İhtimâl Kuramının Sözde “Üçüncü Aksiyomu” Foldur — Dr. Işık Barış Fidaner

YERSİZ ŞEYLER

14 Mart 2017, EN

1. Bir mümkün neticenin hem gerçellenmesine hem de gerçellenmemesine katkı yapan faktörler vardır.

Bir zarın atılmasında altı sayısının gelmesinin hem gerçellenmesine hem de gerçellenmemesine katkı yapan faktörlerden bazıları:

i) Gerçel atma işi. Atmanın kendisi olmadan altı sayısı ne gelebilir ne de gelmeyebilir.

ii) Attıktan sonra geçen süre. Attıktan sonra yeterli zaman geçmeden altı sayısı ne gelebilir ne de gelmeyebilir.

iii) Görüşün engellenmemesi. Atılan zarı netlikle görebilen bir gözlemci olmadan altı sayısı ne gelebilir ne de gelmeyebilir.

iv) Güvenilir bir gözlemci. Güvenebileceğimiz en azından bir gözlemci olmadan altı sayısı ne gelebilir ne de gelmeyebilir.

v) Düz bir zemin. Düz bir zemin olmadan altı sayısı ne gelebilir ne de gelmeyebilir.

vi) Dünya üzerinde yerçekimi. Dünya üzerinde yerçekimi olmadan altı sayısı ne gelebilir ne de gelmeyebilir.

vii) Sayılar için simgeleri de içeren ortak bir dil. Ortak bir dilde kaydını düşme yetisi olmadan…

View original post 179 more words

The so-called “Third Axiom of Probability” is false — Dr. Işık Barış Fidaner

1. There are factors that contribute both to the actualization & non-actualization of a possible outcome.

For the throw of a die, here are some of the factors that contribute both to the actualization and non-actualization of the number six turning up:

i) The actual throw. Without the throw itself, the number six may neither turn up nor non-turn up.

ii) The time passing after the throw. Without sufficient time passing after the throw, the number six may neither turn up nor non-turn up.

iii) The non-occlusion of view. Without a clear view of the die for an observer, the number six may neither turn up nor non-turn up.

iv) A trustworthy observer. Without at least one trustworthy observer (oneself or another) the number six may neither turn up nor non-turn up.

v) A flat ground. Without a flat ground, the number six may neither turn up nor non-turn up.

vi) Gravity on the Earth. Without the gravity on the Earth, the number six may neither turn up nor non-turn up.

vii) A common language that includes symbols for numbers. Without the ability to register it via a common language, the number six may neither turn up nor non-turn up.

I’ll call these factors, shared factors of a possible outcome.

2. To indicate such factors, there must be some common terms between the summation that computes the probability of the possible outcome being actualized, and the summation that computes the probability of the same possible outcome not being actualized.

The shared factors of a possible outcome are vital for that outcome and other outcomes related to it: The initial impulse, the time passing, the visibility, the trust, the ground, the gravity and the symbols to express the outcome. Any algorithm that computes outcomes related to that possible outcome must take these factors into account.

The actualization and non-actualization of the possible outcome must be articulated in a way to include the shared factors that occur on both sides of the possible outcome.

3. The set of terms that signal the actualization of a possibility cannot be mutually disjoint with the set of terms that signal the non-actualization of the same possibility.

If the terms that express the actualization and the non-actualization of an outcome satisfied mutual exclusivity, if any one of the terms that articulate an outcome appeared only on one side of the possibility in question, they would simply amount to a failure in articulation that ignores the vital shared factors that determine the outcome.

4. The so-called “Third Law of Probability” or “Third Axiom of Probability” is false.

Dr. Işık Barış Fidaner

 

Logarithmic greetings to my visitor numbers

YERSİZ ŞEYLER

selamlar

Sweden took in large numbers and had problems.

I don’t take in large numbers and I don’t have problems.

IBF

Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible. You look at what’s happening in Brussels. You look at what’s happening all over the world. Take a look at Nice. Take a look at Paris. — Donald Trump

View original post

Why Thursday? It’s the monomyth! #FolkloreThursday — Dr. Işık Barış Fidaner

Greetings to #FolkloreThursday!

In a news story about #FolkloreThursday last year, David Barnett raises the question: Why Thursday? [■]

He quotes Dee Dee Chainey’s reference to Norwegian traditions, which is presumably Thor’s day. Thor is a local explanation that I like and accept [*] but let me also give a further global answer to this same question.

