ontac-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontac-forum] Theories, Models, Reasoning, Language, and Truth

To: "ONTAC-WG General Discussion" <ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Azamat" <abdoul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:22:34 +0200
Message-id: <000201c60621$8e802cd0$f802960a@az00evbfog6nhh>
Paul wrote: ''But ...  I do not understand this notion of a lattice of theories''.

Paul,
In your several messages you have been asking the same but good questions. Below I paste a passage from the book ''Standard Ontology for Machines and People'' regarding the nature and ontological relevancy of lattice theory. Hope it will a bit clarify the mistery surrounding mathematical lattices being most fundamental to UFO. 

''The lattice theory with set theory involve such effective abstractions as the universe, class, set, property, object, relation, partial orderings, order preserving or isotonicity, universal bounds, duality, partially ordered sets, and lattice. The Boolean algebra introduces the notions of isomorphism or bijection, Cartesian (direct) product, Boolean polynomial; the relation algebras - binary relation and composition; the category theory - the notions of objects, morphisms (or maps or transformations), composition of morphisms and the duality principle.

The main concern of the lattice theory is an abstract structure L of families of subsets X, Y, Z, ...of a given set, class, or aggregate (the universe) U. Ordered by an inclusion relation £, it is marked by having a largest element, denoted by the intersection of subsets X Ù Y, and a smallest element, denoted by the set-union operation X Ú Y: L = < U, Ù, Ú, £ >. The inclusion relation of holding £ is characterized by the laws of reflexivity X£ X, transitivity, if X £ Y and Y£ Z, then X £ Z, and antisymmetricity, if X£ Y and Y£ X, then X =Y. All lattices share the properties of idempotency, associativity, commutativity, and absorption. What is more important, these algebraic structures are subject to dualization: if the union Ú is replaced by the intersection Ù and vice versa and the inclusion relation £ is interchanged with the opposite relation ³, the lattice will keep its original structure, although turning upside-down.

In a general form, the lattice structure L is an ordered quadruple of the universal aggregate U, a binary operation of relation °, the least or bottom element 0, the null thing as well as the last, universal, top element, which is the world W: L=< U, °, 0, W > . Accordingly, the models of the abstract structure may be as diverse as the types of relation:

the partial orderings;

the implication relation;

the subsumption relation;

the part-whole relation;

the cause and effect relation.

Basing on a selected type of relations, one can realize the models as diverse as

partially ordered sets;

deductive logical systems;

classificatory taxonomies;

mereology;

natural, mental or social systems.

 

By bringing meaning, semantics, and content into the formal structure through specific interpretations, the lattice structure may serve for whatever model of reality one would like to prefer: the totality of things, facts, objects and events, the totality of properties, etc. For instance, the universal class U may be represented as a collection of set variables, where its variables X, Y, . . . , range both over sets and individuals. The structure of reality is to be modeled as a lattice produced by substantial individuals ordered by the part-whole relation. This structure will culminate in a world individual and bottom with a least ontic individual. As a result, a least unit or null element in such the lattice of individual entities is supposed to form the bottom level or the ultimate reality of the ontological structure. The smallest element in such a model of the world ontology of facts is supposed to be the individual, the indivisible, the simple, the particular, the atom, the point, the element, the fact, the item, the single, or the particle. By the agency of the binary operations as juxtaposition or superposition, the multitude of individuals forms the second grade or scale of reality. It includes all kinds of wholes or complex unities: the composition, the aggregation, the aggregate, the assemblage, the group, the association, the set, the number, the collection, the mass, the body, the substance, the matter, the quantity, the class, the compound, the mixture, or the system. The entities are here ordered by the part-whole relation corresponding in set theory to the class membership relation Î of an individual and its collection. The third grade of the physical world is made up of different bodies, masses, complexities, compositions, aggregates, aggregations, collections, systems, and wholes composed of individual parts. This level is composed of a number of large collections of collections ordered by the class inclusion relationship Í. At the apex, the universal element is the totality of all individuals presented as the class of all classes of individuals. It is the world presented as the many rather than the one, as the total sum of particulars, as a multitude of objects, facts, events, and processes constrained by particular causation''.


Regards,
Azamat Abdoullaev
EIS Ltd
Pafos, CYPRUS
http://www.eis.com.cy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul S Prueitt" <psp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "ONTAC-WG General Discussion" <ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 10:39 PM
Subject: RE: [ontac-forum] Theories, Models, Reasoning, Language, and Truth


>
>
> The lattice that you are refering to is a construction, or potential
> construction.  In this way it is similar to the set of counting numbers.
> The set of positive integers can be regarded as existing only as a
> potential... given that there is no way to get the entire construction put
> somewhere.  But this is a mute point, as you point out.
>
>
> In the counting numbers one has a total, sometimes called linear, order.
> This order extends to the real numbers but not the complex numbers.
>
> The lattice can be a structure with a partial order having a minimal element
> and a maximal element.
>
> An example of this is the set of subsets can be organized in such a fashion.
> John, is your , and Tarski's, notion of a lattice of theories such a
> structure?  This is what I just do not see.  How do you or Tarski compare to
> theories?  Suppose that all theories are the special ones that are
> formalized to a degree necessary.
>
> Lattice geometries are discussed at
>
> http://www.hermetic.ch/compsci/lattgeom.htm
>
>
> and I may say that in 1987 I published a paper on spin glass lattices in the
> journal "Complex Systems".  I recognize how really interesting it is to say
> that there is a relationship ....
>
>
> In my recent work I develop the notion of a non specific relationship
> (without order) as a means of mapping data structure into computer memory.
>
> But ...  I do not understand this notion of a lattice of theories.
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
> To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
> Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
> Community Wiki: http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: 
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki: 
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG    (01)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>