4 ms·
Short answer: A graph. All data structures are simplified graphs. The state of the physical universe is a massive graph in which interconnected objects are th
by gmt2027 15y ago
Short answer: A graph.
All data structures are simplified graphs.
The state of the physical universe is a massive graph in which interconnected objects are themselves massive assemblies of graphs of atoms and the atoms are graphs of subatomic particles. It's graphs all the way down. The properties of all systems - physical, chemical, economic, biological - emerge from the interactions between simple connected elements.
My opinion is that all knowledge is representable as a connected graph. The disconnect between our computers and our minds arises from the fact that brains are categorically not numerical machines but graph processing and pattern recognition engines. Neural networks are the underlying hardware and, with the typical elegance of nature, these are also graphs.
It should be possible to build a graph based language. The basic "Elements" [SICP] are easy to realise:
1. Primitive Expressions are graph nodes. They have identity and not much else.
2. Means of combination. Graphs can be added, subtracted etc.
3. Abstraction. A graph can be abstracted into a single node. We have no problem looking at a complex assembly of components as a single entity.
Since Google and Facebook are two massive platforms whose value arise from direct interaction with planet-scale graphs with billions of nodes, would these platforms be easier to build if our computers were more graph oriented? I would like to believe so.
- espeed 15y agoIt should be possible to build a graph based language. Gremlin is a graph-based language (http://gremlin.tinkerpop.com/ http://gremlin.tinkerpop.com/).
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- Aarvay 15y agoExplanation is fair enough. Moreover, it is comfortable to model it as a graph.
- shasta 15y agoAnd a graph is a relation, and a relation is a function, etc. Just because you can model everything with graphs doesn't make them special. You can model everything with lots of things.
- gmt2027 15y agoI believe we are considering an abstract data structure here.
- Dn_Ab 15y agoA correction. A relation is not a function but a function is a relation. A function is a restriction of a relation such that for each thing_a in A and thing_b in B, for a pairing of (thing_a's,thing_b's) by some relation f,each thing_a can only be paired with one thing_b in B.
- Cushman 15y agoHow do you account for the fundamentally non-deterministic nature of the universe?
- akg0 15y agoFirst, non-determinism would have to be demonstrated.
- jQueryIsAwesome 15y agoThe problem is, all the things we don't understand could be labed as non-determined (i.e: quantum particles moving "randomly")
- Jach 15y agoThey only appear non-determined when you think of them as particles or waves. They're neither.
- akg0 15y agoI don't see how. "Not predictable given what I've observed so far" is a long way from "not predictable".
- jQueryIsAwesome 15y agoWierd... because i think those are the same.
- gmt2027 15y agoActually representing the entire state of the universe sounds rather ambitious. However, the very action of 'imaging' will force the entire system into a consistent state by quantum collapse. The universe will be represented but changed, the original multitude of super-imposed states will be lost. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle implies that some things are just unknowable. However, only the most basic constituents of physical reality demonstrate noticeable quantum behaviour. The macroscopic universe is fairly deterministic. You don't need to jump in front of a moving bus to learn that Newtonian mechanics applies 100% of the time in a very deterministic way.