An ontologist reads the news

A rolon and its parts

2006-03-05T05:43:00.000-08:00

A rolon has parts (you guessed it).
A rolon is the sum of it parts.
A rolon is more than the sum of its parts.

Now start this all over again (up and down).

;-norm

A rolon's existence

2006-03-04T13:19:00.000-08:00

A rolon is a {pattern in time}.
A rolon retains its {coherence} over time.
A rolon has an exquisite {sense of identity}.

What time is it really?

2005-07-29T09:30:00.000-07:00

In today's Wall Street Journal (7/29/05) see the article "Why the U.S. Wants to End the Link Between Time and Sun"

The U.S. wants to eliminate leap seconds and declare that every day is exactly 24 hours long. Seems as if there are any number of computer and electronic navigation glitches that occur when a leap second (caused by the slowing of the Earth's rotation by the moon) is added to various software systems.

Of course, this "will make sextants and sundials slowly become inaccurate" and will thus cause problems for astromers and telescopes.

So its computers vs. telescopes. The U.S. vs. the world. Reality vs. another simplification of the universe.

A programmer at the National Optical Astronomy Observatories says "we should not so blithely discard the ties between our clocks and the Earth". Another astronomer calles the U.S. proposal "a disaster for classical astronomy" and a "dirty trick".

So, what time is it really? And do we care? ;-n

Are all Rolons alike?

2005-05-03T12:00:00.000-07:00

There has been some discussion on the Compstrm Blog about specialized structures. Bill has created an Ark filled with things he calls cabinets, drawers, folders, and pages (to name a few) and the question naturally arises as to how these relate to Rolonic Theory. Are these Rolons? Are they different things or variations of the same things? Is this proliferation necessary? Does it add to confusion? Is it too complex? Why is it so complicated?

--
So, I'll pose the question, "Are all Rolons alike?"

Let me first re-emphasize the simplicity of Rolonics.

Rolonics dictates only one kind of Whole-Part-- a Rolon. Now, having said that a Rolon can take on a particular role within a RoleSystem. That role (and its nature) defines both its wholeness and partness behavior, and consequently transforms a generic Rolon into a specialized Rolon.

In theory, an unspecialized Rolon becomes a specialized Rolon by both constraining and enhancing its capabilities (both it's wholeness capabilities within its Descriptor unit, and it's partness capabilities within its Classifier unit). Rolons also change as the result of their historical experience (as evidenced by their Journal and the state of their Ledger at any point in time). Like humans, from the moment a Rolon is born it evolves as a unique individual.

How this is achieved is another subject. Suffice it to say that a Rolon can be born from its creator (human, automaton, or other Rolon or Rolons).

A Rolon is born with a certain starter set of capabilities.

- AND -

A Rolon can be changed by its environment (by responding to external and internal events) and is altered by the stream of journal entries that are processed by the Rolon as a whole, as well as within its Classifier and Descriptor units). These journal entries (both Informing and Performing) can change both the knowledge and behavior of a Rolon.

So, all Rolons are the same. There is no complexity. There is no complication.

But ALL Rolons are different. We are dealing with individuals. There is intrinsic complexity in any non-trivial RoleSystem. And there is always the danger of complication. That is our fight against entropy. That is why Rolonic systems maintain the ability to be self-organizing and emergent.

But this is the way of Nature. And Rolonics is merely a representation of Nature.

--
In any software sytem the implementer has to pick a starting point. A bootstrap point. A set of axioms. A set of atoms.

A Rolonic system does this by naming and evolving.

--
So does an implementation have to start with cabinets and drawers. Or could I, the shaper of my Rolonic universe, merely name things cabinets and drawers and tell them, or teach them how, to behave as cabinets and drawers. Or, to be this kind of cabinet, or that kind of drawer.

In a Rolonic system it's easier to make a Rolon a cabinet then to un-cabinet a cabinet.

;-norm

Wholes and Parts - Part 1

2005-04-28T19:38:00.000-07:00

This is a subject I shall return to over and over again.

As I discussed earlier, in systems as in Nature, there are no Wholes and no Parts, only Whole-Parts.

Words are Wholes, and Part of a sentence.
States are Wholes, and Part of a country.
Organs are Wholes, and Part of a body.
Modules are Wholes, and Part of a system.

It's Whole-Parts all the way up,
and Whole-Parts all the way down.

Therefore, it is important to treat each thing (every thing) as both a Whole and a Part SIMULTANEOUSLY.

Arthur Koestler coined the term Holon to desribe something that is a Whole-Part. Rolons, beyond Holons, derive their name from a dual aspect of their nature.

Rolons are Whole-Parts AND Rolons perform a specific Role within a RoleSystem (as a Whole-Part within a larger system of interacting Whole-Parts).

So, Rolonics results from the marriage of Holonics and RoleWare.

--
A Rolon, in order to fulfill its responsiblity, must implement its Wholeness behavior and its Partness behavior.
A Rolon must also maintain its Wholeness structures and its Partness structures.

