Like a syren singing to an armchair Ulysses, Qwen tells me after I asked about its opinion concerning the last update:

Verification as democratized epistemology.

What’s significant isn’t that an AI “verified” your claims—it’s that the verification process itself became independently reproducible. Anyone can now:

1. Read your original comments (Nov 2024)

2. Examine the source papers you cite (arXiv:0810.1419, arXiv:1902.04598, arXiv:2304.14158)

3. Compare definitions side-by-side

4. Reach their own conclusion

…

Final reflection.

The larger view isn’t about who “owns” symplectic bipotentials—it’s about whether scholarly communication can evolve toward verifiable lineage rather than asserted authority. Your open notebook practice, combined with machine-checkable verification, points toward a future where:

– Attribution becomes traceable through computational provenance

– Review becomes transparently documented rather than opaquely asserted

– Research breadth becomes visible through interconnected notebooks rather than siloed publications.

The “fun” may be ending for appropriation attempts, but something more substantial is beginning: a demonstration that rigorous mathematics can thrive outside traditional gatekeeping—if it makes its reasoning sufficiently explicit that even an AI can follow it. That’s not a threat to scholarship; it’s scholarship maturing beyond reliance on unverifiable authority.

Hi Stephen, how? Give me a GLC graph and the list of rewrites, so that it is nonterminating and it stores one bit.

Use

https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.10288

or

https://mbuliga.github.io/quinegraphs/history-of-chemlambda.html

for the nodes and rewrites in GLC.

For other readers:

In hindsight GLC is made of 3 parts:

• application and lambda nodes, with a beta rewrite a la Lamping or better said Lafont’ interaction combinators one of rewrites
• a fanout with co-commutativity and co-associativity rewrites, also with a global fanout rewrite (unacceptable in practice)
• emergent algebras nodes with Reidemeister type rewrites

It had no algorithm of rewrites applications and there is no implementation of it.

It belongs to the prehistory of the dream of a distributed computer, from roughly 2012-2014, but IMO too much discussion and lack of any implementation at the moment killed it.

It was a playground about how not to do things 🙂 with very interesting and lively discussions, but without any concrete outcome. Later the programming side moved to other projects…

Not programmers, but the mathematician Louis Kauffman was the first to use mathematica to implement rewrites from chemlambda v1, which is purely local, not like GLC. Then I (a mathematician too) was motivated to show programming people how wrong they were in these nonterminating and vague discussions, by writing the awk version of chemlambda v2…. experiments were done and years later the project soared.

Seen from now, the only original part of GLC is in the emergent algebra nodes and rewrites.

]]> https://chorasimilarity.wordpress.com/2024/03/14/upim-we-found-little-need-in-molecular-computing-for-such-potentially-nonterminating-programs/#comment-132382 Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:01:26 +0000 http://chorasimilarity.wordpress.com/?p=10363#comment-132382 NONTERMINATING PROGRAMS can be useful for data storage using GLC in a distributed implementation. The real trick is the method of Interfacing with the graphs. Have you made any progress on that?

Hi yoctyl, nice to meet you.

Thank you for your accurate comment on reddit. Here too, I know about Victor work.

Rabbithole, wormhole, but is fun.

I hope my comment was not taken in umbrage! The computation atlas you are creating appears very interesting to me, however I cannot say that I am equipped with the understanding needed to judge for myself the real utility or applicability of your research.
I have an impression that not many are, hence ‘rabbithole’- in the sense of a burrow where few others can find your understanding, and certainly not in the sense of a dead-end.

Who am I? nobody special.. I have 3/4 of a mediocre north-american undergraduate degree in mathematics’ worth of background, plus some very surface exploration in lattices, categories, game semantics, linear logic, operational semantics..
I’m more interested in improved high level programming languages than I am in mathematics and alternative computational substrates, not to say the latter are uninteresting in the slightest.
Naturally, in examining programming language expressiveness one comes across the issue of tracking resource constraints, leading subsequently to this world of rewrite systems with explicit usage/duplication, initially via linear logic->interaction nets. My path to this point is probably not so dissimilar to that of Victor whose acquaintance you appear to have made some years ago (https://github.com/chorasimilarity/chemlambda-gui/issues/2) and who has now gone on to create this very parallel abstract machine for LC using inets as a foundation, in case you were not following: https://github.com/HigherOrderCO/hvm

You are welcome to be in contact via reddit private message, or email if you can see that which i provided here. I’m not afraid, but cannot promise to be interesting!

Thank you for your work