| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2008 10:36 pm Post subject: describing a machine |
 |
|
Anyone familiar with the idea of trying to describe a machine the way
it works?
like where it>s being a machine working the way of having a loop with
the problem of being in
the middle and then to the outside as how the machine can move? so
like if you were to make it a machine
that does math the way it works it has machine parts that actually
move like the way the calculation is done?
so it moves like if this were to try and move as a real machine:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
if (i == 3) next;
};
so as a real machine though, that works the way that would have to as
a machine? a machine that can>t be anything really working like gears
because of how to be in the middle of the loop is to go outside but
sometimes not is a problem the way something has to move.
so if that>s to look like a real machine, it>s not a machine that
turns around and around mechanically though, because in the middle is
back to the beginning. but sometimes through and back around. But it
actually has to move like a real machine though.
I think I know a way there is to describe a machine that works this
way...
say on a checkers board you have checker pieces, and say each checker
piece is paired with another.
now all checker pieces are pairs.
the way said, try to make one piece able to move... but you have to
move the other it>s a pair with at the same time.
the board is full, there>s no free spaces to move to.
so to make a piece move with it>s paired piece, find where it can go
where there>s another pair that can move, that pair can move where
another pair can move, and so on... where the last pair to move goes
where the first pair left.
each time you move a pair, they are not the same pair anymore once
they>ve moved, each of the pair is now a pair with the piece that
left
where they went to make a new pair of them. this is key in figuring
out the only way it can work so a piece can move at all.
so knowing no first move you can make because there isn>t any
specific
move to know, find the pair to be able to move the way where they
move
to another pair where each of the pair is now another pair with the
one they move to, they move to a pair that>s together. now first pair
to move to another pair, is now not the same pair, but each a pair
with each of the other pair.
so move and do that, but at the same time when you get a piece of the
first pair where it goes and the other pair moved, as a new pair now
it can>t stay there because it has to move again because of how at
the
same time something is making the other of the pair move. right?
maybe
that part is hard to see. It>s the only way to figure it can move in
any way at all.
so it>s like the last move has to be known before the first move can
be made, because the first move that can be made is where something
can move next, but what can move next is what carries on to the last
move that can move where the first pair moved from. it>s a recursive
type of problem to figure out how to move a pair.
where a pair can move is where it goes to another pair that at the
same time is moving away making an occupancy, but when you get there
and you>re a new pair with the piece that moves from where you get
to,
it>s not to think staying can work because now something needs the
pair you are now to move.
it>s like so where you can never have it so you stop moving until all
the move is complete. but nowhere in the middle, or at first or last,
can you know how to make it work to move because the beginning is
like
knowing the end of how to move.
what>s interesting though is how pairs that figure themselves to be
able to move are not all the pairs but some, but that some other
pairs
that figure out a way to move are the same pairs as others that
figure
out another way.
and each time a pair makes a move it>s all the way to where the place
they leave has something come, but that had to be before you can move
in the first place in idea of the problem it is because that>s where
something can move to finally get around to the last move where you
leave, but leave where you can because you find what comes where you
leave at first. each time a pair is moved depending on how moving
pairs are said together is to reorganize how pairs are together, but
to keep moving the same pairs is to find the same place they were in
to begin with but alot of other ways too depending on which of the
pairs together you try to move, if you say the pairs together are the
pairs that given one pair are the ones that move at the same time
too.
isn>t it fair to call how they behave any machine?
there>s a few things you can say like given how they>re arranged pick
a few pairs for how they>re organized and see how every way you can
move them makes a few more pairs reorganized for how you move them?
it>s like pairs can setup in any way where for any way they are
organized is for any way other pairs are organized.
it>s like saying for every combination of a number, there>s another
combination but not linear association.
so don>t they describe any machine there can be ? like don>t they
describe working with a behavior that can be how any possible machine
works?
you can see how it looks like a machine when you take a pair and
figure how it can be moved, like say one moves, but it goes where
something else moves, and it moves where something else moves, but
then something moves to where the first one left. so say just one of
these that work around to move, but then say all that do. say all
together like the ones that move around in a way but the others that
move around in a way, you can see importantly enough for how it>s a
machine that they use the same pairs starting from somewhere else to
move as how you can move somewhere else.
isn>t that any machine there can be? I mean like a functional machine
to work like gears but not like gears where you have to be in the
middle of it working to be on the outside then the otherside again.
Like if you thought of code working as a real machine doing what a
'for loop' does, it has to be a machine that is in the middle of the
'for loop' to be to the beginning again, but then again through it
but
not to the beginning but through the end.
But as a machine that actually moves the way this would have to?
Don>t moving pairs represent any machine there can be?
See how moving pairs rearrange each time? but the way others do will
rearrange another way if they use the same pairs? but see how to
rearrange those ones and the other ones again make difference of how?
See moving pairs that move together as part of the machine where for a
condition one way is for a condition another way like they say
together a condition that matters together. Like if part of the
machine is one way then another part of the machine is another way,
together matters like to change one part is to change the other part.
But then pairs that move together another way are another part like
they use the same pairs, because it>s a part of the machine together
with another part. But see how they>re eachother? like when one part
together moves, other part together has to move another way now?
See them though the way you put together pairs that move with others
that can move the way they can move, like one moves the other to move
the other. but then others that do that do that to another that works
it>s own way. see it though the way it>s a machine that can work like
a machine can for what it is to work that way, because it>s to see
what a loop has to be for example.
I find something special about how if you move a pair and look at it
as a machine again, there>s something to notice. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 12:07 am Post subject: Re: describing a machine |
|
|
On Jul 19, 6:36 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]Anyone familiar with the idea of trying to describe a machine the way
it works?
like where it>s being a machine working the way of having a loop with
the problem of being in
the middle and then to the outside as how the machine can move? so
like if you were to make it a machine
that does math the way it works it has machine parts that actually
move like the way the calculation is done?
so it moves like if this were to try and move as a real machine:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
if (i == 3) next;
};
so as a real machine though, that works the way that would have to as
a machine? a machine that can>t be anything really working like gears
because of how to be in the middle of the loop is to go outside but
sometimes not is a problem the way something has to move.
so if that>s to look like a real machine, it>s not a machine that
turns around and around mechanically though, because in the middle is
back to the beginning. but sometimes through and back around. But it
actually has to move like a real machine though.
