Re: [stack] Comments on Trade-Offs in Systems of Notation/Programming Languages

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William Tanksley, Jr" <[email protected]>
> 
> > almost instantly). (Unfortunately, Spencer-Brown's book on his
> > calculus is marred by bad philosophizing and by having most of the
> > book written in a compact but cryptic style, so it takes a while to
> > "get" what he's done and why it's of value, but there are
> > more-accessible introductions now available online.)
> 
> Where would you recommend going for an intro? Stevan's page on the
> subject was interesting (although "compact but cryptic"), but I want
> more. The PDF you linked to seems like a decent conceptual start, but
> lacks depth and application (as far as I could see).

i realize that this is somewhat off-topic, but ...

nothing beats reading LoF in the original.  as chris says, it's
a quirky, weird, unique book, and just manages to avoid total
kookery by a cat's whisker.  (btw, spencer-brown's own publishing
company was called "cat books", so there's another glancing 
connection to this list.)  spencer-brown's footnotes are highly
entertaining, and the julian press edition of the book (the first
american edition) is vastly preferable to the ugly dutton paperback
version.  you should be able to pick up a decent copy in dustjacket
at abebooks for under $50.

and don't overlook the "companion" to LoF:  _only two can play
this game_, with spencer-brown writing under his pseudonym james
keys.  the footnotes are wonderful, and quite mad.

otherwise, take a look at how lou kauffman uses LoF notation to
explain the computer-generated proof of the robbins problem:

http://www2.math.uic.edu/~kauffman/Robbins.htm

(and see his journal here:

http://www.cybsoc.org/lkonthevoid.htm)


> 
> > bracketed code in this way in the 1970's but almost COMPLETELY missed
> > most of the importance of it, because I was still thinking of the
> > language I was designing as a variant of Forth with a stricter
> > adherence to an "RPN" style (no explicit loops, etc.).
> 
> I made a similar error in my understanding of Forth as well (although
> mine wasn't as creative); it's easy to do when you think of Forth as
> "postfix" rather than dataflow RPN.
> 
> >        http://www.boundarymath.org/papers/BLogic-intro.pdf
> 
> Noted, skimmed, and saved.
> 
> > (e.g., the set-inclusion paradoxes and the liar's paradox, etc.). My
> > own more-philosophical way of dealing with the paradoxes (along with
> 
> We may have to take this particular part offline, unless you've got a
> webpage... But I want to hear more. Imaginary truth values... Very
> interesting.

in an appendix to LoF, spencer-brown describes a circuit he invented
(and patented) which uses so-called imaginary boolean values.  i think
the application was british rail, which may partly explain the downfall
of that venerable institution.

> 
> -Billy
>