6e992cc0c5
- Rename 'three-pronged' folder to 'knowledge-layers' — prong metaphor
was misleading (implied parallel tines), replaced with epistemic layers
(deductive base, empirical middle, probabilistic oracle — vertical stack)
- Collapse 11 overlapping files into 3 coherent documents:
- knowledge-layers/_index.org: core framework (two engines + one store,
World Model formula, 0-14 layer table, provenance store design,
conflict resolution, cold-start, stage mapping)
- knowledge-layers/practical-implications.org: design-world-aware-of-
physics, 10 powers, Schafmeister existence proof, epistemic transparency
- knowledge-layers/neurological-empirical.org: neural networks in
provenance framework (kept intact)
- Relocate wolfram/mathematica and Schafmeister docs to ideas/viability/
- Integrate into main architecture _index.org:
- Gate: expanded from two vectors (ACL2+LLM) to three (deductive,
provenance/empirical, LLM oracle)
- Autodidactic loop: split into Track 1 (deductive hardening, fast)
and Track 2 (empirical validation, slow, experimental-feedback-driven)
- See also: added Knowledge Layers cross-reference
- Add all-lisp geometry engine note (ideas/lisp-geometry-engine.org) as
concrete illustration of the empirical layer's effect on design work
- Rebuild site: 148 files, 0 errors
31 lines
1.8 KiB
Org Mode
31 lines
1.8 KiB
Org Mode
#+title: Orders of Magnitude
|
|
#+filetags: :passepartout:framework:time:scale:hierarchy:
|
|
|
|
:PROPERTIES:
|
|
:ID: 2cdca4b0-6b41-44b4-acb0-af21d0e27b00
|
|
:ID: orders-of-magnitude-time
|
|
:CREATED: [2026-05-23 Sat]
|
|
:END:
|
|
|
|
Time at human scales is best thought of in orders of magnitude, not linear progression. Each jump in scale is qualitatively different — the constraints, the tools, the feedback loops, and the failure modes change entirely.
|
|
|
|
The hierarchy:
|
|
|
|
| Scale | What fits | Feedback | Failure mode |
|
|
|-------|-----------|----------|--------------|
|
|
| Minutes | Firefighting, ops, real-time decisions | Instant | Burnout, whiplash |
|
|
| Hours | Work session, meeting, focused task | Same day | Interruption cascade |
|
|
| Days | Shippable thing, momentum building | Next day | Drift, distraction |
|
|
| Weeks | Sprint, feature, market pulse | One cycle | Wrong direction |
|
|
| Months | Product cycle, hiring, traction | One data point | Bleeding out slow |
|
|
| Years | Company, [[id:aa6d062e-a520-5d14-8773-00687ed9c689][moats]], technology shifts | Scarce | Irrelevance |
|
|
| Generations | Culture, regulation, infrastructure | Post-founding | Irreversibility |
|
|
|
|
Practical use:
|
|
|
|
When planning anything, identify which order of magnitude you're operating in — then use the tools and cadence appropriate to that scale, not the one below or above it. A minutes problem solved with a weeks solution is overengineering; a years problem approached with days thinking is naive.
|
|
|
|
Common mistake: treating a months/years problem as if it can be solved in days/weeks (startup hype, premature optimization) or a minutes problem as if it deserves weeks of deliberation (analysis paralysis, bikeshedding).
|
|
|
|
The [[id:dc2e4f22-1c4c-5d4a-a151-f96e5d3b0d70][Time estimates]] page applies this framework to [[id:28c46769-c14b-42aa-ac7a-69d310157f8f][Passepartout]]'s development timeline.
|