I think I know a way there is to describe a machine that works this
way...
say on a checkers board you have checker pieces, and say each checker
piece is paired with another.
now all checker pieces are pairs.
the way said, try to make one piece able to move... but you have to
move the other it>s a pair with at the same time.
the board is full, there>s no free spaces to move to.
so to make a piece move with it>s paired piece, find where it can go
where there>s another pair that can move, that pair can move where
another pair can move, and so on... where the last pair to move goes
where the first pair left.
each time you move a pair, they are not the same pair anymore once
they>ve moved, each of the pair is now a pair with the piece that
left
where they went to make a new pair of them. this is key in figuring
out the only way it can work so a piece can move at all.
so knowing no first move you can make because there isn>t any
specific
move to know, find the pair to be able to move the way where they
move
to another pair where each of the pair is now another pair with the
one they move to, they move to a pair that>s together. now first pair
to move to another pair, is now not the same pair, but each a pair
with each of the other pair.
so move and do that, but at the same time when you get a piece of the
first pair where it goes and the other pair moved, as a new pair now
it can>t stay there because it has to move again because of how at
the
same time something is making the other of the pair move. right?
maybe
that part is hard to see. It>s the only way to figure it can move in
any way at all.
so it>s like the last move has to be known before the first move can
be made, because the first move that can be made is where something
can move next, but what can move next is what carries on to the last
move that can move where the first pair moved from. it>s a recursive
type of problem to figure out how to move a pair.
where a pair can move is where it goes to another pair that at the
same time is moving away making an occupancy, but when you get there
and you>re a new pair with the piece that moves from where you get
to,
it>s not to think staying can work because now something needs the
pair you are now to move.
it>s like so where you can never have it so you stop moving until all
the move is complete. but nowhere in the middle, or at first or last,
can you know how to make it work to move because the beginning is
like
knowing the end of how to move.
what>s interesting though is how pairs that figure themselves to be
able to move are not all the pairs but some, but that some other
pairs
that figure out a way to move are the same pairs as others that
figure
out another way.
and each time a pair makes a move it>s all the way to where the place
they leave has something come, but that had to be before you can move
in the first place in idea of the problem it is because that>s where
something can move to finally get around to the last move where you
leave, but leave where you can because you find what comes where you
leave at first. each time a pair is moved depending on how moving
pairs are said together is to reorganize how pairs are together, but
to keep moving the same pairs is to find the same place they were in
to begin with but alot of other ways too depending on which of the
pairs together you try to move, if you say the pairs together are the
pairs that given one pair are the ones that move at the same time
too.
isn>t it fair to call how they behave any machine?
there>s a few things you can say like given how they>re arranged pick
a few pairs for how they>re organized and see how every way you can
move them makes a few more pairs reorganized for how you move them?
it>s like pairs can setup in any way where for any way they are
organized is for any way other pairs are organized.
it>s like saying for every combination of a number, there>s another
combination but not linear association.
so don>t they describe any machine there can be ? like don>t they
describe working with a behavior that can be how any possible machine
works?
you can see how it looks like a machine when you take a pair and
figure how it can be moved, like say one moves, but it goes where
something else moves, and it moves where something else moves, but
then something moves to where the first one left. so say just one of
these that work around to move, but then say all that do. say all
together like the ones that move around in a way but the others that
move around in a way, you can see importantly enough for how it>s a
machine that they use the same pairs starting from somewhere else to
move as how you can move somewhere else.
isn>t that any machine there can be? I mean like a functional machine
to work like gears but not like gears where you have to be in the
middle of it working to be on the outside then the otherside again.
Like if you thought of code working as a real machine doing what a
'for loop' does, it has to be a machine that is in the middle of the
'for loop' to be to the beginning again, but then again through it
but
not to the beginning but through the end.
But as a machine that actually moves the way this would have to?
Don>t moving pairs represent any machine there can be?
See how moving pairs rearrange each time? but the way others do will
rearrange another way if they use the same pairs? but see how to
rearrange those ones and the other ones again make difference of how?
See moving pairs that move together as part of the machine where for a
condition one way is for a condition another way like they say
together a condition that matters together. Like if part of the
machine is one way then another part of the machine is another way,
together matters like to change one part is to change the other part.
But then pairs that move together another way are another part like
they use the same pairs, because it>s a part of the machine together
with another part. But see how they>re eachother? like when one part
together moves, other part together has to move another way now?
See them though the way you put together pairs that move with others
that can move the way they can move, like one moves the other to move
the other. but then others that do that do that to another that works
it>s own way. see it though the way it>s a machine that can work like
a machine can for what it is to work that way, because it>s to see
what a loop has to be for example.
I find something special about how if you move a pair and look at it
as a machine again, there>s something to notice.
[/quote]
see how pairs setup make for any machine because they can be setup a
way to move any way but back to the way they start.
like given some pairs setup they rearrange but find the same
arrangement. fine so any machine because all the others too do that,
but then as any are rearranged the others rearrange another way
depending. see like part of the machine that can move on it>s own, and
another part that can move on it>s own, but parts together that when
one part moves the other part moves?
so say a checkers board with pieces on each square, say all are pairs
any way.
now figure out how to make a pair move.. they go where another pair
is but which? figure out every way and there>s only one answer.
so see as how all pairs are able to move? find how each moves and say
how one piece goes somewhere, and that piece goes somewhere else...
and then a piece that goes back where you leave the first piece. so
say that about all the ones that have to move if you move one.. which
way to move to for each.
so say all pieces move but not all part of the same circuit of
moving... but they use the same pieces in another circuit of movement.
see it as what works like a machine. see each time though you move a
pair that can move another way, see all them now together like it>s
the same machine but different.
see how it draws a machine that looks the way it has to though? the
way one has to look for the type of machine that is in the middle to
go back to the beginning, but has a few places in the middle to go
back to the beginning?
like just do this....
on a checkers board make pieces out to be pairs, just a bunch of
checkers pieces but all together in two>s.
so pick a pair together and move... try to move it, but both have to
be able to move at the same time. so make the pair move where it
can... it>s hard to figure which way they can move... it>s a recursive
problem, like try every answer until an answer works.
each of the pair goes to another pair, and now each piece is a new
pair with the piece that was where it went to, that piece moved with
it>s pair. so it left and is not the pair it was to leave because it>s
now a pair with what went where it left from.
so now a problem if you think right now about where it>s at, because
always to think about moving is to think it>s not able to stop until
the final piece with how you decide pairs are together. to even make
the first move though the last move has to be known, because that>s
how there>s even a first move. but the last move can only be known if
the first move is known.
see how many pairs can work out together to move? see how they
reorganize how they are pairs together each way they can move? see how
they can move and move again if the same pairs that they were first
are moved again when they got reorganized so they are back to how they
were organized the first time?
but also see how other pairs to figure out how they can move now
figure out to move another way ?
so see how with some pairs to move other pairs to move are being
switched around? see how this is a machine? because machine part that
moves on it>s own moved other machine part but then all machine if you
see it all again the way they work to move?
try please... at least try seeing this... a checkers board with pairs
that work out to be able to move... draw how together they can move as
a circuit but circuits together that can move are circuits joined but
not to show how to move joined, but each circuit moves but the other
circuit moves on it>s own too, but circuits together that show how one
circuit moves is another circuit moved already the way they are the
same pairs?
so see by drawing it how it looks ? like if something is trying to
seem like a machine loop, it looks like in the middle is a piece that
moves to the outside but not connected is part of the machine to get
to another part of the machine, because you move a piece say across
from there.
see how it>s any machine there can be though ? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 12:15 am Post subject: Re: describing a machine |
|
|
On Jul 19, 6:36 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]Anyone familiar with the idea of trying to describe a machine the way
it works?
like where it>s being a machine working the way of having a loop with
the problem of being in
the middle and then to the outside as how the machine can move? so
like if you were to make it a machine
that does math the way it works it has machine parts that actually
move like the way the calculation is done?
so it moves like if this were to try and move as a real machine:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
if (i == 3) next;
};
so as a real machine though, that works the way that would have to as
a machine? a machine that can>t be anything really working like gears
because of how to be in the middle of the loop is to go outside but
sometimes not is a problem the way something has to move.
so if that>s to look like a real machine, it>s not a machine that
turns around and around mechanically though, because in the middle is
back to the beginning. but sometimes through and back around. But it
actually has to move like a real machine though.
