Indeed. What I do is think of technical glossaries and where the words will fit in each field. But sometimes, figuring out “what field” are we in here is first and sometimes hardest.

Indeed. What I do is think of technical glossaries and where the words will fit in each field. But sometimes, figuring out “what field” are we in here is first and sometimes hardest.

Etymology:
describe = down + write. Write down.
explain = out + flatten. flatten out.
predict = before + say. Say before.

How this helps? I dunno. I like etymology.

My preferences in this:
I prefer describing. I write down. I can’t always explain. I certainly can’t always predict.

For me, explaining is answering: WHY. I don’t always know why.
Describing is: WHAT. I can talk about parts and wholes and pieces and relationships. So, I can do a lot of WHAT without knowing WHY.

To predict? Consulting oracles? That’s taking the past and folding it over the present and calling it “Future”. It’s practical but is it correct? Nah. It’s just nice when it works and in some fields it works more often and more reliably than in others, assuming engineering specifications are met and you use plenty of oil to keep parts moving.

===

I like the notion of the ing-ing. But I also think all things are ultimately equivalent in some fashion so that allows me to use any form of communication, adding extra explaining when I need to: because in that case, I do know the “why”.

I love the notion but nouns are so darn practical. I don’t think I could abandon objects entirely But I’ll gladly point out that Love is a verb and that the Law of Excluded Middle is pragmatic but not a rule of the universe.

====

You’re right — and it’s not easy. It’s not that kids today understand how quaternions work, but that they use them when programming in unity, just as I used 2d and 3d coordinate systems in BASIC even before I was in Pre-Algebra. I didn’t know the math behind it, just how to use the commands.

Different representations. Computing I understand. Mathematics confuses me still. Logic confuses me. It’s all the symbols.

A kid playing minecraft doesn’t have to understand coordinate systems to create a house but it helps. That’s all I mean.

A lot of game programming is drag-and-drop. So a kid writing a game in Unity couldn’t explain quaternions — I don’t think I could explain quaternions. I know I can’t. But they – and someone like me – can plug in numbers, trial and error, have it do what I want.

So maybe that’s the profiteers vs the engineers.

=====

I think I could’ve explained quaternions about 5-6 years ago. I was really into coordinate things.

Yeah, “use it or lose it”, like you say. This stuff’s complicated if you don’t use it everyday.

===

It shows the genius though that these compact formulas can be unrolled, turned into input boxes and enacted upon pseudo-objects calculated within a graphics card to create an imaginary universe-in-a-box — and they the creator of this formula and others did it all in their heads, on paper, puzzling and reasoning things out.

=====

 

grumble. My interests keep “happening” to accidentally fall in anniversaries of past times I was interested in similar things.
 
I thought of my Color Computer before. BASIC. Quaternions. Just within the past hours. Now I search for quaternion posts I made on FB and this came up. Oh well. I’m still avoiding Quaternions. I understand it, forget it, go back to it, avoid it…
====

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


nine + = 13

Leave a Reply