This post is styled after conversations we’ve had in the course of our research, put together in a way that hopefully highlights a bunch of relatively recent and (ironically) hard-to-articulate ideas around natural abstractions.

John: So we’ve been working a bit on semantics, and also separately on fluid mechanics. Our main goal for both of them is to figure out more of the higher-level natural abstract data structures. But I’m concerned that the two threads haven’t been informing each other as much as they should.

David: Okay…what do you mean by “as much as they should”? I mean, there's the foundational natural latent framework, and that's been useful for our thinking on both semantics and fluid mechanics. But beyond that, concretely, in what ways do (should?) semantics and fluid mechanics inform each other?

John: We should see the same types of higher-level data structures across both - e.g. [...]

---

First published:
August 26th, 2024

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/QsstSjDqa7tmjQfnq/wait-our-models-of-semantics-should-inform-fluid-mechanics

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“... Wait, our models of semantics should inform fluid mechanics?!? ” by johnswentworth, David Lorell

LessWrong (30+ Karma)