I think I know a way there is to describe a machine that works this
way...
say on a checkers board you have checker pieces, and say each checker
piece is paired with another.
now all checker pieces are pairs.
the way said, try to make one piece able to move... but you have to
move the other it>s a pair with at the same time.
the board is full, there>s no free spaces to move to.
so to make a piece move with it>s paired piece, find where it can go
where there>s another pair that can move, that pair can move where
another pair can move, and so on... where the last pair to move goes
where the first pair left.
each time you move a pair, they are not the same pair anymore once
they>ve moved, each of the pair is now a pair with the piece that
left
where they went to make a new pair of them. this is key in figuring
out the only way it can work so a piece can move at all.
so knowing no first move you can make because there isn>t any
specific
move to know, find the pair to be able to move the way where they
move
to another pair where each of the pair is now another pair with the
one they move to, they move to a pair that>s together. now first pair
to move to another pair, is now not the same pair, but each a pair
with each of the other pair.
so move and do that, but at the same time when you get a piece of the
first pair where it goes and the other pair moved, as a new pair now
it can>t stay there because it has to move again because of how at
the
same time something is making the other of the pair move. right?
maybe
that part is hard to see. It>s the only way to figure it can move in
any way at all.
so it>s like the last move has to be known before the first move can
be made, because the first move that can be made is where something
can move next, but what can move next is what carries on to the last
move that can move where the first pair moved from. it>s a recursive
type of problem to figure out how to move a pair.
where a pair can move is where it goes to another pair that at the
same time is moving away making an occupancy, but when you get there
and you>re a new pair with the piece that moves from where you get
to,
it>s not to think staying can work because now something needs the
pair you are now to move.
it>s like so where you can never have it so you stop moving until all
the move is complete. but nowhere in the middle, or at first or last,
can you know how to make it work to move because the beginning is
like
knowing the end of how to move.
what>s interesting though is how pairs that figure themselves to be
able to move are not all the pairs but some, but that some other
pairs
that figure out a way to move are the same pairs as others that
figure
out another way.
and each time a pair makes a move it>s all the way to where the place
they leave has something come, but that had to be before you can move
in the first place in idea of the problem it is because that>s where
something can move to finally get around to the last move where you
leave, but leave where you can because you find what comes where you
leave at first. each time a pair is moved depending on how moving
pairs are said together is to reorganize how pairs are together, but
to keep moving the same pairs is to find the same place they were in
to begin with but alot of other ways too depending on which of the
pairs together you try to move, if you say the pairs together are the
pairs that given one pair are the ones that move at the same time
too.
isn>t it fair to call how they behave any machine?
there>s a few things you can say like given how they>re arranged pick
a few pairs for how they>re organized and see how every way you can
move them makes a few more pairs reorganized for how you move them?
it>s like pairs can setup in any way where for any way they are
organized is for any way other pairs are organized.
it>s like saying for every combination of a number, there>s another
combination but not linear association.
so don>t they describe any machine there can be ? like don>t they
describe working with a behavior that can be how any possible machine
works?
you can see how it looks like a machine when you take a pair and
figure how it can be moved, like say one moves, but it goes where
something else moves, and it moves where something else moves, but
then something moves to where the first one left. so say just one of
these that work around to move, but then say all that do. say all
together like the ones that move around in a way but the others that
move around in a way, you can see importantly enough for how it>s a
machine that they use the same pairs starting from somewhere else to
move as how you can move somewhere else.
isn>t that any machine there can be? I mean like a functional machine
to work like gears but not like gears where you have to be in the
middle of it working to be on the outside then the otherside again.
Like if you thought of code working as a real machine doing what a
'for loop' does, it has to be a machine that is in the middle of the
'for loop' to be to the beginning again, but then again through it
but
not to the beginning but through the end.
But as a machine that actually moves the way this would have to?
Don>t moving pairs represent any machine there can be?
See how moving pairs rearrange each time? but the way others do will
rearrange another way if they use the same pairs? but see how to
rearrange those ones and the other ones again make difference of how?
See moving pairs that move together as part of the machine where for a
condition one way is for a condition another way like they say
together a condition that matters together. Like if part of the
machine is one way then another part of the machine is another way,
together matters like to change one part is to change the other part.
But then pairs that move together another way are another part like
they use the same pairs, because it>s a part of the machine together
with another part. But see how they>re eachother? like when one part
together moves, other part together has to move another way now?
See them though the way you put together pairs that move with others
that can move the way they can move, like one moves the other to move
the other. but then others that do that do that to another that works
it>s own way. see it though the way it>s a machine that can work like
a machine can for what it is to work that way, because it>s to see
what a loop has to be for example.
I find something special about how if you move a pair and look at it
as a machine again, there>s something to notice.
[/quote]
see how it>s a machine though like how a machine can move with how the
pieces jump across? if you draw it the way they show which way they
would move if you pick one piece and draw where it moves, but all the
others for how one moves back where it left, but in circuit on it>s
own? but see how you draw all the other circuits but they use pieces
the same as other circuits? see how moving a piece as part of one
circuit is moving pieces as part of other circuits? but now see all
circuits together but it>s the same machine. see how it>s the same
machine though?
so what did the machine do to get where it>s at? did it run step by
step or did it jump to a middle condition? pairs that move together
look like a part of the machine where for the way the machine is in
one place is the way it is in another place. see how though it>s like
to move a part of the machine you have to move all the machine because
it>s together? see how a pair is to move on it>s own but is it>s own
part of the machine but other parts of the machine are part of it ?
draw it and see though.. how it>s a machine, but see how when you move
a pair it>s the same machine but moved... see how it>s moved.
so it>s like running a machine faster than it takes to run? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:01 am Post subject: Re: describing a machine |
|
|
On Jul 19, 6:36 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]Anyone familiar with the idea of trying to describe a machine the way
it works?
like where it>s being a machine working the way of having a loop with
the problem of being in
the middle and then to the outside as how the machine can move? so
like if you were to make it a machine
that does math the way it works it has machine parts that actually
move like the way the calculation is done?
so it moves like if this were to try and move as a real machine:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
if (i == 3) next;
};
so as a real machine though, that works the way that would have to as
a machine? a machine that can>t be anything really working like gears
because of how to be in the middle of the loop is to go outside but
sometimes not is a problem the way something has to move.
so if that>s to look like a real machine, it>s not a machine that
turns around and around mechanically though, because in the middle is
back to the beginning. but sometimes through and back around. But it
actually has to move like a real machine though.
