(draft)
An abstraction is any pattern used to represent another pattern, such as a name, a diagram, or a detailed description. Abstractions are meant to be used, and the use case determines the tolerance of how similar the expressions can be, and how they are physically implemented.
All matter must have a shape. All shapes must be of matter. Abstractions are made of shapes, and so are perfectly physical.
Most shapes match their substance. But they don't have to. Some substances can be manipulated for their shapes.
Every abstraction has an implementation, and an expression.
The implementation is the physical nature of the abstraction. The ink on paper, the pixels on a screen, the clay, the hard disk, our memory, etc.
The expression is the use case, that is meant to be observed and mean something.
The expression itself is often used for implementation, but this has little to do with the physical nature of the abstraction.
An instruction is an expression that causes the observer to do as instructed.
A schematic expresses an implementation.
A fact expresses a true description of the world.
A description of a cause expresses a theory.
-
Every abstraction has an implementation. It's physical composition.
-
Every abstraction is an expression. It's observed composition.
-
Abstractions are shapes. The observation is shaped.
-
Abstractions have meaning. The shape is known.
-
Abstractions travel. Shapes are communicated across sound, paper, wires, and screens.
-
Abstractions are used. By those that know them.
-
Abstractions are defined. By those that use them.
-
Abstractions evolve. With use.
-
An abstraction is an abstraction, and never what it represents.
-
Abstractions are enacted. They substitute the real thing and are made consequential.
-
Abstractions can be counted.
-
Abstractions can be copied.
-
Something is abstracted by something. The abstractor comes first, the thing being abstracted second, and the abstraction third.
-
There is always a direction, and is worth identifying.
-
Abstractions are free. They don't change anything until we change anything.
positivistic nature of abstraction
An abstraction can never be the thing it abstracts.
consciousness a priori before observations
one-ness and two-ness yields three-ness every time.
observation, utterance, logic.
A doll can be made of clay or plasitc. The doll is the shape and the abstraction. You can have one girl doll and one boy doll. One, girl, and boy are all abstractions. They are ideas we put words to so we can express them. Words are tools, and each word has a unique shape so we can tell them apart.
Throwing a rock into a pond generates ripples. The throw must happen, the rock and pond must exist, the rock must hit the water, and only then will multiple ripples grow out from the point of contact. This order does not, and cannot change.
Abstractions are taught as something abstract, that they come in objects and layers, and that they're convenient for when hiding complexity. It's only intuitive to see higher layers as more abstract, making the lower layers as more concrete.
However, not only are all layers composed of abstractions, even "abstract" and "concrete" are abstractions, as is "abstraction".
Moreover, all abstractions are equally "abstract", and therefore goes without mentioning, once understood.
To translate the existing intuitions incorporating our new additions to our mental models, "more concrete" would mean "closer to the physics", and "more abstract" would mean "further from the physics". However, this degree of abstractness as in distance from physics is not to be confused with the abstractness of abstraction itself which remains constant.
However, the building blocks of these descriptions and definitions, these words, and all that exists at all non-physical layers continues to be the product of abstraction, and are all abstractions equal in nature. Moreover, English is also just another abstraction layer that exists outside of the machine, yet is imported through howe we define our creations within the machine. English cannot be detached from the implementation.
The first step in reordering the mental model is detaching the idea of abstractions and the ideas of abstraction theory into its own layer. However, since the abstraction layers of the machiine remain, it's not accurate to place this layer above. Instead, it would be on a new axist, and on a new dimension.