This paper makes 3 contributions:

1. A formal statement of the ownership clause for DIP, making explicit what Martin’s examples illustrate, but his DIP statement does not. 2. A proof that DIP’s ownership clause applied per client implies ISP universally at the class level, with the converse holding only under client-driven evolution. 3. The identification of three distinct interface evolution origins—client-driven, provider-driven, and shared governance—as the conceptual framework that explains why the ISP-DIP connection was historically hard to see and why ISP retains independent value outside client-driven contexts.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48306055

Points: 2

# Comments: 1

First using Bob Martin's own words. Then, formally, using the concept of change driver.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48306019

Points: 2

# Comments: 1

Synchronizing with Syncthing works well enough both on desktops and smartphones.

This works really well.

Now, it's clear that I have no idea how much of this is something we would consider new and original, and how much is a kind of systematic, but not novel, easy of thinking.

What I couldn't do so far is get an LLM to generate a truly new maths theory, with new abstract concepts and dimensions and points of view. The kind that is not just a combination of existing theories and logic.

Note: I'm not sure this is formulated well, or even if I am able to articulate this correctly.

In mathematics and physics, complex numbers aren't just "imaginary" values—they are the secret language of 2D rotation. While real numbers live on a 1D line, complex numbers inhabit a 2D plane, and multiplying them acts as a bridge between dimensions. 1. The Geometry of i To understand how we switch dimensions, look at the imaginary unit i. In a standard real-number system, you only move left or right. Adding i introduces a vertical axis. * The 90-degree turn: Multiplying a real number by i is geometrically equivalent to a 90° counter-clockwise rotation. * The Dimension Switch: If you start at 1 (on the x-axis) and multiply by i, you land at i (on the y-axis). You have effectively "switched" your direction from horizontal to vertical. 2. Rotation via Euler’s Formula The most elegant link between complex numbers and rotation is Euler’s Formula: This formula places any complex number on a unit circle in the complex plane. When you multiply a vector by e^{i\theta}, you aren't changing its length; you are simply rotating it by the angle \theta. Why this matters: * Algebraic Simplicity: Instead of using messy rotation matrices (which involve four separate multiplications and additions), you can rotate a point by simply multiplying two complex numbers. * Phase in Physics: This is why complex numbers are used in electrical engineering and quantum mechanics. A "phase shift" in a wave is just a rotation in the complex plane. 3. Beyond 2D: Quaternions If complex numbers (a + bi) handle 2D rotations by adding one imaginary dimension, what happens if we want to rotate in 3D? To handle 3D space without hitting "Gimbal Lock" (where two axes align and you lose a degree of freedom), mathematicians use Quaternions. These extend the concept to three imaginary units: i, j, and k. > The Rule of Four: Interestingly, to rotate smoothly in three dimensions, you actually need a four-dimensional number system. > Summary Table | Number System | Dimensions | Primary Use in Rotation | |---|---|---| | Real Numbers | 1D | Scaling (stretching/shrinking) | | Complex Numbers | 2D | Planar rotation, oscillations, AC circuits | | Quaternions | 4D | 3D computer graphics, aerospace navigation |

They can be treated as vectors, but they have "superpowers" that standard vectors do not. 1. The Similarities (The 2D Map) In a purely visual or structural sense, a complex number z = a + bi behaves exactly like a 2D vector \vec{v} = (a, b). * Addition: Adding two complex numbers is identical to "tip-to-tail" vector addition. * Magnitude: The "absolute value" (modulus) of a complex number |z| = \sqrt{a^2 + b^2} is the same as the length of a vector. * Coordinates: Both represent a point on a 2D plane. 2. The Difference: Multiplication This is where complex numbers leave standard 2D vectors in the dust. In standard vector algebra (like what you'd use in an introductory physics class), there isn't a single, clean way to "multiply" two 2D vectors to get another 2D vector. You have the Dot Product (which gives you a single number/scalar) and the Cross Product (which actually points out of the 2D plane into the 3D world). Complex numbers, however, can be multiplied together to produce another complex number. The "Rotation" Secret When you multiply two complex numbers, the math automatically handles two things at once: * Scaling: The lengths are multiplied. * Rotation: The angles are added. Standard vectors cannot do this on their own; you would need to bring in a "Rotation Matrix" to force a vector to turn. A complex number just "knows" how to turn naturally through its imaginary component. 3. When to use which? Mathematically, complex numbers form a Field, while vectors form a Vector Space. * Use Vectors when you are dealing with forces, velocities, or any dimension higher than 2 (like 3D space). * Use Complex Numbers when you are dealing with things that rotate, vibrate, or oscillate (like radio waves, electricity, or quantum particles). > The Peer-to-Peer Truth: Think of a complex number as a vector with an attitude. It lives in the same 2D house, but it knows how to spin and transform itself algebraically in ways a simple (x, y) coordinate cannot. >

I check context use percentage, and above ~70% I ask it to generate a prompt for continuation in a new chat session to avoid compaction.

It works fine, and saves me from using precious tokens for context compaction.

Maybe you should try it.

I know first-hand that low energy-levels and lacking energy production mechanically lead to depression.

Also, look at how people (children also) experience the world and their relationships and their stresses when they are tired (or even just hungry) compared to when they are fit...

Fix those, and the depression might be gone.

This is not bashing against anti-depressants, they play their role to. But in some cases, energy-management is key.

This paper is the result _so far_. Specifically, I asked the AI to propose treatment protocols for people with severe ME/CFS, which should yield significant improvements quickly. With the hope to give them back quickly a decent quality of life and the emotional and physical means to fight against this disease in the long term.

Disclaimer: I am not a doctor. This work is the result of careful instructions given to an AI, including requests for the AI to formulate novel hypotheses, make links to other diseases with similar symptoms or underlying mechanisms. So, while a part of the paper is generated in a brainstorming mode, the protocols of chapters 16 and 17 are not, and most of the paper has been generated and documented with explicit request of honesty, strictest math. and logic rigor and correctness, rigorous citations of sources.

It also proposes several research directions, sorted from most promising to least promising.

This paper provides additional information and insights (not medical advice - that, you might get from your doctor, maybe sharing the paper with them), I wish it will help those out there who need help managing ME/CFS or who face a continuous lack of energy, wherever it may come from.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46764255

Points: 1

# Comments: 1