I think I know a way there is to describe a machine that works this
way...
say on a checkers board you have checker pieces, and say each checker
piece is paired with another.
now all checker pieces are pairs.
the way said, try to make one piece able to move... but you have to
move the other it>s a pair with at the same time.
the board is full, there>s no free spaces to move to.
so to make a piece move with it>s paired piece, find where it can go
where there>s another pair that can move, that pair can move where
another pair can move, and so on... where the last pair to move goes
where the first pair left.
each time you move a pair, they are not the same pair anymore once
they>ve moved, each of the pair is now a pair with the piece that
left
where they went to make a new pair of them. this is key in figuring
out the only way it can work so a piece can move at all.
so knowing no first move you can make because there isn>t any
specific
move to know, find the pair to be able to move the way where they
move
to another pair where each of the pair is now another pair with the
one they move to, they move to a pair that>s together. now first pair
to move to another pair, is now not the same pair, but each a pair
with each of the other pair.
so move and do that, but at the same time when you get a piece of the
first pair where it goes and the other pair moved, as a new pair now
it can>t stay there because it has to move again because of how at
the
same time something is making the other of the pair move. right?
maybe
that part is hard to see. It>s the only way to figure it can move in
any way at all.
so it>s like the last move has to be known before the first move can
be made, because the first move that can be made is where something
can move next, but what can move next is what carries on to the last
move that can move where the first pair moved from. it>s a recursive
type of problem to figure out how to move a pair.
where a pair can move is where it goes to another pair that at the
same time is moving away making an occupancy, but when you get there
and you>re a new pair with the piece that moves from where you get
to,
it>s not to think staying can work because now something needs the
pair you are now to move.
it>s like so where you can never have it so you stop moving until all
the move is complete. but nowhere in the middle, or at first or last,
can you know how to make it work to move because the beginning is
like
knowing the end of how to move.
what>s interesting though is how pairs that figure themselves to be
able to move are not all the pairs but some, but that some other
pairs
that figure out a way to move are the same pairs as others that
figure
out another way.
and each time a pair makes a move it>s all the way to where the place
they leave has something come, but that had to be before you can move
in the first place in idea of the problem it is because that>s where
something can move to finally get around to the last move where you
leave, but leave where you can because you find what comes where you
leave at first. each time a pair is moved depending on how moving
pairs are said together is to reorganize how pairs are together, but
to keep moving the same pairs is to find the same place they were in
to begin with but alot of other ways too depending on which of the
pairs together you try to move, if you say the pairs together are the
pairs that given one pair are the ones that move at the same time
too.
isn>t it fair to call how they behave any machine?
there>s a few things you can say like given how they>re arranged pick
a few pairs for how they>re organized and see how every way you can
move them makes a few more pairs reorganized for how you move them?
it>s like pairs can setup in any way where for any way they are
organized is for any way other pairs are organized.
it>s like saying for every combination of a number, there>s another
combination but not linear association.
so don>t they describe any machine there can be ? like don>t they
describe working with a behavior that can be how any possible machine
works?
you can see how it looks like a machine when you take a pair and
figure how it can be moved, like say one moves, but it goes where
something else moves, and it moves where something else moves, but
then something moves to where the first one left. so say just one of
these that work around to move, but then say all that do. say all
together like the ones that move around in a way but the others that
move around in a way, you can see importantly enough for how it>s a
machine that they use the same pairs starting from somewhere else to
move as how you can move somewhere else.
isn>t that any machine there can be? I mean like a functional machine
to work like gears but not like gears where you have to be in the
middle of it working to be on the outside then the otherside again.
Like if you thought of code working as a real machine doing what a
'for loop' does, it has to be a machine that is in the middle of the
'for loop' to be to the beginning again, but then again through it
but
not to the beginning but through the end.
But as a machine that actually moves the way this would have to?
Don>t moving pairs represent any machine there can be?
See how moving pairs rearrange each time? but the way others do will
rearrange another way if they use the same pairs? but see how to
rearrange those ones and the other ones again make difference of how?
See moving pairs that move together as part of the machine where for a
condition one way is for a condition another way like they say
together a condition that matters together. Like if part of the
machine is one way then another part of the machine is another way,
together matters like to change one part is to change the other part.
But then pairs that move together another way are another part like
they use the same pairs, because it>s a part of the machine together
with another part. But see how they>re eachother? like when one part
together moves, other part together has to move another way now?
See them though the way you put together pairs that move with others
that can move the way they can move, like one moves the other to move
the other. but then others that do that do that to another that works
it>s own way. see it though the way it>s a machine that can work like
a machine can for what it is to work that way, because it>s to see
what a loop has to be for example.
I find something special about how if you move a pair and look at it
as a machine again, there>s something to notice.
[/quote]
see how logically a machine is what has a part that moves a way for
the next part to move a way and so on for the whole machine? different
than the idea of moving a machine step-by-step in direction of machine
progress? look at what happens to the whole machine when you find a
moving pair to move.
try seeing it as a machine though, the way a pair will move with the
others to be organized another way. when you think a machine has to
have two places that go to the same place, but a place that leaves two
ways depending.. it>s what a machine has to look like when something
jumps from the middle to the beginning of say a loop, but the
beginning works through to the end... it>s the pairs and how they move
around. but a loop is not like a circle in seeing pairs and how they
move, it shows pairs that would move from one to the next like jumping
around makes sense for a loop. you see how they do that but start
around again like a loop? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:27 am Post subject: Re: describing a machine |
|
|
On Jul 19, 9:01 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]On Jul 19, 6:36 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone familiar with the idea of trying to describe a machine the way
it works?
like where it>s being a machine working the way of having a loop with
the problem of being in
the middle and then to the outside as how the machine can move? so
like if you were to make it a machine
that does math the way it works it has machine parts that actually
move like the way the calculation is done?
so it moves like if this were to try and move as a real machine:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
if (i == 3) next;
};
so as a real machine though, that works the way that would have to as
a machine? a machine that can>t be anything really working like gears
because of how to be in the middle of the loop is to go outside but
sometimes not is a problem the way something has to move.
so if that>s to look like a real machine, it>s not a machine that
turns around and around mechanically though, because in the middle is
back to the beginning. but sometimes through and back around. But it
actually has to move like a real machine though.
I think I know a way there is to describe a machine that works this
way...
say on a checkers board you have checker pieces, and say each checker
piece is paired with another.
now all checker pieces are pairs.
the way said, try to make one piece able to move... but you have to
move the other it>s a pair with at the same time.
the board is full, there>s no free spaces to move to.
so to make a piece move with it>s paired piece, find where it can go
where there>s another pair that can move, that pair can move where
another pair can move, and so on... where the last pair to move goes
where the first pair left.
each time you move a pair, they are not the same pair anymore once
they>ve moved, each of the pair is now a pair with the piece that
left
where they went to make a new pair of them. this is key in figuring
out the only way it can work so a piece can move at all.
so knowing no first move you can make because there isn>t any
specific
move to know, find the pair to be able to move the way where they
move
to another pair where each of the pair is now another pair with the
one they move to, they move to a pair that>s together. now first pair
to move to another pair, is now not the same pair, but each a pair
with each of the other pair.
so move and do that, but at the same time when you get a piece of the
first pair where it goes and the other pair moved, as a new pair now
it can>t stay there because it has to move again because of how at
the
same time something is making the other of the pair move. right?
maybe
that part is hard to see. It>s the only way to figure it can move in
any way at all.
so it>s like the last move has to be known before the first move can
be made, because the first move that can be made is where something
can move next, but what can move next is what carries on to the last
move that can move where the first pair moved from. it>s a recursive
type of problem to figure out how to move a pair.
