Editor, Editors, USER, admin, Bureaucrats, Check users, dev, editor, founder, Interface administrators, member, oversight, Suppressors, Administrators, translator
11,073
edits
(Created page with "{{transl}} left|300x300px Nei capitoli precedenti abbiamo considerato la complessità diagnostica in medicina tenendo conto specialmente di alcuni parametri quali le variabili nascoste che soltanto l'evoluzione della conoscenza di base nel tempo ci permetterà di individuare e le difficoltà nel decodificare il segnale criptato che il Sistema Nervoso Centrale invia all'esterno sotto forma di linguaggio verbale. Non ultimo le limitazi...") |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{transl}} | {{transl}} | ||
[[File:Spasmo emimasticatorio.jpg|left|300x300px]] | [[File:Spasmo emimasticatorio.jpg|left|300x300px]] | ||
In the previous chapters we have considered the diagnostic complexity in medicine taking into account especially some parameters such as the hidden variables that only the evolution of basic knowledge over time will allow us to identify and the difficulties in decoding the encrypted signal that the Central Nervous System sends to the external in the form of verbal language. | |||
Last but not least, the limitations imposed by a deterministic mindset that reduces knowledge in specialist contexts by limiting its diagnostic capacity. An alternative mindset to deterministics that primarily considers a logic of fuzzy language and the important contribution of quantum probability would allow us to expand the scientific-clinical horizons and delve into a mesoscopic reality. | |||
In this chapter, therefore, we will deal with the diagnosis of our Mary Poppins following the scientific-clinical process, evaluating the difficulties of implementation and the added value of the encrypted code identified in the hepaptic transmission.{{ArtBy| | |||
{{ArtBy| | |||
| autore = Gianni Frisardi | | autore = Gianni Frisardi | ||
| autore2 = Giorgio Cruccu | | autore2 = Giorgio Cruccu | ||
Line 15: | Line 14: | ||
| }} | | }} | ||
=== | === Introduction === | ||
From what has been exposed in the previous chapters from the 'Introduction' to the '[[Logic of medic language]]' chapters, beyond the complexity of the arguments and the vagueness of the verbal language, we found ourselves faced with a dilemma that of the context in which the patient is referred and in these cases for our poor Mary Poppins it seems to dominate the dental context, given the positive assertions reported by the clinical and laboratory tests performed on the patient. | |||
{{Q2|then the dentist triumph!| | {{Q2|then the dentist triumph!|it would seem apparently but ......}} | ||
The clinical case of our poor Mary Poppins shows all the physiopathological and clinical complexity but above all a phenomenon of overlapping of propositions, statements and logical phrases in the dental and neurological context in which, one context obtains compatibility and coherence while the other incoherence. | |||
Basically, given the compatibility and consistency of sentence {{:F:Imo}} (dental context) with the assertions derived from the clinical test reporting {{:F:Delta series}}, consistently say that Orofacial Pain is caused by a Temporomandibular Disorder could become incompatible if another set of clinical statements <math>(\gamma_1,\gamma_2,.....\gamma_n \ )</math> were consistent with sentence <math>\Im_n</math> (neurological context) and contextually opposite, from a diagnostic point of view, to {{:F:Imo}}<blockquote>Therefore, there would be a source of logistical conflict between the two specialist contexts with inevitable diagnostic delay, also polluting the decryption process of the signal in the machine language of the Central Nervous System (CNS).</blockquote>What will determine the access key for decoding the encrypted code in machine language (SNC) and will allow us to intercept a demarcation line will be an irrefutable clinical and / or laboratory data called {{:F:Tau}}, which will confirm or exclude the consistency of an assertion than the other. It is essential, at this point, a <math>\Im_d</math> sentence (demarcation sentence) of the type will be: <blockquote>Does Mary Poppins have a neuromotor disorder or a Temporomandibular Disorder? </blockquote>We explain this step in detail: | |||
Si ricordi che da '[[The logic of classical language - en|The logic of classical language]]' si evince : | |||
Si ricordi che: | |||
*Un insieme di frasi {{:F:Im}}, e un numero <math>n\geq1</math> di altre asserzioni <math>(\delta_1,\delta_2,.....\delta_n \ )</math> sono logicamente compatibili se, e solo se, l'unione tra di loro <math>\Im\cup\{\delta_1,\delta_2.....\delta_n\}</math> è coerente | *Un insieme di frasi {{:F:Im}}, e un numero <math>n\geq1</math> di altre asserzioni <math>(\delta_1,\delta_2,.....\delta_n \ )</math> sono logicamente compatibili se, e solo se, l'unione tra di loro <math>\Im\cup\{\delta_1,\delta_2.....\delta_n\}</math> è coerente |
edits