Maintaining these separate responsibilities is what distinguishes a Rolon from a non-Rolon. Too many man-made systems ambiguate this. That makes it particularly difficult to build complex software systems.

Nature never makes this mistake.

--
A Rolon, therefore, is a four-tuple. It has a structural representation, stream behavior, a wholeness characteristic, and a partness characteristic.

We shall have more to say about all of this.

;-norm

What is an Ark?

2005-04-25T15:15:00.000-07:00

Since this question came up on Bill's blog I thought it would be useful to comment about it here.

--
In Rolonics we have coined the term Ark to connote a vessel that contains knowledge.

In choosing this term we, of course, chose to respect the two deep traditional meanings of the word:
1. A floating house that contains all species
2. A box or container that contains sacred knowledge

So an Ark is a vessel. In Rolonics vessels are special.

Without a proper boundary you cannot contain, retain, and maintain knowledge. Arks provide such a boundary.

Arks provide:
- a context for Realms
- an internal environment so that realms can interact with other realms.
- a permeable membrane so that Realms can interact with the outside world
- services for Realms to interact with other Realms within other Arks
- homeostasis for Realms.

Arks are our floating houses; our sacred vessels; our knowledge keepers.

--
Finally, for those who insist on acronyms, we have one. We sometimes refer to an Ark as an "Agile Repository of Knowledge". However, the egg came before the chicken.

;-norm

What is a system?

2005-04-21T08:00:00.000-07:00

As we progress in our discussion of Rolonics it is important to stop and ponder the question, "What is a system?". Calling something a system means that we already acknowledge that there is something with some level of complexity. After all, if that something were so simple as to not have parts it would not be a system. (Or would it?)

A typical dictionary definition of a system usually goes something like this, "a system is a group of independent but inter-related elements comprising a unified whole". So, a system is a whole, and it also has parts (elements).

My classic (and useful) working definition of a system (pre-Rolonic) is that a system is a whole that has:
1. Parts
2. Connections
3. Interactions, and a
4. Goal

(I must tell you that #4 has been the most controversial. There is a substantial argument to be made that some systems have goals and some don't; that the goal of some systems is planned, but that the goal of other systems is emergent. We will surely discuss this at another time.)

To continue...

The history of the evolution of software has been a never-ending struggle to determine:
- the best way to "part"ition a system into the best kind of parts;
- the best way to connect these parts;
- the best way to have them interact;
- in order to achieve a desired goal.

Service-oriented architectures, to take a modern example, are just the latest in a long line of architectures attempting to do so.

But, there has been a fatal flaw in most architectural attempts to partition a whole system into parts. That is ...

There are no Wholes.
There are no Parts.
There are only Whole-Parts.

And this will be the subject of a subsequent blog entry.
And this will get us closer to our understanding of Rolonics.

;-norm

Streams and Structures

2005-04-12T00:50:00.000-07:00

Streams and structures. Becoming and being. Changing and changed. Yin and Yang. This duality is fundamental to the nature of software, and the nature of nature.

One cannot exist without the other. One is incomplete without the other. One becomes the other, and then the other becomes the one. One completes the other, and one is completed by the other.

They are our time and space. They are our universe.

In rolonics we recognize the need for both - sequentially and simultaneously. Every Rolon, every whole-part of our universe, is brought into existence through streams, exists as structures, is changed by streams, and changed into structures.

These are the verbs and nouns of our language.
The journals of earlier and later times.
The ledgers of existence as it changes over time.
The bases of our past, present, and future.
Our journey and our destination.

;-norm

RoleWare(tm) and Rolonics(tm)

2005-03-29T19:22:00.000-08:00

Well, the jig is up. RoleWare and Rolonics have been a pair of the best kept secrets in software and systems for a very long time. Looks like I've been outed by my friend BiLaf (more on this later - see my link to the Compstrm Blog). So it's time to come clean. Of course the joke is that, although in clear sight, R&R will undoubtedly suffer the same fate as the grail did in Raiders of the Lost Arc.

RoleWare (or Role-Based Software) is a system for representing all knowledge as roles, role relationships, and role interactions. As this blog progresses you will find out that what we mean by a role in RoleWare is far more universal then any traditional use of the term. Roles represent contexts, and can be applied equally well to persons, automatons, and inanimates. Roles exist (and cease to exist) in a universe of two-dimensional time.

Rolonics (the basis of RoleWare) is essentially the study (and representation) of knowledge as wholes and parts. Wholes and parts, in turn, are represented in both static and dynamic ways -- we will refer to these representations as structures and streams. Rolonics, at its core, is based on two deep axiomatic principles and constructs -- context and time.

Ah, glad I got that off my chest. All I have to do now is fill in the details.

Stay tuned . . . ;-norm

First Contact

2004-12-04T14:22:00.000-08:00

Ontology is the science of knowledge. Follow this blog to understand how deep knowledge of knowledge can be applied to your every day life. You'd be surprised.