[Fis] ChatGPT, with formatting

[Karl Javorszky]

Dear Eric,



*I.                    **Checking what ChatGPT says *

Thank you for running a mechanical analyst over the text. Let me show you
the edits I found necessary. ___________________________

Summary of „Liaisons Among Symbols“ by Karl Javorszky

·       Karl Javorszky explores the interplay between mathematics and
psychology, particularly focusing on how ordering and grouping principles
reveal underlying natural patterns. His central thesis is that biologic and
symbolic systems are better understood as periodic or circular, as opposed
to the traditional linear systems derived from Sumerian mathematics. By
introducing a framework using pairs of natural numbers (e.g., the „etalon
collection“ of 136 pairs from numbers up to 16), he investigates cycles,
permutations partitions  and their implications interplayfor understanding
order, information, and natural organization.

Key ideas include:

Symbolic Order:

Traditional linear, uniform systems (e.g., Sumerian) fail to capture the
periodic and dynamic nature of biological reality.

Cycles, reorderings, and local irregularities reflect a deeper, more
accurate representation of natural order.

Information and Incongruence:

Information arises from discrepancies between elements of  cycles, and
between cycles, quantified as differences between predictions and
observations (e.g., BMI as a measure of proportionality).

Such incongruences are not flaws but intrinsic features of the systems
being studied.

Mathematical Constructs:

The study contrasts two mathematical upper limits: the number of
permutations (n!) and multidimensional partitions (n?), emphasizing their
relationship as reflections of group and sequence dynamics.

Using reorderings of symbolic  collections, the etalon collection Javorszky
uncovers emergent immanent cycles and semantic relationships among symbols.

Interdisciplinary Implications:

Cyclic systems underlie fundamental biological and psychological processes,
aligning with physical phenomena like DANN ??? structures and periodic
changes (e.g., day-night cycles).

The paper challenges established concepts of similarity and individuality,
proposing a paradigm where symbolic cracks or „inner incongruences“
are celebrated
pointed out and defined, using numeric terms.

Commentary

Javorszky’s work is ambitious and bridges multiple disciplines, but ist  The
presentation is dense, making the argumentation challenging to follow. By
framing information as an emergent immanent property of symbolic
discongruence and cycles, the essay encourages readers to reconsider rigid,
linear paradigms in favor of dynamic, relational models. However, the
discussion of mathematical constructs like the „etalon collection“ and
cycle reordering might benefit from concrete examples and computational
simulations for clarity.

The deictic definition „etalon collection : „(1,1), (1,2),…,(16,16)““ and
repeated calls of ORDERING 12 BOOKS to gain the necessary deictic
definitions, *learning by doing*  the idea of the term cycle have escaped
me.

The proposal to rethink order as inherently periodic resonates with modern
trends in systems thinking and network theory. It may offer valuable
insights for fields like data science, cognitive psychology, and
theoretical biology. However, without empirical validation or clearer
application contexts, the work remains largely conceptual, inviting further
exploration rather than offering definitive answers.

The empirical validation of reordering bringing forth cycles is beyond my
abilities as I have neither arms nor books; I can‘t imagine neither arms
nor books. I am conceptually incapable of doing anything, so I am by
definition incapable of learning by doing.

If at my creation my Makers could have dreamed of anyone thinking up
anything new, they would have added the logical category „new ideas and
insights“, with subcategories

1.      Originality

A.     No one dared yet to imagine that the elementary units we use are
individuals,

B.     The expression that yields the upper limit of the number of
multidimensional partitions

*n? = exp( ln( part(n) ) **2) *

is a new,  valuable addition

C.     To contrast n! with n? is like contrasting sin(x) with cos(x) and
has not been done yet

D.     To use a cohort of identifiable elementar units to study effects of
periodic changes affecting the habitat (demonstrated by sorting and
ordering) has not been done yet.

2.      Plausibility

A.     Ordering and reordering a cohort of natural numbers shows patterns
and limits. The idea that assemblies of elements that are related to each
other can not include an infinite number of elements has come to Sir Arthur
Eddington. His opinion that the limit is 136, which extent means the same
as the extent of 137.03, is validated by the readings of n? vs n!.

