Sitting in my car: analog vs digital logic

I was thinking about the dichotomy of analog vs digital/ discrete signals, and the logical linguistic equivalence.

Formal (symbolic or Boolean) logic is entirely digital logic.

In formal logic there are operators (and, or, not, if/then) and values (true, false).

These values in digital logic represent presence or absence: yes or no, on or off. The signal is there, or it is not.

Logic is a very robust way for building reliable systems.

In physics, energy signals can be represented as a waveform or particles. That is, analog or digital.

I was just thinking that even in digital logic, in order to have a “yes” value, there needs to be a threshold, or an ideal curve which acts as the set point.

But this set point is arbitrary, in the sense that there is a human judgment that decides what that necessary threshold is to trigger “on” or yes is.

The operators in formal logic are represented as relays or contacts or logic gates in digital logic.

Values (propositional statements/ premises) in formal logic are either true and false. And they are true and false based on their facticity, which is arrived at inductive reasoning/ empirical observation/ testing, and therefore is entirely a matter of probability.

When we observe the world, we can look at things are true or false. Presence or absence.

That is a very logical way of looking at things.

However, what is the analog approach?

When someone makes judgements about the truths and clarity of facts or values, they do so by making judgements according to a set of preconceived criteria of what qualifies something as true, present, real. Can my senses engage with it? See it touch it hear it? Can others? Okay. It is true, a fact.

But then we bring in the matter of perception.

Perception is very different from observation.

Perception is loaded with criteria, loaded with ideas about the world, and what we see.

Observation is very superficial, and therefore honest, devoid of bias.

Just because you perceive something doesn’t make it true. The perception is a product of the mind, not of the thing/experience.

Observation is devoid of judgment. It is a stoic or apathetic attitude which allows you to see the world as it is.

Perception: roasted turkey dinner.

Observation: dead burnt bird carcass.

I just was thinking about the simultaneous existence of the waveform and particle, analog and digital experience of man, and how it influenced thoughts, and ideas.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.