where a pair can move is where it goes to another pair that at the
same time is moving away making an occupancy, but when you get there
and you>re a new pair with the piece that moves from where you get
to,
it>s not to think staying can work because now something needs the
pair you are now to move.
it>s like so where you can never have it so you stop moving until all
the move is complete. but nowhere in the middle, or at first or last,
can you know how to make it work to move because the beginning is
like
knowing the end of how to move.
what>s interesting though is how pairs that figure themselves to be
able to move are not all the pairs but some, but that some other
pairs
that figure out a way to move are the same pairs as others that
figure
out another way.
and each time a pair makes a move it>s all the way to where the place
they leave has something come, but that had to be before you can move
in the first place in idea of the problem it is because that>s where
something can move to finally get around to the last move where you
leave, but leave where you can because you find what comes where you
leave at first. each time a pair is moved depending on how moving
pairs are said together is to reorganize how pairs are together, but
to keep moving the same pairs is to find the same place they were in
to begin with but alot of other ways too depending on which of the
pairs together you try to move, if you say the pairs together are the
pairs that given one pair are the ones that move at the same time
too.
isn>t it fair to call how they behave any machine?
there>s a few things you can say like given how they>re arranged pick
a few pairs for how they>re organized and see how every way you can
move them makes a few more pairs reorganized for how you move them?
it>s like pairs can setup in any way where for any way they are
organized is for any way other pairs are organized.
it>s like saying for every combination of a number, there>s another
combination but not linear association.
so don>t they describe any machine there can be ? like don>t they
describe working with a behavior that can be how any possible machine
works?
you can see how it looks like a machine when you take a pair and
figure how it can be moved, like say one moves, but it goes where
something else moves, and it moves where something else moves, but
then something moves to where the first one left. so say just one of
these that work around to move, but then say all that do. say all
together like the ones that move around in a way but the others that
move around in a way, you can see importantly enough for how it>s a
machine that they use the same pairs starting from somewhere else to
move as how you can move somewhere else.
isn>t that any machine there can be? I mean like a functional machine
to work like gears but not like gears where you have to be in the
middle of it working to be on the outside then the otherside again.
Like if you thought of code working as a real machine doing what a
'for loop' does, it has to be a machine that is in the middle of the
'for loop' to be to the beginning again, but then again through it
but
not to the beginning but through the end.
But as a machine that actually moves the way this would have to?
Don>t moving pairs represent any machine there can be?
See how moving pairs rearrange each time? but the way others do will
rearrange another way if they use the same pairs? but see how to
rearrange those ones and the other ones again make difference of how?
See moving pairs that move together as part of the machine where for a
condition one way is for a condition another way like they say
together a condition that matters together. Like if part of the
machine is one way then another part of the machine is another way,
together matters like to change one part is to change the other part.
But then pairs that move together another way are another part like
they use the same pairs, because it>s a part of the machine together
with another part. But see how they>re eachother? like when one part
together moves, other part together has to move another way now?
See them though the way you put together pairs that move with others
that can move the way they can move, like one moves the other to move
the other. but then others that do that do that to another that works
it>s own way. see it though the way it>s a machine that can work like
a machine can for what it is to work that way, because it>s to see
what a loop has to be for example.
I find something special about how if you move a pair and look at it
as a machine again, there>s something to notice.
see how logically a machine is what has a part that moves a way for
the next part to move a way and so on for the whole machine? different
than the idea of moving a machine step-by-step in direction of machine
progress? look at what happens to the whole machine when you find a
moving pair to move.
try seeing it as a machine though, the way a pair will move with the
others to be organized another way. when you think a machine has to
have two places that go to the same place, but a place that leaves two
ways depending.. it>s what a machine has to look like when something
jumps from the middle to the beginning of say a loop, but the
beginning works through to the end... it>s the pairs and how they move
around. but a loop is not like a circle in seeing pairs and how they
move, it shows pairs that would move from one to the next like jumping
around makes sense for a loop. you see how they do that but start
around again like a loop?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
like the way a part of the machine moves is for the way the next part
of the machine moves?
like if a part of the machine moves one way, the next part moves
another way....
it doesn>t work thinking this is step by step machine progress though
if you think a machine like in the middle of working, because it>s to
think in the middle of the machine at a part of the machine you can
move that one part and the next part of the machine moves like for
that part to move.. but not like next running step of the machine, but
like _part moved for part moved_.
see how a machine is like that no matter what? because if a part moves
the next part moves.. but what is part of a machine like a machine for
what has a loop in it?
see how moving pairs look the way you say for each of a pair it moves
the direction to another pair, and say those pairs move the direction
towards another pair. but then a pair that moves the direction of the
first pair to move. see how? see how it>s part of the machine to move
together? so that part moves all together, but another part moves
altogether if it were a machine another way, but with pairs setup that
already happened all across because now they work to all move
different. so just move a pair and see the others able to move but
another way.
so see.. see how this is a machine
make a checkerboard full of pieces, then say each piece is together
with another piece.
now all pieces are pairs right?
so figure out how one pair can move... there>s nowhere to move it
right? because nothing says for it to move any which way right? like
there>s no reason it should have any way to move at all. so it can be
figured out it can move.
find this out... if i move one piece of the pair, and I have to move
the other of the pair at the same time... find where it can move. both
have to go where another
pair is that can move.
find it moves to another pair as the only way. it goes there because
that>s the pair that can go somewhere else.
so make the first pair go there, and where it goes has a pair that can
leave to go somewhere else.
but go there as a pair and make the pair to move to another pair,
make each piece of the pair be paired with the piece that moves where
each piece can go.
so now they>re paired with the piece to leave where they can go, but
that piece is a pair already...
but not, because the pair of that piece had the other piece become
part of another pair.
so a pair is to move the way that it goes to another pair, to be a new
pair.
the pair it went to was the pair that can move at the same time,
because it goes where another pair can move at the same time, and
finally this continues until
it gets to another pair that can move at the same time to go back to
the beginning... they lock together as one way to move a piece.
each move is for a pair to be another pair... a pair to move is to go
where it makes a new pair with the pair where it goes, that>s the pair
moving away at the same time.
so it only works out one way on a checkers board... to move a piece
said to be with a pair. and how it works they can move depends on how
they are setup.
it takes trying many ways before one way is right, but you can>t see
which way is right because it>s like knowing how it finishes before it
starts.
so finally a piece gets to where you make a piece leave from where you
move first, and just became a pair with what made it leave to be at
the first spot on the checker board.
so see how when you set pairs up on a board, depending on how you set
them up, to say one piece to move is to have an answer that works out
to being all the pairs involved in moving rearranged? see how to do it
again rearranges them again? but then it goes around a few ways of
being arranged then back to the same way?
so see how they look together the way they are able to move for each
and then all of them together... looks like a machine that can work
right?
so see part of the machine moved by moving a pair.. like take a piece
and move it, it has only one move that can figure... but of all it
takes to move choose any first and move then it>s another way for them
together but able to be the same to start with.
see how that>s a machine? like a machine that works for real? because
it has to be that a real machine that works can get to the same place
a few ways.
so moving pairs are a way to show a working machine and work the way a
machine does right? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:40 am Post subject: Re: describing a machine |
|
|
On Jul 19, 6:36 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]Anyone familiar with the idea of trying to describe a machine the way
it works?
like where it>s being a machine working the way of having a loop with
the problem of being in
the middle and then to the outside as how the machine can move? so
like if you were to make it a machine
that does math the way it works it has machine parts that actually
move like the way the calculation is done?
so it moves like if this were to try and move as a real machine:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
if (i == 3) next;
};
so as a real machine though, that works the way that would have to as
a machine? a machine that can>t be anything really working like gears
because of how to be in the middle of the loop is to go outside but
sometimes not is a problem the way something has to move.
so if that>s to look like a real machine, it>s not a machine that
turns around and around mechanically though, because in the middle is
back to the beginning. but sometimes through and back around. But it
actually has to move like a real machine though.
