Two analyst competencies

Introduction

In the last article, Projection Modeling, I gave definitions and theses of projection modeling. Starting with this, I will begin a detailed story, why is it done so and not otherwise, and how it works.

Duality

You can often hear: this object at the same time has properties such and such properties. For example, this can often be heard about a quantum particle. Ostensibly, it possesses both wave properties and particle properties. There are no dualities in my model. As soon as duality appears, it means that we have either two different points of view on the description of a 4-D object, or two different methods.

Two points of view

Take the operation to transfer parts from production to the warehouse. For the turner who made the part, this operation will sound like this: transfer the manufactured part to the warehouse. For the storekeeper, the same operation will have a completely different meaning: take the part to the warehouse. Two different points of view give rise to different interpretations of the same 4-D volume: for a turner, this is an operation to transfer a part, and for a storekeeper, to receive a part.

One subject applies a “sale” method to a 4-D volume and receives a sale operation. I told about the methods in the article What is hidden behind the term modeling . He is trying to apply the “purchase” method to this volume and does not get the result. Another subject applies the “buy” method to the same 4-D volume and receives a purchase transaction. He is trying to apply the “sale” method to this volume and does not get the result. Both use the same “buy” and “sell” methods, however, their subjective position contributes to the analysis, with the result that the methods return different results. It turns out that the operation is dual? No, of course, just different points of view.
')
In real models, we are constantly confronted with such tasks — as the same 4-D object is modeled to meet the needs of several customers. For example, a purchase operation for an enterprise is a sale operation for a supplier. And, if we create an information system for both counterparties, then we must learn to treat the same 4-D volume in different ways. By the way, system engineering cannot do this, because it contains the postulate that one 4-D volume is one of its interpretation.

Different methods

Now look at the example with the electron. Here duality arises for another reason. Consider the situation in detail.

Let there be a subject. Let him have two methods: the method of "wave" and the method of "particle". In the macrocosm, these methods are mutually exclusive. That is, the successful application of the “wave” method to a 4-D object clearly indicates that the “particle” method is not applicable to the same 4-D object. However, in the microworld, the successful application of the “wave” method to 4-D volume does not guarantee that the “particle” method is not applicable to the same 4-D object. From this, the subject is inconvenient - in the macrocosm, these methods are mutually exclusive, and the microworld is not.

All because we do not study the world, we study our understanding of the world. We have an idea that the wave method and the particle method should mutually exclude each other, and when we see that this is not the case, we are talking about the counter-intuitiveness of quantum mechanics and the duality of the electron. But where did we get the idea that these methods should be mutually exclusive? From experience. But how relevant is our experience? Neither. This is the problem - we are trying to measure everything with the standards of anthropomorphic perception. We hardly allow other ways of perception and interpretation of reality.

The example of a quantum particle seems rather exotic. Let's take a more practical example. Let there be a process of pouring rubble into the receiving bin of a concrete plant. Looking at him, you see the flow of rubble, but do not distinguish individual events. It is hard for you to imagine that perception can be how fast, that a given stream will be perceived as rare events when another stone crosses the plane of the receiving basket.

Or vice versa. We can observe a rare phenomenon - the birth of a new star. But it is very difficult for us to imagine ourselves so slow as to imagine the birth of stars in a continuous stream.

That is, the application of methods depends on the perception we now possess.

All these examples seem to be strained, but in practice we are constantly confronted with them. For example, there is a function of the enterprise: to produce locomotives. The trick is that, speaking a function, we mean such a way of perception in which events on the release of locomotives merge into one stream. We make ourselves so slow to see it, but not conscious enough to understand it.

findings

For successful modeling, we need to break the mirror, which reflects our favorite ego. We need to abandon the anthropomorphic perception of the world and assume that there are different subjects, each of which has its own point of view. That is, the analyst must acquire such flexibility of perception in which he can change both the modes of perception and points of view. In the article Function, Scenario and Approximation of Events, I consider how these skills allow us to correctly separate functions and scenarios. In the article The concept of connection in projection modeling, I explain in more detail the definition of connection.