Talk:PROSE modeling language

This page (PROSE modeling language) is very incomplete. I just started editing it. I need to upload some personally created image files (Figures). for insertion into it (dealing with copyright issues). Is there a way to create the article offline and then publish it? Beartham (talk) 16:38, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can put it in your user namespace: User:Beartham/PROSE modeling language. Be sure to use the page move option so that the history is kept; if you can't move because you're not yet autoconfirmed, then I can do it for you if you like. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 09:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article is pretty much complete now, except for the references, which I intend to start adding now. I would appreciate any criticism (recommendations). Since PROSE was the world's introduction to the MetaCalculus paradigm, which had a long history before and after PROSE, and is being resurrected in the cloud now, I am now going to start another article (MetaCalculus) that will discuss its evolution from the Apollo era to date, including its origination of WISC (writable instruction-set computers) in the 1980s, and its potential future merging with other paradigms to simplify K-12 STEM education and renew growth in R&D markets. Beartham (talk) 17:47, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged the article with the {{more footnotes}} tag. The article makes quite a few bold claims, and I'd like to see specific references, preferably with page numbers (you can use the rp template for that). QVVERTYVS (hm?) 19:35, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern about the bold claims, and I appreciate your assistance in asking for the specific references, as I definitely want people to research them. I added hyperlinks to make this easy. There is an important back-story as to the reason the claims seem bold. What has happened is that the industry mainstream has diverged into intermediate disciplines that never were motivated to escalate DIY modeling as we were.

For example, it has been an embarrassment to the academics of the Autodiff movement that FortranCalculus, the 7th generation MetaCalculus modeling language, was demonstrated at their very first conference in 1991 on a Toshiba laptop. Consequently, in all their many publications, they don't even mention PROSE, which had been a commercial time-sharing language 17 years before, even though its example broke the dam of academic resistance to "non-symbolic" calculus for them to grow their movement. In Kuhn's scenario, PROSE shifted the paradigm, and the autodiff people have been engaged in phase three normal-science puzzle solving and publication ever since. Yet nobody has yet built the escalator to automate modeling, or even seems to know how.

PROSE laid the groundwork for calculus hardware. In the 1980s we designed and built this WISC hardware, and created two key patents, the latter becoming famous in the "patent-troll" infringement case against Intel. The reason we are coming forward in Wikipedia now is that we want to see this "metacomputer host architecture" emerge again as quad-core WISC elements of many-core RISC chips to support nested AD in hardware logic. Both of the patents have expired now, paving the way for open-source software-in-hardware development, automated by Metacybernetics. Beartham (talk) 20:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're saying "we are coming forward in Wikipedia". You are aware of the rules on conflict of interest and original research, right? QVVERTYVS (hm?) 09:01, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am certainly aware that as an originator of these technologies, I have a perceived conflict of interest in seeing them emerge into mainstream awareness. I do have a few colleagues who have been involved in these technologies since the PROSE era. As I do want to comply by your rules, I will ask them to take over the editorial role. Thank you for your valued clarification and support. Beartham (talk) 21:20, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Advert and Technical tags

The entire article is written in a very technical and jargon-y style, and is probably incomprehensible to almost all Wikipedia readers as written. "Yet AD was applied in nestable iterative holons in PROSE semantics, giving rise to a threefold alphabet of holistic operator templates for very-high-order mathematical modeling" - Heck, I can't tell if this is a real statement or word salad. And if this is a real statement, it's only going to be comprehensible to a very narrow and deep specialty. And the computing related definitions of "holons" and "holarchy" appear to have been added to those articles recently as well.

It also reads very promotionally, and all of the references appear to lead back to a single website (www.metacalculus.com), and I'm concerned that even meets the standards for notability. This appears to have been a minor language/system in the seventies, which is being used to promote a new commercial(?) product along similar lines. Rwessel (talk) 00:09, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]