Continue reading “Why Thursday? It’s the monomyth! #FolkloreThursday — Dr. Işık Barış Fidaner”

Introduction to Sociotechnical Cognition — compilation

Sociotechnic Activities at Planet Trappist-1e

I haven’t written the book. It’s just the seed.

cyoa-trappist1e

You are being sent to the human colony in TRAPPIST-1e to serve as a “sociotechical worker” which primarily involves the constant adjustment of the so-called action-signifiers that are being deployed in the space station for its variety of tasks.

(…)

There is a terrestrial legend, a myth about a life form, a neural leech that proliferates on TRAPPIST-1E. Earth folks sometimes associate inexplicable phenomena with this thing they call …?…

But your colleagues on the planet confidently deny its existence. There are adverse life forms but they are nothing like that, and the incidents on the Earth show neither correlation nor regularity, so it’s just that, a myth.

“The Earth folks have always been a bit too …?… anyways,” the professor explains. “Let’s go to the space farmer’s market and I’ll show you the actual life forms we have here.”

(Facebook)

What is a scientist? Who are “we” and who are “they”? — IBF

Thanks to the recent political developments, the present referent of the nomination “scientist” is no longer “a person that’s historically recognized as a scientist through his/her scientific contributions” but the actual concrete movement that’s organized around #ScienceMarch #BilimYürüyüşü who vocally demands that “Evidence Based Peer-Reviewed Information” (EBPRI) indisputably establishes facts by getting perceived as the self-evident state of affairs.

Continue reading “What is a scientist? Who are “we” and who are “they”? — IBF”

Data virüsü mü yoksa kız basili mi?

YERSİZ ŞEYLER

cooties

Kızlar sadece makyaj, kıyafet, atlar ve pembe şalları düşünür? Öyle mi?

Hiç de bile!

Kızlar en az oğlanlar kadar iyi ve hevesli data delileridir. Ve diğer herkes gibi, kızlar da yeni zorluklar isterler. Sınırları zorlamayı ve hatta ötesine geçmeyi.

Sizin için artık yeni Amiga 600 var (pazar öncüsü Commodore’dan).

Varolan en havalı oyunları ve simülatörleri onda oynayabilirsiniz.

Ama Amiga bundan çok daha fazlasıdır. Binlerce işlevi sayesinde böyledir. Mesela ev ödevinizi düpedüz maceraya çevirir.

4000 rengiyle, 16/32 bitiyle, çizim programları ve stereo sesiyle, yazabilir, hesaplayabilir ve önceden ancak hayal edebildiğiniz yollarla havalı resimler yaratabilirsiniz.

Amiga’yı 40Mb harddiskli ya da harddisksiz olarak alabilirsiniz (harddiskli versiyonda heyecan veren bir sürü program önceden yüklenmiştir).

Ve o kadar basittir ki onu herkes anlar. Oğlanlar bile.

AMIGA: Commodore’dan

Kendine ait bir sınıfta!

Türkçesi: Işık Barış Fidaner

View original post 325 more words

Topology as Tautology — IBF

Topology is the turning-into-itself of spatiality.

But the restrictions that topology articulates are not spatial restrictions.

Topology articulates combinatorial restrictions over spatiality.

In general topology indicates the restricted state of the spatial in face of the combinatorial. [*]

Topology, in this sense, is a ‘tautology’. [■]

IBF

(Turkish)

Continue reading “Topology as Tautology — IBF”

Our freedom to communicate as scientists is not a matter of convenience — Dr. Işık Barış Fidaner

YERSİZ ŞEYLER

18 Aralık 2016 Pazar günü saat 15:30’a doğru gönderilen altı e-postanın [*] beşincisi

From: fidaner@ece.neu.edu
To: johndoe@ece.neu.edu
CC: rsvpkeyboard@googlegroups.com

No problem John Doe.

We are free to use any of our e-mail addresses or not.

We are free to use any of these mailing lists or not.

We are free to write any of our messages or not.

And we are free to include any of the recipients or not.

Our freedom to communicate as scientists is not a matter of convenience.

Greetings,

Dr. Işık Barış Fidaner
Postdoc Researcher
?????, CSL, NEU
Boston, MA, USA

fidaner.wordpress.com/science

I answer questions only, I don’t respond to requests.

Ideas don’t have deadlines.

Have you considered applying for a VNIS?
https://fidaner.wordpress.com/2016/11/28/presenting-vnis-isik-baris-fidaner/

===

From: fidaner@ece.neu.edu
To: johndoe@ece.neu.edu
CC: rsvpkeyboard@googlegroups.com

Sorun yok John Doe.

E-posta adreslerimizin her birini kullanıp kullanmamakta özgürüz.

Bu e-posta gruplarının her birini kullanıp kullanmamakta özgürüz.

Mesajlarımızın her birini yazıp yazmamakta özgürüz.

Ve…

View original post 56 more words