![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
We have the following categories:
- Conflicting Desires; D1xD2; an alternative would be to have a list of ranked desires.
- Fixed Condition, e.g. Allocation (A1xA2)
- Material, with at least two properties, P1xP2
- Process, with at least two stages, S2 after S1, e.g. make and use.
- Design, with at least two components, C1xC2
- Cost, with at least two components, T1->T<-T2; can probably be modeled as a monoid.
- Outcomes, with at least two components. O1->O<-O1.
A constant functor from D to A can be called "no-brainer."
upd: We can also think of a natural transformation to the coproduct b/w functors mapping Desires onto Designs.
upd 2: We can augment Bob Coecke's resource theory framework with costs.
- Conflicting Desires; D1xD2; an alternative would be to have a list of ranked desires.
- Fixed Condition, e.g. Allocation (A1xA2)
- Material, with at least two properties, P1xP2
- Process, with at least two stages, S2 after S1, e.g. make and use.
- Design, with at least two components, C1xC2
- Cost, with at least two components, T1->T<-T2; can probably be modeled as a monoid.
- Outcomes, with at least two components. O1->O<-O1.
A constant functor from D to A can be called "no-brainer."
upd: We can also think of a natural transformation to the coproduct b/w functors mapping Desires onto Designs.
upd 2: We can augment Bob Coecke's resource theory framework with costs.