| Poll |
| Is the gate on the picture open, closed, all at once or half open/closed? |
| Open |
|
39% |
[ 47 ] |
| Closed |
|
5% |
[ 6 ] |
| It's all at once |
|
8% |
[ 10 ] |
| It's half open, half closed |
|
47% |
[ 57 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 120 |
|
IRSWalker
Joined: Jan 27, 2006
|
 Posted:
Mar 07, 2006 - 22:32 |
 
|
Neo just told me that there is no gate. |
|
|
Adar
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 07, 2006 - 23:04 |
|
| Plorg wrote: |
The gate in the picture lowers/rises vertically and can cover from 0% to 100% of the opening. This gate is about 66% closed. To impose an evaluation of a binary yes/no condition of whether the gate is open or closed requires a reference of perspective.
Let's assume the gate is around 6 meters high.
From the perspective of a cat or dog, this gate is open.
From the perspective of a semi trailer truck, this gate is definitely not open.
Eat that, absolutists! |
What your saying is that the statement "the gate is closed" is 66% correct and that the statement "the gate is open" is 34% correct. So your using absolute values too.
And since everyone is so absolutist am I starting to wonder what to do with my Estonian vodka  |
_________________
For all his rage, he's still just a rat in it's cage. |
|
Bacillen
Joined: Aug 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 07, 2006 - 23:20 |
|
| Plorg wrote: | | From the perspective of a semi trailer truck, this gate is definitely not open. |
Can a truck have a perspective on such things ?
Would the semi driver's view take precedence ?
So for our semi driver is it closed, given that he can detach himself from the Semi ? (No ! Unless he's had too much pie..)
I'm not clear it's definately not open to that semi, but I'm pretty sure that semi don't much care either way.
And how about a tank driver's perspective, is any tin roller door ever closed ?
Yes, because open and closed are states of the door and have no bearing on the door's permisson of passage to this that and the other. Mr Tank driver's sitreps would sound a bit odd if he described everything as open all the time.
Neither your semi (nor my tank) could drive over an open gorge either, but we never say the gorge is closed (I guess they could still drive into it though huh ?). And sure, maybe a road with a brand new gorge opened up across it would be characterised as closed, but that'd be talking about states of an entirely different object and that word is really only used that way because it's more plainly understood by dumbasses (and there are HEAPS of them no every road) than "impassable" and it fits on signs better.
And Neo's right, there is no gate...just a picture of a shed with a roller door (that is quite obviously not closed). |
|
|
Plorg
Joined: May 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 00:08 |
|
| Taffsadar wrote: | | What your saying is that the statement "the gate is closed" is 66% correct and that the statement "the gate is open" is 34% correct. So your using absolute values too. |
These are numbers with fixed values yes,
but they are not limited to binary true/false 1 or 0 values.
Is the door closed? 0.66 yes, 0.34 no.
From the perspective of a dust mite,
could your example gate ever be truly closed? |
|
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
And if, from that same dust mites perspective, it can never be closed, is it truely a gate at all? What right have we to impose our perspective as to the definition of 'gate' upon an object that seen from other perspectives is nothing of the sort? |
|
|
Hoodeddwarf
Joined: Feb 15, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 00:23 |
|
The file is called red_door_half_open, and that has to count for something, but for me, it's more maroon. |
|
|
Plorg
Joined: May 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 00:27 |
|
| Bacillen wrote: | | Plorg wrote: | | From the perspective of a semi trailer truck, this gate is definitely not open. |
Can a truck have a perspective on such things ? ...
I'm not clear it's definately not open to that semi, but I'm pretty sure that semi don't much care either way.
|
The emotional or perceptive state of the truck's consciousness is irrelevant.
The size of the truck in relation to the size of the opening is relevant.
| Bacillen wrote: |
Would the semi driver's view take precedence ? ...
So for our semi driver is it closed, given that he can detach himself from the Semi ? (No ! Unless he's had too much pie..)
|
While the driver sits in the truck, the gate is not open (enough) to enter.
If the human-sized driver exits the vehicle and then enters the door
by walking under it, then for that driver the gate is open (enough).
| Bacillen wrote: |
And how about a tank driver's perspective, is any tin roller door ever closed ?
Yes, because open and closed are states of the door and have no bearing on the door's permisson of passage to this that and the other.
|
Incorrect. They do have bearing on permission of passage.
In the context of a door or gate, the terms "open" and "closed"
have specific connotations with regard to the ability to enter,
with additional debatable connotations as to whether the entry
can be done without structural damage.
| Bacillen wrote: |
Neither your semi (nor my tank) could drive over an open gorge either, but we never say the gorge is closed (I guess they could still drive into it though huh ?). And sure, maybe a road with a brand new gorge opened up across it would be characterised as closed, but that'd be talking about states of an entirely different object and that word is really only used that way because it's more plainly understood by dumbasses (and there are HEAPS of them no every road) than "impassable" and it fits on signs better. |
This illustrates the importance of context and connotations of the terms
that have been taken for granted.
Doors have specific terms that relate to them such as "Open" and "Closed".
Gorges do not use these terms, but they might have others.
