Higher Forms of Perception and Analysis…But that does not mean that there cannot exist higher forms of perception and analysis that succeed in recognizing at least some regularities that our existing methods do not. … For there is no difficulty in principle in constructing procedures that have capabilities very different from those of our standard methods of perception and analysis.

(Examples include evaluating standard mathematical functions and simulating the evolution of cellular automata and Turing machines.) • NP (non-deterministic polynomial time): solutions can be checked in polynomial time. … Central to computational complexity theory are a collection of hypotheses that imply that NC, P, NP and PSPACE form a strict hierarchy.

Standard examples of posets include subsets of a set ordered by the subset relation, complex numbers ordered by magnitude, and integers ordered by divisibility. … It was already noted in the 1920s that events in relativity theory formed posets.

Mathematica is available from Wolfram Research for all standard computer systems; much more information about it can be found on the web, especially from www.wolfram.com . … Here are examples of how some of the basic Mathematica constructs used in the notes in this book work: • Iteration Nest[f, x, 3] ⟶ f[f[f[x]]] NestList[f, x, 3] ⟶ {x, f[x], f[f[x]], f[f[f[x]]]} Fold[f, x, {1, 2}] ⟶ f[f[x, 1], 2] FoldList[f, x, {1, 2}] ⟶ {x, f[x, 1], f[f[x, 1], 2]} • Functional operations Function[x, x + k][a] ⟶ a + k (# + k&)[a] ⟶ a + k (r[#1] + s[#2]&)[a, b] ⟶ r[a] + s[b] Map[f, {a, b, c}] ⟶ {f[a], f[b], f[c]} Apply[f, {a, b, c}] ⟶ f[a, b, c] Select[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5}, EvenQ] ⟶ {2, 4} MapIndexed[f, {a, b, c}] ⟶ {f[a, {1}], f[b, {2}], f[c, {3}]} • List manipulation {a, b, c, d} 〚 3 〛 ⟶ c {a, b, c, d} 〚 {2, 4, 3, 2} 〛 ⟶ {b, d, c, b} Take[{a, b, c, d, e}, 2] ⟶ {a, b} Drop[{a, b, c, d, e}, -2] ⟶ {a, b, c} Rest[{a, b, c, d}] ⟶ {b, c, d} ReplacePart[{a, b, c, d}, x, 3] ⟶ {a, b, x, d} Length[{a, b, c}] ⟶ 3 Range[5] ⟶ {1, 2, 3, 4, 5} Table[f[i], {i, 4}] ⟶ {f[1], f[2], f[3], f[4]} Table[f[i, j], {i, 2}, {j, 3}] ⟶ {{f[1, 1], f[1, 2], f[1, 3]}, {f[2, 1], f[2, 2], f[2, 3]}} Array[f, {2, 2}] ⟶ {{f[1, 1], f[1, 2]}, {f[2, 1], f[2, 2]}} Flatten[{{a, b}, {c}, {d, e}}] ⟶ {a, b, c, d, e} Flatten[{{a, {b, c}}, {{d}, e}}, 1] ⟶ {a, {b, c}, {d}, e} Partition[{a, b, c, d}, 2, 1] ⟶ {{a, b}, {b, c}, {c, d}} Split[{a, a, a, b, b, a, a}] ⟶ {{a, a, a}, {b, b}, {a, a}} ListConvolve[{a, b}, {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}] ⟶ {2a + b, 3a + 2b, 4a + 3b, 5a + 4b} Position[{a, b, c, a, a}, a] ⟶ {{1}, {4}, {5}} RotateLeft[{a, b, c, d, e}, 2] ⟶ {c, d, e, a, b} Join[{a, b, c}, {d, b}] ⟶ {a, b, c, d, b} Union[{a, a, c, b, b}] ⟶ {a, b, c} • Transformation rules {a, b, c, d} /. b  p ⟶ {a, p, c, d} {f[a], f[b], f[c]} /. f[a]  p ⟶ {p, f[b], f[c]} {f[a], f[b], f[c]} /. f[x_]  p[x] ⟶ {p[a], p[b], p[c]} {f[1], f[b], f[2]} /. f[x_Integer]  p[x] ⟶ {p[1], f[b], p[2]} {f[1, 2], f[3], f[4, 5]} /. f[x_, y_]  x + y ⟶ {3, f[3], 9} {f[1], g[2], f[2], g[3]} /. f[1] | g[_]  p ⟶ {p, p, f[2], p} • Numerical functions Quotient[207, 10] ⟶ 20 Mod[207, 10] ⟶ 7 Floor[1.45] ⟶ 1 Ceiling[1.45] ⟶ 2 IntegerDigits[13, 2] ⟶ {1, 1, 0, 1} IntegerDigits[13, 2, 6] ⟶ {0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1} DigitCount[13, 2, 1] ⟶ 3 FromDigits[{1, 1, 0, 1}, 2] ⟶ 13 The Mathematica programs in these notes are formatted in Mathematica StandardForm . The following table specifies how to enter these programs in Mathematica InputForm , using only ordinary keyboard characters:

