afford)

Knowledge is what influenced our personal decision today. that's all it is - that's all it does.
I do not wish to be fed corrupted, homogenised, compiled knowledge. I want a knowledge that is original. one off, individual. So I can live as an individual.

[Tubby]

P.S.
Knowledge is what influenced our personal decision today. that's all it is

If you never got the telegram today telling you your grandmother died today. you might just continue to party all night long.

Knowledge is only good for the instant you make a decision.

If the Internet does not understand this - we are all going to be in deep Shit!

[kgun]

Tubby, instead of reading books, write (a) book(s).

Proposal for title: "Tubby's philosophy, the hidden dimension."

[Tubby]

Writing Books.
I would only write a book for people that disagreed with me, and these people would not buy my book Kgun.

By the time I had written the book, I would have changed my mind and need to rewrite it.
(thought are always in a state of flux - time stamping them - is always error)

I do not have the need for the extra cash, growing my new lawn is far more important.

Somebody could always cut and paste, separate the crap from anything inciteful I might have written (there has to be a lot of junk out there) and do it themselves. I presume if nobody else thinks there is worthwhile content to be gleaned. . Then it would likely be only my own ego that tempted me.

I just like to chat Kgun.. (and I know you read it - that is a bonus)

[Clicken]

More like the Lost Dimension! Hehe sorry tubby, I just couldn’t resist…. You are too funny!... that goes for you too kgun!

Originally Posted by Tubby"

Kgun.
Are your and my thoughts knowledge?
No, Knowledge may provoke thought - thoughts might discover knowledge. But a thought is not much more than a sieve..

Are your and my dreams (widely defined) knowledge?
No a dream is not much more than an emotional sieve. (but free flowing)

What about our sites?
No our sites are just information. . Knowledge might be acquired from them.

If information is acquired from a site,… and I think of that information then the knowledge becomes my thought… temporarily, until another piece of information pushes it through the sieve.

You guys are so silly…

Originally Posted by ”Kgun”

"What is knowledge? To whom is it knowledge?"?

Knowledge is data/information collected by receptors whether it is true or not and whether you ask for it or just bump into it. But, data is not knowledge until whom ever receives it and thinks it. Wisdom is expressed by the action motivated by knowledge.

So perhaps it is not likely that one monkey alone could reproduce the complete works of Shakespeare, but collect the works from all of the monkeys and I bet you could piece it together, eventually… with leftovers.


So if the philosopher or the scientist eat the apple and it disappeared, how confused would they be?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Tubby

Kgun. I stopped reading books years ago, I never watch Videos, and you must know by now that I dislike any concept that accepts infinity,

ie maths accepts infinity - so it can not be knowledge, it can only be a tool.

Originally Posted by Clicken

So perhaps it is not likely that one monkey alone could reproduce the complete works of Shakespeare, but collect the works from all of the monkeys and I bet you could piece it together, eventually… with leftovers.

My boldings.

Tubby dislikes a set with inifinite elements, that is a set that is countable, per definition a 1 - 1 relation to the natural numbers. The very simple Cantor Set that nobody has never seen like a point is over countable, even if it like a point has length zero. It is a very simple deterministic (there are random too ) fractal.

Clicken has not understood (your are not from Russia? ) infinity and / or random. Infinity and mathematical chaos are beautiful. One popular definition of mathematical chaos is a system with infinite periodicity. Take our beautiful planet. Tellus does not have random orbit around the sun. If it had, we would not have lived, since we would have frozen do death long time ago. But the orbit is chaotic. It has infinite periodicity. Imagine that you cut the earths orbit around the sun with a very big plane. One definition of a system with periodicity k, is that the sun hit the same point for every k cutting of the plane. But the earth never hits the same point. Since "God does not play dice with the universe" accoridng to Albert Einstein that also said that "The faster you go, the shorter you are" (I will not compete with GoogelBot on moving) the earths orbit is not random. The orbit is chaotic, so it is according to the popular definition of mathematical chaos infinite.

Originally Posted by Clicken

You guys are so silly…

Mathematical chaos is life. If, my hearth beats, were not chaotic, I would not live.

An Algorithm for Discovery

"One day, during a particularly lengthy commute in our carpool, we began to wonder whether the process of creating new knowledge--asking the right question, pursuing the unknown, making discoveries--might also benefit from such an algorithmic approach. Surely a formula for boosting the rate and magnitude of discoveries would be most welcome".

The whole of science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking.

Related thread: Cardinality of the continuum.

P.S. The Norwegian coast line that has fractal dimension has infinite length, but the area is definitely finite.

The fractal dimension D is found to be 1.52.

Are we off topic now?

No, IMO. Mathematics is a collection of trivialities. Each step is a triviality. A computer program or algorithme is simple, plain, elementary mathematics. Each step is a triviality. What makes it difficult is the complexity, the number of lines of code.

Exercise for those that like mathematics (programming):

Write an algorithme that computes the n first prime numbers. Why is it enough to stop the iteration by the SQRT(n) to conclude that n is or is not a prime number?

Exercise for mathematicians (not Tubby and kgun): Is there an infinite number of prime number twins like

(5,7), (11,13), (17,19), (29,31) ... ??

Prove your answer and you should IMO, be awarded the Nobel Price in mathematics if there were one.

--- 000 ---

Words, reproduced by one of the earths silliest ...

[Tubby]

Hi Clicken
"So if the philosopher or the scientist eat the apple and it disappeared, how confused would they be?"

