The paper considers the intellectual computer mathematics system InparSolver, which is designed to automatically explore and solve basic classes of computational mathematics problems on multi-core computers with graphics accelerators. The problems of results reliability of solving problems with approximate input data are outlined. The features of the use of existing computer mathematics systems are analyzed, their weaknesses are found. The functionality of InparSolver, some innovative approaches to the implementation of effective solutions to problems in a hybrid architecture are described. Examples (...) of applied usage of InparSolver for processes mathematical modeling in various subject areas are given. Nowadays, new more complex objects and phenomena in many subject areas are constantly emerging, which are subject to mathematical research on a computer. This encourages the development of new numerical methods and technologies of mathematical modeling, as well as the creation of more powerful computers for their implementation. With the advent and constant development of supercomputers of various architectures, the problems of their effective use, expansion of tasks range should be solved, ensuring the reliability of computer results and increasing the level of intellectual information support for users ‒ specialists in various fields. Today, the issues of solving these problems are given special attention by many specialists in the fields of information technology and parallel programming. The world's leadingscientists in the field of computer technology see the solution to the problems of efficient usage of modern supercomputers in algorithmic software creation that easily adapts to different computer architectures with different types of memory and coprocessors, supports efficient parallelism on millions of cores etc. In addition, improving the efficiency of high-performance computing on modern supercomputers is provided by their intellectualization, transferring to the computer to perform a significant part of the functions. The industry of development and usage of intelligent computer technologies is one of the main directions of science and technology development in modern society. (shrink)

In a pair of very important papers, namely “Space, Time and Individuals” in the Journal of Philosophy for October 1955 and “The Indestructibility and Immutability of Substances” in Philosophical Studies for April 1956, Professor N. L. Wilson began something which badly needed beginning, namely the construction of a logically rigorous “substance-language” in which we talk about enduring and changing individuals as we do in common speech, as opposed to the “space-time” language favoured by very many mathematical logicians, perhaps most notably (...) by Quine. This enterprise of Wilson's is one with which I could hardly sympathize more heartily than I do; and one wishes for this logically rigorous “substance-language” not only when one is reading Quine but also when one is reading many other people. How fantastic it is, for instance, that Kotarbinski1 should call his metaphysics “Reism” when the very last kind of entity it has room for is things —instead of them it just has the world-lines or life-histories of things; “fourdimensional worms”, as Wilson says. Wilson, moreover, has at least one point of superiority to another rebel against space-time talk, P. F. Strawson; namely he does seriously attempt to meet formalism with formalism—to show that logical rigour is not a monopoly of the other side. At another point, however, Strawson seems to me to see further than Wilson; he is aware that substance-talk cannot be carried on without tenses, whereas Wilson tries to do without them. Wilson, in short, has indeed brought us out of Egypt; but as yet has us still wandering about the Sinai Peninsula; the Promised Land is a little further on than he has taken us. (shrink)

WHAT do we mean by saying that a being, God for example, is omniscient? One way of answering this question is to translate ‘God is omniscient’ into some slightly more formalised language than colloquial English, e.g. one with variables of a number of different types, including variables replaceable by statements, and quantifiers binding thes.

It is frequently said that words like ‘now’, ‘then’, ‘ago’, ‘present’, ‘past’, ‘future’ and the various indications of tense, are ‘egocentric’ or ‘token-reflexive’ in character. I want to suggest, on the contrary, that the apparent egocentricity or token-reflexiveness of this class of expression is deceptive. It is perhaps not easy to see how on a point of this sort deception is possible, but a parallel case may make the position clearer.