I think I know a way there is to describe a machine that works this
way...
say on a checkers board you have checker pieces, and say each checker
piece is paired with another.
now all checker pieces are pairs.
the way said, try to make one piece able to move... but you have to
move the other it>s a pair with at the same time.
the board is full, there>s no free spaces to move to.
so to make a piece move with it>s paired piece, find where it can go
where there>s another pair that can move, that pair can move where
another pair can move, and so on... where the last pair to move goes
where the first pair left.
each time you move a pair, they are not the same pair anymore once
they>ve moved, each of the pair is now a pair with the piece that
left
where they went to make a new pair of them. this is key in figuring
out the only way it can work so a piece can move at all.
so knowing no first move you can make because there isn>t any
specific
move to know, find the pair to be able to move the way where they
move
to another pair where each of the pair is now another pair with the
one they move to, they move to a pair that>s together. now first pair
to move to another pair, is now not the same pair, but each a pair
with each of the other pair.
so move and do that, but at the same time when you get a piece of the
first pair where it goes and the other pair moved, as a new pair now
it can>t stay there because it has to move again because of how at
the
same time something is making the other of the pair move. right?
maybe
that part is hard to see. It>s the only way to figure it can move in
any way at all.
so it>s like the last move has to be known before the first move can
be made, because the first move that can be made is where something
can move next, but what can move next is what carries on to the last
move that can move where the first pair moved from. it>s a recursive
type of problem to figure out how to move a pair.
where a pair can move is where it goes to another pair that at the
same time is moving away making an occupancy, but when you get there
and you>re a new pair with the piece that moves from where you get
to,
it>s not to think staying can work because now something needs the
pair you are now to move.
it>s like so where you can never have it so you stop moving until all
the move is complete. but nowhere in the middle, or at first or last,
can you know how to make it work to move because the beginning is
like
knowing the end of how to move.
what>s interesting though is how pairs that figure themselves to be
able to move are not all the pairs but some, but that some other
pairs
that figure out a way to move are the same pairs as others that
figure
out another way.
and each time a pair makes a move it>s all the way to where the place
they leave has something come, but that had to be before you can move
in the first place in idea of the problem it is because that>s where
something can move to finally get around to the last move where you
leave, but leave where you can because you find what comes where you
leave at first. each time a pair is moved depending on how moving
pairs are said together is to reorganize how pairs are together, but
to keep moving the same pairs is to find the same place they were in
to begin with but alot of other ways too depending on which of the
pairs together you try to move, if you say the pairs together are the
pairs that given one pair are the ones that move at the same time
too.
isn>t it fair to call how they behave any machine?
there>s a few things you can say like given how they>re arranged pick
a few pairs for how they>re organized and see how every way you can
move them makes a few more pairs reorganized for how you move them?
it>s like pairs can setup in any way where for any way they are
organized is for any way other pairs are organized.
it>s like saying for every combination of a number, there>s another
combination but not linear association.
so don>t they describe any machine there can be ? like don>t they
describe working with a behavior that can be how any possible machine
works?
you can see how it looks like a machine when you take a pair and
figure how it can be moved, like say one moves, but it goes where
something else moves, and it moves where something else moves, but
then something moves to where the first one left. so say just one of
these that work around to move, but then say all that do. say all
together like the ones that move around in a way but the others that
move around in a way, you can see importantly enough for how it>s a
machine that they use the same pairs starting from somewhere else to
move as how you can move somewhere else.
isn>t that any machine there can be? I mean like a functional machine
to work like gears but not like gears where you have to be in the
middle of it working to be on the outside then the otherside again.
Like if you thought of code working as a real machine doing what a
'for loop' does, it has to be a machine that is in the middle of the
'for loop' to be to the beginning again, but then again through it
but
not to the beginning but through the end.
But as a machine that actually moves the way this would have to?
Don>t moving pairs represent any machine there can be?
See how moving pairs rearrange each time? but the way others do will
rearrange another way if they use the same pairs? but see how to
rearrange those ones and the other ones again make difference of how?
See moving pairs that move together as part of the machine where for a
condition one way is for a condition another way like they say
together a condition that matters together. Like if part of the
machine is one way then another part of the machine is another way,
together matters like to change one part is to change the other part.
But then pairs that move together another way are another part like
they use the same pairs, because it>s a part of the machine together
with another part. But see how they>re eachother? like when one part
together moves, other part together has to move another way now?
See them though the way you put together pairs that move with others
that can move the way they can move, like one moves the other to move
the other. but then others that do that do that to another that works
it>s own way. see it though the way it>s a machine that can work like
a machine can for what it is to work that way, because it>s to see
what a loop has to be for example.
I find something special about how if you move a pair and look at it
as a machine again, there>s something to notice.
[/quote]
so see the idea of moving pairs as a machine though? the way you can
say this though with how they are setup?
if i pick one pair to move, the way it works to be able to move is to
move others... so depending on how it>s setup though. so setup some
ways is to say a few move is a few others that move.... but see next
move be different for the others again , for them to be another way.
so isn>t it like a few moving pairs say to a few other moving pairs
which gives any combination for any combination... like say a few
pairs matter to say a number and a few others matter to say another
number... then they can say any number is for any number. so that can
be what happens any way depending,... but see how that>s saying a
machine? like the way the pairs are now are showing machine
condition. because to move one is to change machine condition if you
move again it>s different like with machine condition to be different
again.
so they say any machine there can be if the rule stays true that they
can always say for any way is for another way, and carrying on...
that>s always induction, and any induction depending on how they
setup.
so see how any machine... see how if you look at one pair and it>s way
to move, like say it moves to another piece, but the other piece moves
to another piece, but then show how every way that works out to be
with each pair, that it>s all one together like say for each pair that
works to move, and with the other>s that work to move, what shows it
it>s together like how a pair moves but the other pairs say to start
with to move are the same as the first to move anyways but another
arrangement of them, but then others that do using some of the same
pairs but not all, but maybe none at all? show how they overlap like
they cut across eachother the way they work.
see how it looks like a machine even? if you find a machine to be in
the middle though but back to the beginning, where it has many places
in the middle back to the beginning? see how it>s a whole machine like
to start it moving around and to get to the ending is back to the
beginning? see how it>s a machine that moves the way like software
code function?
see how each pair you find to move is part of how it>s a machine? see
how it>s a connected condition? see how if you say each piece is part
of the machine, then the other piece too the way they say each the way
the other is? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:57 am Post subject: Re: describing a machine |
|
|
On Jul 19, 9:27 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]On Jul 19, 9:01 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 19, 6:36 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone familiar with the idea of trying to describe a machine the way
it works?
like where it>s being a machine working the way of having a loop with
the problem of being in
the middle and then to the outside as how the machine can move? so
like if you were to make it a machine
that does math the way it works it has machine parts that actually
move like the way the calculation is done?
so it moves like if this were to try and move as a real machine:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
if (i == 3) next;
};
so as a real machine though, that works the way that would have to as
a machine? a machine that can>t be anything really working like gears
because of how to be in the middle of the loop is to go outside but
sometimes not is a problem the way something has to move.
so if that>s to look like a real machine, it>s not a machine that
turns around and around mechanically though, because in the middle is
back to the beginning. but sometimes through and back around. But it
actually has to move like a real machine though.