By their nature, gorges are impassable (to land vehicles) unless
there is a bridge. The bridge itself could be open or closed depending
on its condition and the traveller's perspective.
Driving a bicycle might be possible over a wooden suspension bridge,
while driving a tank over the same rickety planks would be impossible, even if the bridge was wide enough.
If you are a flying bird, then what meaning could possibly be derived
from applying terms like open or closed to a bridge over a gorge?
| Bacillen wrote: |
And Neo's right, there is no gate...just a picture of a shed with a roller door (that is quite obviously not closed). |
Ceci n'est pas un forum post. |
|
|
Woodpecker
Joined: Apr 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 00:52 |
|
Gate? I see no gate? Seriously, what are you guys talking about. |
|
|
Buddy
Joined: Mar 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 01:32 |
|
| IRSWalker wrote: | | Neo just told me that there is no gate. |
Funny enough, this is the only post on this topic that makes any sence to me  |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 01:41 |
|
Ha... now I have a clever one:
"Making a definition dependend on a perspective contradicts the definition of 'definition'!"
So lets stop talking about perspectives and go to math - which I already pointed out.
If you look at all possible states of this 'gate', you can only define one as truely closed - when it`s completly down. Every other state is therefore "not closed". As 'not closed' is the opposite of 'closed' and the opposite of 'closed' is commonly referred to as 'open'. So the gate is open - that`s for sure.
You guys are discussing another question: "Is it open wide enough?" (or maybe 'Do I care if it`s open?') |
|
|
Plorg
Joined: May 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 02:31 |
|
| CircularLogic wrote: | Ha... now I have a clever one:
"Making a definition dependend on a perspective contradicts the definition of 'definition'!"
|
Your sentence logically implodes in a burst of feathers.
There are often multiple definition entries for the same word,
with variations based on context (perspective).
A restaurant is open for business. Its front door is closed
to keep the cold out but unlocked to let patrons inside.
Is the building "open" or "closed"?
Depends on the context of the definitions of "open" and "closed".
| CircularLogic wrote: |
So lets stop talking about perspectives and go to math - which I already pointed out.
If you look at all possible states of this 'gate', you can only define one as truely closed - when it`s completly down. Every other state is therefore "not closed". As 'not closed' is the opposite of 'closed' and the opposite of 'closed' is commonly referred to as 'open'. So the gate is open - that`s for sure.
You guys are discussing another question: "Is it open wide enough?" (or maybe 'Do I care if it`s open?') |
You have arbitarily chosen one endpoint ("closed") as your personal absolute baseline.
I could just as easily say that there is only one state
of the door that is truly "open", and unless that state is achieved,
then the door is in one of infinite states of "not openness". |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 03:07 |
|
| Plorg wrote: |
Your sentence logically implodes in a burst of feathers.
There are often multiple definition entries for the same word,
with variations based on context (perspective).
A restaurant is open for business. Its front door is closed
to keep the cold out but unlocked to let patrons inside.
Is the building "open" or "closed"?
Depends on the context of the definitions of "open" and "closed".
|
OK... lets try it another way.
If the gate was fully open, and something (e.g. elephant) too big for the opening came along, that would not mean, that the gate is closed for the elephant. Even for him the gate would be open - just not passable.
You see, that "open" is distached from whatever wants to pass it. Because the word that describes if you can pass something is "passable" which would be an easier word to argue about, because there are no intermediate states of passable.
You are right, if you ask why I not choose "close" as baseline and not "open". That`s an easy one. "Open" - for a gate - means that there is an opening. An opening is quanitfyable. "Closed" is the absence of an opening. Absence of something is always absolute and a binary state - because either there is something, or it`s absent. Therefore there is no such thing as half closed. Same with light and darkness - there is no such thing as half as dark - or empty and full - there is no half empty, because empty is the absence of content. |
|
|
f_alk
Joined: Sep 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 11:16 |
|
| Taffsadar wrote: | But that only works on size scales where the particle size is small enough to get decently close to their wave length. I'm not sure but I think that the gate is just abit too large to cause that kind of situation.
|
(a) The gate could be really cold and the wavelength really long - no information is given about that.
(b) Even then that is not the case. Size as such is not a source for decoherence or dephasing - the source for decoherence is the continual measurement that each particle of the object is conducting on the other particles, changing a superposition into a mixture. |
|
|
Gismo
Joined: Sep 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 11:19 |
|
My opinion is that everything that is not closed is open. |
|
|
Plorg
Joined: May 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 17:08 |
|
Suppose a gate is locked in a position so that there is one millimeter of space beneath it.
By practical designations, the gate would commonly be referred to as "closed".
It is not open wide enough for a horde of zombies to enter.
Now suppose that the horde of zombies have some canisters of fire ants and nerve gas.
(These are sophisticated zombies)
Releasing the fire ants, they crawl through the millimeter gap.
Releasing the nerve gas, it seeps through the millimeter gap.
So... unless the gate is sealed to be airtight, is it closed?
There are many "near-closed" states of the gate that are commonly
considered as closed, depending on the perspective of whatever
is trying to get in the door. |
|
|
|
|
| |
FUMBBL HAIKU'S
Search