AAAHHH. now you are talking. because the act of eating the apple, drops the scientist back to a reality situation. It casts aside the intellectual bullshit, it cast aside the 'search for truth' it stops dead the speculation and wonder of why we are here and for what purpose. for this moment when either eat the apple - they are living. If for one moment they understand that to ponder these questions is to totally miss the point of being alive. . then the apple was a good one.



"You guys are so silly…" We know Clicken. I sense a little silliness in you ( you gotta love It )

So perhaps it is not likely that one monkey alone could reproduce the complete works of Shakespeare, but collect the works from all of the monkeys and I bet you could piece it together, eventually… with leftovers.

No. . . This is my major beef with these theories. and things like statistics.
I could have three neighbours . my experience could involve three women neighbours all with 5 children, struggling along to make ends meet. This could be the 'reality of my world" Statistic might tell me that women have 2.65 Children... That is not a real figure. it is not a figure that can be duplicated or found in any instance on this whole planet.
yet we continue to gather bulk information, , and ACCEPT IT.

Clicken. . this is not information yet we consume this data everyday, and it is warping our reality, and making us clone what we see.

This has some peculiar side effects. . even as far as say Google is concerned. Google is clearly able to detect "trends" because we all ' imitate' we imitate what statistics tell us is the right thing to do. . but we are imitation the 2.65 children - when in reality there is nothing there. If every web page was just a random construction. then a trend a formula for analysis might be made. . . But websites are being constructed to a formula. so what does the analyst do. . does he throw out the dirty data, and just Analise the non formula websites? . are we placing ourselves in a basket that can be thrown out? (google has shown us how easily a basket of formular sites can be identified. I hate the expression but could this be the start of the slippery slope?

This is a problem. What is information ? Kgun has found a very good question.
well worth us 'silly' people pondering

[Clicken]

Tubby, I blame the silliness on the toxins in my brain from all the,… as you say, BS that has found it’s way into my receptors! Silliness releases those toxins to prevent total decay!

Let me try to help with this problem of understanding information and knowledge without getting myself tied into a knot.

Kgun’s question was… What is knowledge? That is different than information.

Knowledge is the awareness of data or information. To help understand this think…

We can understand that the universe is an accumulation of things or materials, what we call substance. It is there but until our brain is aware of it then we have no knowledge of it. It exist but we have not received any information of that existence.

Information may or may not be true or what we call factual nonetheless it is information. Once our brain is aware of the information it SHOULD analyze the information by comparing it to the knowledge we already have stored in our memory banks.

This is where the problem lies… Some brains don’t analyze the information, they just accept it as truth and then their actions reflect the wisdom or lack of it. Some brains will analyze but still come up with incorrect answers because most of the information for which is used to analyze new information was wrong or mendacious.

Tricky stuff!

Originally Posted by ”Kgun”

The faster you go, the shorter you are

I must be going faster than the rest of you because I am short… compared to most of you!

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Clicken

More like the Lost Dimension! Hehe sorry tubby, I just couldn’t resist…. You are too funny!... that goes for you too kgun!

Einstein has the relevant cite:

The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.

Stephen W. Hawkins operates with iterated spaces where time is the fourth dimension? If you collapse time (project the time axis onto the 3-D space), is that the lost dimension?

Originally Posted by Clicken

I must be going faster than the rest of you because I am short… compared to most of you!

Why do women bear silly children (boys) with probability close to tossing a coin? Or is it only WPW members Tubby and kgun that are so...?

You are definitely another candidate for writing a book.

We are still on topic IMHO.

P.S. Headache. By projection, you can get rid of all knowledge or information if you want? What is nothing? It is easy to define in mathematics, namely {}. No, that is two curly braces so it can not be nothing.

[Clicken]

Einstein had a sense of humor,... he was probably overwhelmed with toxins in his brain!

"There is only one demension it is called space and space has many compartments" - clicken

Time is not a thing or what we know as substance but rather a perception of the compartments and their relativity... I think.

Are we off topic yet?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Clicken

Are we off topic yet?

No, we are producing free information.

[Tubby]

I say, 'Time is just the distance between bits of information'.


I do not have a problem with knowledge or information. My problem lies with false information. I dislike the accepted practice of accepting what is not known...

The doctor tells a patient - I am sorry but you have contracted "Bingles"
"Oh ny goodness Doc, what are my chances?"
" not good . . You have only a 20% chance of living until you are 80"

The doctor offers a statement that is wrong. what he is saying when he offers 20% is
"I do not know". what we do know is that for every five people that get "bingles' four of them die before 80. We just presume bingles is a factor. But four out of five people die before they are eighty anyway According to the statistics of life expectancy. . . starting from birth . . . living in Bangladesh.

" Where do you live by the way?"
" I am with the US military stationed in Iran? "...

OK that's pretty silly. But we do accept statements that are wrong or irrelevant everyday, based on what is not known. and accept them. We re-print these statements and apply them to the most unsuitable situations, and we accept them as fact.

(I could be the Emperor of 'silly')

[Tubby]

No information on the Internet.

As long as the webmaster has a priority of getting visitors. information that is posted on web pages is falsely prioritised.

A web searcher typing into google something like 'best way to sell classified adverts'. will not get an answer. they will simply be confronted with the best optimised pages.

If they dig deeper and find say a forum. . they will get the same biased results from webmaster all using 'packaged software'.

What is information? It is certainly not Knowledge. and reading it could quite possibly destroy knowledge..

the sheer bulk of of 'weighted answers' distorts. .

anyone coming to a conclusion based on this information is likely to make a very poor decision.