I think I know a way there is to describe a machine that works this
way...
say on a checkers board you have checker pieces, and say each checker
piece is paired with another.
now all checker pieces are pairs.
the way said, try to make one piece able to move... but you have to
move the other it>s a pair with at the same time.
the board is full, there>s no free spaces to move to.
so to make a piece move with it>s paired piece, find where it can go
where there>s another pair that can move, that pair can move where
another pair can move, and so on... where the last pair to move goes
where the first pair left.
each time you move a pair, they are not the same pair anymore once
they>ve moved, each of the pair is now a pair with the piece that
left
where they went to make a new pair of them. this is key in figuring
out the only way it can work so a piece can move at all.
so knowing no first move you can make because there isn>t any
specific
move to know, find the pair to be able to move the way where they
move
to another pair where each of the pair is now another pair with the
one they move to, they move to a pair that>s together. now first pair
to move to another pair, is now not the same pair, but each a pair
with each of the other pair.
so move and do that, but at the same time when you get a piece of the
first pair where it goes and the other pair moved, as a new pair now
it can>t stay there because it has to move again because of how at
the
same time something is making the other of the pair move. right?
maybe
that part is hard to see. It>s the only way to figure it can move in
any way at all.
so it>s like the last move has to be known before the first move can
be made, because the first move that can be made is where something
can move next, but what can move next is what carries on to the last
move that can move where the first pair moved from. it>s a recursive
type of problem to figure out how to move a pair.
where a pair can move is where it goes to another pair that at the
same time is moving away making an occupancy, but when you get there
and you>re a new pair with the piece that moves from where you get
to,
it>s not to think staying can work because now something needs the
pair you are now to move.
it>s like so where you can never have it so you stop moving until all
the move is complete. but nowhere in the middle, or at first or last,
can you know how to make it work to move because the beginning is
like
knowing the end of how to move.
what>s interesting though is how pairs that figure themselves to be
able to move are not all the pairs but some, but that some other
pairs
that figure out a way to move are the same pairs as others that
figure
out another way.
and each time a pair makes a move it>s all the way to where the place
they leave has something come, but that had to be before you can move
in the first place in idea of the problem it is because that>s where
something can move to finally get around to the last move where you
leave, but leave where you can because you find what comes where you
leave at first. each time a pair is moved depending on how moving
pairs are said together is to reorganize how pairs are together, but
to keep moving the same pairs is to find the same place they were in
to begin with but alot of other ways too depending on which of the
pairs together you try to move, if you say the pairs together are the
pairs that given one pair are the ones that move at the same time
too.
isn>t it fair to call how they behave any machine?
there>s a few things you can say like given how they>re arranged pick
a few pairs for how they>re organized and see how every way you can
move them makes a few more pairs reorganized for how you move them?
it>s like pairs can setup in any way where for any way they are
organized is for any way other pairs are organized.
it>s like saying for every combination of a number, there>s another
combination but not linear association.
so don>t they describe any machine there can be ? like don>t they
describe working with a behavior that can be how any possible machine
works?
you can see how it looks like a machine when you take a pair and
figure how it can be moved, like say one moves, but it goes where
something else moves, and it moves where something else moves, but
then something moves to where the first one left. so say just one of
these that work around to move, but then say all that do. say all
together like the ones that move around in a way but the others that
move around in a way, you can see importantly enough for how it>s a
machine that they use the same pairs starting from somewhere else to
move as how you can move somewhere else.
isn>t that any machine there can be? I mean like a functional machine
to work like gears but not like gears where you have to be in the
middle of it working to be on the outside then the otherside again.
Like if you thought of code working as a real machine doing what a
'for loop' does, it has to be a machine that is in the middle of the
'for loop' to be to the beginning again, but then again through it
but
not to the beginning but through the end.
But as a machine that actually moves the way this would have to?
Don>t moving pairs represent any machine there can be?
See how moving pairs rearrange each time? but the way others do will
rearrange another way if they use the same pairs? but see how to
rearrange those ones and the other ones again make difference of how?
See moving pairs that move together as part of the machine where for a
condition one way is for a condition another way like they say
together a condition that matters together. Like if part of the
machine is one way then another part of the machine is another way,
together matters like to change one part is to change the other part.
But then pairs that move together another way are another part like
they use the same pairs, because it>s a part of the machine together
with another part. But see how they>re eachother? like when one part
together moves, other part together has to move another way now?
See them though the way you put together pairs that move with others
that can move the way they can move, like one moves the other to move
the other. but then others that do that do that to another that works
it>s own way. see it though the way it>s a machine that can work like
a machine can for what it is to work that way, because it>s to see
what a loop has to be for example.
I find something special about how if you move a pair and look at it
as a machine again, there>s something to notice.
see how logically a machine is what has a part that moves a way for
the next part to move a way and so on for the whole machine? different
than the idea of moving a machine step-by-step in direction of machine
progress? look at what happens to the whole machine when you find a
moving pair to move.
try seeing it as a machine though, the way a pair will move with the
others to be organized another way. when you think a machine has to
have two places that go to the same place, but a place that leaves two
ways depending.. it>s what a machine has to look like when something
jumps from the middle to the beginning of say a loop, but the
beginning works through to the end... it>s the pairs and how they move
around. but a loop is not like a circle in seeing pairs and how they
move, it shows pairs that would move from one to the next like jumping
around makes sense for a loop. you see how they do that but start
around again like a loop?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
like the way a part of the machine moves is for the way the next part
of the machine moves?
like if a part of the machine moves one way, the next part moves
another way....
it doesn>t work thinking this is step by step machine progress though
if you think a machine like in the middle of working, because it>s to
think in the middle of the machine at a part of the machine you can
move that one part and the next part of the machine moves like for
that part to move.. but not like next running step of the machine, but
like _part moved for part moved_.
see how a machine is like that no matter what? because if a part moves
the next part moves.. but what is part of a machine like a machine for
what has a loop in it?
see how moving pairs look the way you say for each of a pair it moves
the direction to another pair, and say those pairs move the direction
towards another pair. but then a pair that moves the direction of the
first pair to move. see how? see how it>s part of the machine to move
together? so that part moves all together, but another part moves
altogether if it were a machine another way, but with pairs setup that
already happened all across because now they work to all move
different. so just move a pair and see the others able to move but
another way.
so see.. see how this is a machine
make a checkerboard full of pieces, then say each piece is together
with another piece.
now all pieces are pairs right?
so figure out how one pair can move... there>s nowhere to move it
right? because nothing says for it to move any which way right? like
there>s no reason it should have any way to move at all. so it can be
figured out it can move.