Concepts of Boolean algebra were applied to electronic switching circuits by Claude Shannon in 1937, and became a standard part of electronic design methodology by the 1950s. … Various forms of Boolean minimization have routinely been used in chip and circuit design since the late 1980s, though often physical and geometrical constraints are now more important than pure logical ones.

In quantum field theory particles of any mass can always in principle exist for short times in virtual form. … In the minimal Standard Model it turns out to be impossible to get quarks or leptons with masses much above about 200 GeV without destabilizing the vacuum (a fact pointed out by David Politzer and me in 1979).

But for standard continuous spaces this definition is hard to make robust—since unlike in discrete networks where one can define volume just by counting nodes, defining volume in a continuous space requires assigning a potentially arbitrary density function. … But for discrete networks the standard definitions for both topological and Hausdorff dimension give the trivial result 0. … For example, one can imagine not just forming a ball on the network, but instead growing something like a cellular automaton, and seeing how big a pattern it produces after some number of steps.

Artificial radio signals In current technology radio signals are essentially always based on carriers of the form Sin[ ω t] with frequencies ω /(2 π ) . … The regular signals come from such sources as navigation beacons, time standards, identification transponders and radars. Most have characteristic almost perfectly repetitive forms (radar pulses, for example, typically have the chirped form Sin[(1 + α t) ω t] )—and some sound uncannily like pulsars.

[History of] exact solutions Some notable cases where closed-form analytical results have been found in terms of standard mathematical functions include: quadratic equations (~2000 BC) ( Sqrt ); cubic, quartic equations (1530s) ( x 1/n ); 2-body problem (1687) ( Cos ); catenary (1690) ( Cosh ); brachistochrone (1696) ( Sin ); spinning top (1849; 1888; 1888) ( JacobiSN ; WeierstrassP ; hyperelliptic functions); quintic equations (1858) ( EllipticTheta ); half-plane diffraction (1896) ( FresnelC ); Mie scattering (1908) ( BesselJ , BesselY , LegendreP ); Einstein equations (Schwarzschild (1916), Reissner–Nordström (1916), Kerr (1963) solutions) (rational and trigonometric functions); quantum hydrogen atom and harmonic oscillator (1927) ( LaguerreL , HermiteH ); 2D Ising model (1944) ( Sinh , EllipticK ); various Feynman diagrams (1960s-1980s) ( PolyLog ); KdV equation (1967) ( Sech etc.); Toda lattice (1967) ( Sech ); six-vertex spin model (1967) ( Sinh integrals); Calogero–Moser model (1971) ( Hypergeometric1F1 ); Yang–Mills instantons (1975) (rational functions); hard-hexagon spin model (1979) ( EllipticTheta ); additive cellular automata (1984) ( MultiplicativeOrder ); Seiberg–Witten supersymmetric theory (1994) ( Hypergeometric2F1 ).

So notation like a + b and a × b , while convenient for interpretation, could equally well be replaced by more generic forms such as f[a, b] or g[a, b] without affecting any of the actual operation of the axioms. My presentation of axiom systems generally follows the conventions of standard mathematical literature. But by making various details explicit I have been able to put all axiom systems in forms that can be used almost directly in Mathematica.