A Unified Theory of Names

Summary of Unified Name Theory: Name theorists are currently divided into two camps: Frege and Milian. Frege theorist believes that the name has meaning of reference. It can explain things such as content change, general reference name replacement, meaning of owner's name, and so on. Their longstanding problem is to state these feelings. Millian theorists denied that the name had feelings and gained courage from Kripke's argument that the name is a strict indicator.

Helie and Sun recently proposed a unified framework to understand the problem solving creativity of explicit - recessive interaction (EII) creativity theory. This new theory constitutes an attempt to more uniformly explain related phenomena (by reinterpreting / integrating various existing existing hatching theories and insight theory). The computational implementation of this theory is based on the CLARION cognitive architecture and is used to simulate relevant human data. This research represents the first step in the development of process-based creativity theory, including latency, insight and various other relevant phenomena.

Scientific efforts to understand various natural phenomena are aimed at creating a theory that can explain many phenomena with minimum principle. These theories are sometimes called unified theory. Everyone does not agree with the meaning of "unity" or "unified theory" in science. Morrison (2000) states that although theoretical unity is a chaotic process, there may not be obvious universal features, but historically successful unified scientific theories often have two common features It was. Mathematical description) and (2) the principle of unity (unifying the abstract concept of different phenomena). In this concept, the unified psychedelic drug effect theory will provide a single formal (mathematical or computational) framework that can describe different psychedelic phenomena using the smallest unified principle.

There are some annoying things about unified physics. The two theories that need to be unified, the field quantum theory and Einstein's general relativity are very successful. Both predict better than the number of digits below the decimal point that the experimenter can manage. Both are based on persuasive principles. Both have defects including an unfortunate tendency to create many defects - but these flaws are still safely behind the scenes and have never succeeded in damaging the theoretical experience. However, if these theories are incompatible, you must give something. That is why it is very difficult to unite. At the meeting, I saw physicists include a list of hypotheses that backed their theory. Everyone seems to be firm. However, not all of them are correct. Probably after examining carefully, you will find that it is different from others. Or, since physicists are deeply rooted and not even hypothesised from their ideas, they may have removed the perpetrator from their list.