find this out... if i move one piece of the pair, and I have to move
the other of the pair at the same time... find where it can move. both
have to go where another
pair is that can move.
find it moves to another pair as the only way. it goes there because
that>s the pair that can go somewhere else.
so make the first pair go there, and where it goes has a pair that can
leave to go somewhere else.
but go there as a pair and make the pair to move to another pair,
make each piece of the pair be paired with the piece that moves where
each piece can go.
so now they>re paired with the piece to leave where they can go, but
that piece is a pair already...
but not, because the pair of that piece had the other piece become
part of another pair.
so a pair is to move the way that it goes to another pair, to be a new
pair.
the pair it went to was the pair that can move at the same time,
because it goes where another pair can move at the same time, and
finally this continues until
it gets to another pair that can move at the same time to go back to
the beginning... they lock together as one way to move a piece.
each move is for a pair to be another pair... a pair to move is to go
where it makes a new pair with the pair where it goes, that>s the pair
moving away at the same time.
so it only works out one way on a checkers board... to move a piece
said to be with a pair. and how it works they can move depends on how
they are setup.
it takes trying many ways before one way is right, but you can>t see
which way is right because it>s like knowing how it finishes before it
starts.
so finally a piece gets to where you make a piece leave from where you
move first, and just became a pair with what made it leave to be at
the first spot on the checker board.
so see how when you set pairs up on a board, depending on how you set
them up, to say one piece to move is to have an answer that works out
to being all the pairs involved in moving rearranged? see how to do it
again rearranges them again? but then it goes around a few ways of
being arranged then back to the same way?
so see how they look together the way they are able to move for each
and then all of them together... looks like a machine that can work
right?
so see part of the machine moved by moving a pair.. like take a piece
and move it, it has only one move that can figure... but of all it
takes to move choose any first and move then it>s another way for them
together but able to be the same to start with.
see how that>s a machine? like a machine that works for real? because
it has to be that a real machine that works can get to the same place
a few ways.
so moving pairs are a way to show a working machine and work the way a
machine does right?
[/quote]
see what there is to notice if you call it a whole machine though and
you move any pair? see it as the same machine it was, but now what?
see what happens when you move any and see how it all fits together
again... |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:25 am Post subject: Re: describing a machine |
|
|
On Jul 19, 8:07 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]On Jul 19, 6:36 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone familiar with the idea of trying to describe a machine the way
it works?
like where it>s being a machine working the way of having a loop with
the problem of being in
the middle and then to the outside as how the machine can move? so
like if you were to make it a machine
that does math the way it works it has machine parts that actually
move like the way the calculation is done?
so it moves like if this were to try and move as a real machine:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
if (i == 3) next;
};
so as a real machine though, that works the way that would have to as
a machine? a machine that can>t be anything really working like gears
because of how to be in the middle of the loop is to go outside but
sometimes not is a problem the way something has to move.
so if that>s to look like a real machine, it>s not a machine that
turns around and around mechanically though, because in the middle is
back to the beginning. but sometimes through and back around. But it
actually has to move like a real machine though.
I think I know a way there is to describe a machine that works this
way...
say on a checkers board you have checker pieces, and say each checker
piece is paired with another.
now all checker pieces are pairs.
the way said, try to make one piece able to move... but you have to
move the other it>s a pair with at the same time.
the board is full, there>s no free spaces to move to.
so to make a piece move with it>s paired piece, find where it can go
where there>s another pair that can move, that pair can move where
another pair can move, and so on... where the last pair to move goes
where the first pair left.
each time you move a pair, they are not the same pair anymore once
they>ve moved, each of the pair is now a pair with the piece that
left
where they went to make a new pair of them. this is key in figuring
out the only way it can work so a piece can move at all.
so knowing no first move you can make because there isn>t any
specific
move to know, find the pair to be able to move the way where they
move
to another pair where each of the pair is now another pair with the
one they move to, they move to a pair that>s together. now first pair
to move to another pair, is now not the same pair, but each a pair
with each of the other pair.
so move and do that, but at the same time when you get a piece of the
first pair where it goes and the other pair moved, as a new pair now
it can>t stay there because it has to move again because of how at
the
same time something is making the other of the pair move. right?
maybe
that part is hard to see. It>s the only way to figure it can move in
any way at all.
so it>s like the last move has to be known before the first move can
be made, because the first move that can be made is where something
can move next, but what can move next is what carries on to the last
move that can move where the first pair moved from. it>s a recursive
type of problem to figure out how to move a pair.
where a pair can move is where it goes to another pair that at the
same time is moving away making an occupancy, but when you get there
and you>re a new pair with the piece that moves from where you get
to,
it>s not to think staying can work because now something needs the
pair you are now to move.
it>s like so where you can never have it so you stop moving until all
the move is complete. but nowhere in the middle, or at first or last,
can you know how to make it work to move because the beginning is
like
knowing the end of how to move.
what>s interesting though is how pairs that figure themselves to be
able to move are not all the pairs but some, but that some other
pairs
that figure out a way to move are the same pairs as others that
figure
out another way.
and each time a pair makes a move it>s all the way to where the place
they leave has something come, but that had to be before you can move
in the first place in idea of the problem it is because that>s where
something can move to finally get around to the last move where you
leave, but leave where you can because you find what comes where you
leave at first. each time a pair is moved depending on how moving
pairs are said together is to reorganize how pairs are together, but
to keep moving the same pairs is to find the same place they were in
to begin with but alot of other ways too depending on which of the
pairs together you try to move, if you say the pairs together are the
pairs that given one pair are the ones that move at the same time
too.
isn>t it fair to call how they behave any machine?
there>s a few things you can say like given how they>re arranged pick
a few pairs for how they>re organized and see how every way you can
move them makes a few more pairs reorganized for how you move them?
it>s like pairs can setup in any way where for any way they are
organized is for any way other pairs are organized.
it>s like saying for every combination of a number, there>s another
combination but not linear association.
so don>t they describe any machine there can be ? like don>t they
describe working with a behavior that can be how any possible machine
works?
you can see how it looks like a machine when you take a pair and
figure how it can be moved, like say one moves, but it goes where
something else moves, and it moves where something else moves, but
then something moves to where the first one left. so say just one of
these that work around to move, but then say all that do. say all
together like the ones that move around in a way but the others that
move around in a way, you can see importantly enough for how it>s a
machine that they use the same pairs starting from somewhere else to
move as how you can move somewhere else.
isn>t that any machine there can be? I mean like a functional machine
to work like gears but not like gears where you have to be in the
middle of it working to be on the outside then the otherside again.
Like if you thought of code working as a real machine doing what a
'for loop' does, it has to be a machine that is in the middle of the
'for loop' to be to the beginning again, but then again through it
but
not to the beginning but through the end.
But as a machine that actually moves the way this would have to?
Don>t moving pairs represent any machine there can be?
See how moving pairs rearrange each time? but the way others do will
rearrange another way if they use the same pairs? but see how to
rearrange those ones and the other ones again make difference of how?
See moving pairs that move together as part of the machine where for a
condition one way is for a condition another way like they say
together a condition that matters together. Like if part of the
machine is one way then another part of the machine is another way,
together matters like to change one part is to change the other part.
But then pairs that move together ano | |