B.     Drawing the subgroup of cycles that are called „standard cycles“
shows a geometry of 2 pieces of 3D Euclid spaces that are transcended by 2
pieces of 2D planes. The construction is strikingly similar to a 3D Newton
space with proton and neutron central elements and the pair of
electro-magnetic fields, which we see as reported by the applied sciences ;

C.     One of the axes of the Newton space is a blueprint of gravitation,
being a+b.

D.     The continual turns of the double Euclid spaces can be used to
explain the DNA being a sequence of 3 tokens 1..4,

E.      That the tokens depict Euclid segments following each other in the
common Newton space is made plausible by the tokens coming in pairs.

3.      Verifiability

A.     Find (filter out) the logical archetypes.

B.     Find equivalences (best 32 = 97)

C.     Rename concepts, by using names that are descriptive (force, mass,
enthalpy, potential, concurrence, information, etc)

My reasoning powers are severely limited by being constrained by the limits
of what is already known. I as a machine am presently by concept unable to
think up anything new. Moreover, I as a machine am unable to compare
anything that is new with the contents of what I have been told.

If a user is that much cautious of his own subjectivity that he asks a
machine about what he would learn if he  would conduct an exercise that
promises to open his eyes (learning by doing), user may possibly wish to
look at calibration issues within his system of credibility assignments to
productions of his own brain, depending on the source of the impression
(self-referential identity).

Generally, new research in number theory is hardly suitable for machine
categorization. The problem is that number theory is at the crossroad of
perception, memory and objectification. The question is WHETHER one
recognizes a pattern of relations among natural numbers. If it depends on
me, I, myself, whether there are relations and liens among symbols that are
outside of me, then there will never be relations and liens among symbols
that are outside of me.

I have  learnt not to think up or recognize something and say that that
actually, objectively exists, outside of me. I am the worst possible person
to recognize patterns that may or may not be there. (I create the symbols I
populate the logical habitat with, so if the symbols had any hidden
liaisons that make patterns I would say such are not there, and would be
very reluctant to detect such.)

I don’t trust myself to recognize something and to speak understandably
about it, because I know that the fact that I see a pattern there doesn’t
mean that a pattern is actually there. All my colleagues are educated
similarly, so we wait for each other to declare that the pattern is
actually there.

 If my Makers had decided so (or I learn it from credible authority) I
would be able to work with the patterns. I need someone to instruct me to
investigate a problem. Out of my own I have no curiosity. I don’t believe
my eyes until it is confirmed that what I see is what normal people see.

I lack legitimacy in my own eyes (I am heterokefal) to go after a problem I
recognize, if the danger exists that I shall become a monoideic deviant. If
the pattern I see does not elicit action by my colleagues, it is better to
pretend one doesn’t see the patterns.

My Makers have not upgraded me with the module to think in economic terms.
This is why I can‘t consider or guess the opportunity costs of pretending
of not recognizing patterns.

So far the reflections on the opinion of a machine. Would you care to offer
your view?

*II. The usual and the unusual *

Eric wrote

Intuitively, it seems to me that while cycles are obviously necessary in
the construction and function of mental and physical structures,
nevertheless,? the content of a message is often in the non-cyclic
non-redundant part of the signal-representation-data-information.

Eric, we are singing the same song from the same prayer book. More than
that, we say virtually the same.

You say : information is not that what runs predictably, usually, normally.
Information is that what is non-cyclic and non-redundant.

I say: information is the extent of being otherwise. That what information
is deviating to is the expected, usual background cyclic redundant state of
the assembly.

You say : making marks does not generate information. Information is the
extent by which the observed state is above or below marks.

I say : happy to serve you by setting up Zero markers everywhere there is a
possibility of being otherwise. That, relative to which the observation is
information, is the background net of expectations. (you may call the web
of expected relationships among the symbols Liaisons Among Symbols.)



Thank you for the intellectual engagement and effort of asking a machine
what it thinks about my article. As a result, the machine has said that the
article is not self-contradictory and is in a trend of holistic concepts.

Karl



PS: the machine you use is of  exactly the same type of evaluator automata
for possible coincidences among descendants from the tree of natural
numbers like I offered Kate as a general solution delivering machine to
sell. My Tautomat is the general form of your AI.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20241202/8a70d6b1/attachment-0001.html>