How about something like this (similar to Tracy's idea but done in 2-D):
1. Initial 'array + array'
(1)(2) + (5)(6)
(3)(4) (7)(8)
2. Expand the arrays
(1) (2) (5) (6)
+
(3) (4) (7) (8)
3. Split the '+' into four and move them
(1)+ (2)+ (5) (6)
(3)+ (4)+ (7) (8)
4. Move the RHS
(1)+(5) (2)+(6)
(3)+(7) (4)+(8)
4. Add the '='
(1)+(5) (2)+(6)
=
(3)+(7) (4)+(8)
5. Display the result
(1)+(5) (2)+(6) (6) (8)
=
(3)+(7) (4)+(8) (10) (12)
where the () are circles, coloured say red for the LHS, Blue for the RHS,
green for the result.
If you have space, you could keep a copy of step 1 on screen to remind the
viewer what's being animated, and do Step 2 could by duplicating it and
moving/expanding the duplicate.
bob therriault wrote:
> Very cool Tracy,
>
> I like it (especially the collision). The question that remains is whether I
> can do it. I sense I will need to follow Oleg's suggestion of using Blender,
> but I'll give it a try in Keynote first.
>
> Cheers, bob
>
> On -Feb23-2010, at -Feb23-20109:56 AM, Tracy Harms wrote:
>
>> An idea I like is to take the diagram into a third axis, along these lines:
>>
>> First: Reposition the two arrays so that they're loosly stacked (shifting to
>> a 3-d perspective drawing in that animation.
>>
>> Then, take the addition operator duplicate into (*/ @ $) copies that spread
>> from the original into a matrix the same size as the nouns. This verb matrix
>> would be produced between the two noun layers described above. (They were
>> described as "loosly" stacked so that there is natural room for this third
>> layer to be drawn.)
>>
>> The diagramming of the verb as existing for each atom of each array seems to
>> me a natural visual representation of the rank-zero relationship. (Having a
>> visual representation of rank relationships does not require that they be
>> explained when first shown, yet will provide a visual mnemonic for eventual
>> discussion.)
>>
>> Resolution to the result might be shown by drawing the results in a new
>> (fourth) parallel panel. Or the animation could show a convergence of the
>> two noun panels onto the infixed verb panel, with all of them replaced by
>> the result noun at collision. (The latter appeals to me.)
>>
>> This technique would allow the addition to be shown as conceptually
>> parallel, avoiding inaccurate implications of sequencing. It would also take
>> advantage of the multi-axial thinking that J involves.
>>
>> --
>> Tracy
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:59 AM, bob therriault
>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Tracy,
>>>
>>> I wrestled with this as well. The options I explored were:
>>>
>>> 1) ...
>>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
