A central place for general online coding stuff I do. My aim is to centralize all of my coding and general ongoing projects here.
Projects:
(the art of question formulation, even in an early stage!)
1a. Imagine you have two languages L1 and L2 (for example, Turkish and English). It generally seems that in spite of differences in grammatical structures, they can (often) express the exact same thing. Does this imply the existence of a language which expresses the abstract meaning of any given sentence in Turkish or English, which they could both be translated into (, which they have equivalent meaning in)? If so, why? If not, why not?
1b. (more abstractly) Could it be the case that for any two "languages" (defined in some suitable mathematical way) they can always imply some underlying structure that represents "what they have in common"? You can add in a third language (such as Fijian), and update the language of their "universal semantics". In the extreme / limit case, what two languages may have in common is the empty set, for example. (This needs better mathematical formulation).
- A History of Universal Semantics (IEML, Leibniz, formal logic, cognitive linguistics, many constructed languages, etc.):
- what are the philosophical problems in it?
- i traced my thinking mainly to this (winsome and welcome) question: it almost seems you can trace the essential structure of language to phenomenology: but even there, you do not get a logically clean conclusion, because the structure of consciousness is not prior to the conditions on physical reality (for example, color: we can explain the logic of colors with physics...) formulate this question better: where does this problem lead us? can we sort of co-define phenomenology AND physics as simultaneously primary, co-arising? something better to say than this...
-
Study those DONE principles from No Boilerplate on YouTube.
-
Study information theory.
-
Formulate the question of "universal construction" more clearly (as above!). ... try beginning by learning the formal definitions of, for example, the Von Neumann universe, the Godel universe, the Grothendieck universe, and Quine foundations, and so on. Furthermore: is there any way to broach the question of "how many different foundations to mathematics are there? / universes"? A universal constructor would have to be defined on that, if at all possible.
-
Study theoretical computer science, especially Turing machines and the Church-Turing thesis.
-
Make a mindmap for your life, and chip away at it today. You can make progress on any problem you have, if you have the energy to.
Stupid to-do:
- clean up github (from the command line)
- consider making your own (command line?) mind-mapping software (to be used for your own tasks, intents, purposes, etc.)