Phil Henshaw wrote: > In nature one can often see how it has to do with > physical parts of systems participating in many independent systems at > once. That seems harder for me to imagine for logical systems. Can it > be done somehow? > > If you take a typical program and look at it, it's just a string of characters: opcodes and operands. However, some of these substrings represent functions that get called from different sorts of callers on behalf of a range of higher-level purposes (e.g. a call to allocate memory or a thread of execution). > my question > was simply whether there's a way to design a set of rules that has only > to do with itself, but relies for it's operation on rules outside it's > definitions, beyond it's set of self-references? With a Unix shared library, for example, even many of the physical memory parts are shared across independent systems. Self-referential logic is contained in an assembly, exposing some symbols, and then different client programs (rules outside it's definition) drive it via these symbols -- a.k.a user applications.
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
