More Examples

[[Idea B]] -> [[Isomorphic]] -> [[Idea A]]

does this order make sense?

[[Philosophy]] -> [[is-a]] -> [[Type]]

means Philosophy is a Type

[[Type]] -> [[Philosophy]]

means this note is of type Philosophy, kind of like running

[[Type]]() {
return [[Philosophy]]
}

[[Claim A]] <- [[Supports]]

([[Observation 1]] -> [[Supports]] -> [[Claim A]]) -> [[Unsure]]

so let’s try the function write out:

[[Unsure]]([[supports]]([[Observation 1]]) { return [[Claim A]] }) {
return true
}

[[supports]]([[Observation 1]]) {
return [[Claim A]]
}

so here I’m saying “I’m unsure that Observation 1 supports Claim A.”

vs

[[Observation 1]] -> [[Supports]] -> [[Claim A]] -> [[Unsure]]

which means

[[Unsure]]([[Claim A]]) {
return true
}

[[Supports]]([[Observation 1]]) {

}

and here I’m saying “Observation 1 supports that I’m unsure about Claim A.”

Indents help make this clearer

- Observation 1
- -> [[Supports]] -> [[Claim A]]
- -> [[Unsure]]

= “I’m unsure that Observation 1 supports Claim A.”

vs

- Claim A
- -> [[Unsure]]
- <- [[Supports]] <- [[Observation 1]]

= “Observation 1 supports that I’m unsure about Claim A.” (assuming arrows can be done in both directions)

x -> y -> z means, given x, return y, and given y and x, return z. If there is no note link in front of the ->, then the current note is implied. The last note in the chain is always implied to end with a -> true

how to equate inverses?

[[Supports]] [[Inverse]] [[Supported By]]

Woah.. this could change the game.. Now we are creating a n-order mathematical group / ring / field?. Where instead of two operations (+ and *) with inverses, where each element is also a possible operation, and we can have n operations. Thus we can have n operations…

[[Observation A]] -> [[Supports]] -> 
- (all blocks x where [[Observation A]] -> [[Supports]] -> x)
- (also, due to inverse definition, all blocks x where x -> [[Supported By]] -> [[Observation A]])