[FRIAM] Movement vs. Behavior, and what's in the Black Box

[uǝlƃ ☣]

Yes, you're right. Scale is merely one parameter by which the domain can be shifted. The only problem is that "domain" is a pretty abstract concept. So choosing a concrete example (like scale) helps move the discussion along without getting too caught up in the generalization. This bears directly on the hedging Nick shows with "internal states" and I suspect lingers with the word "hidden". Why some thing/process/state/behavior is hidden shouldn't get in the way of recognizing that it's hidden. It can be hidden by the perspective (I can't see that far) or by definition ("There are many like it, but this one is mine.") or standard control theory unreachability or the complexity of the gen-phen map or whatever. And too much talk of the abstraction (domain) allows the conversation to blossom in too many ambiguous directions. But once the particular examples are well-handled, the abstraction is necessary in order to make the full point (a kind of holographic principle).

On 5/12/20 9:58 AM, Jon Zingale wrote:
> but where Glen refers
> to /scale/ I would speak of /domain of definition/. That a shift in
> domain happens to be size, rather than some other contextual
> specification, may not be what we want. If this isn't the case
> Glen, please let me know.


-- 
☣ uǝlƃ