NTR: Seiche

[dr-shorthair]

Standing wave in enclosed water body https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seiche

[kaiiam]

In alignment with that which is noted in the editors note of the ENVO:radiation, we would need a wave class for full axiomatization of sieche.

wave
   standing wave
      seiche

I'm unsure to what wave should be subclass to. Perhaps BFO:process as according to the wave wiki a wave is

a disturbance of a field in which a physical attribute oscillates repeatedly at each point or propagates from each point to neighboring points, or seems to move through space.

Not to get super into the physics weeds but do we need to consider the wave particle duality concept? Which states that:

every particle or quantum entity may be partly described in terms not only of particles, but also of waves.

In that case how best to handle this in BFO? Particles CHEBI:subatomic particle are BFO:continuants, ENVO:radiation is a process. Should waves also be processes?

Alteratively Could wave be a BFO:specifically dependent continuant? Where @cmungall put the mixed potential and kinetic energy hierarchy which includes classes for wave energy.

BFO:specifically dependent continuant's definition states

b is a relational specifically dependent continuant = Def. b is a specifically dependent continuant and there are n > 1 independent continuants c1, … cn which are not spatial regions are such that for all 1 i < j n, ci and cj share no common parts, are such that for each 1 i n, b s-depends_on ci at every time t during the course of b’s existence.

Could waves be thought of as specifically dependent continuants as they are not dependent on a spatial region, but rather the matter within that region in which to propagate?

[dr-shorthair]

I believe those particular physics weeds only apply at quantum scales. Not relevant to water waves.

[kaiiam]

@dr-shorthair makes sense, I'm just not sure where wave should go within the BFO framework.

[dr-shorthair]

Yeah. A true 'standing' wave, though dynamic, might be a continuant. But I think that terminology is not quite what it seems in this context as a seiche has a finite lifespan, so is definitely an occurrent.

[kaiiam]

Makes sense, I'm leaning more toward wave as an occurent like how the radiation hierarchy falls under environmental system process

[cmungall]

Process makes intuitive sense to me.

But it's also good to check against use cases. What kinds of properties might you want to associate? As Simon mentions, duration is one which indicates occurrent. Would we ever measure mass, density, volume...? If so there is a continuant there (though it doesn't mean we need to name it, but if we do it avoids awkward blank nodes like volume and characteristic-of some (and slice-of some X))

On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 5:22 AM Kai Blumberg notifications@github.com wrote:

Makes sense, I'm leaning more toward wave as an occurent like how the radiation http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001023 hierarchy falls under environmental system process

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/EnvironmentOntology/envo/issues/834?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAAMMOPKYBLKLYYA4BS7QODQEVC75A5CNFSM4IJHMCW2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD4LVFBI#issuecomment-521622149, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAMMOJI533FVGB426GOAKTQEVC75ANCNFSM4IJHMCWQ .

[kaiiam]

From my basic physics, you would measure properties about a wave such as period amplitude etc. If you were to measure something like mass, density, or volume it would be of the water body in which the seiche is occurring no?

[cmungall]

OK, good, this justifies treating seiche/wave as a process

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:54 AM Kai Blumberg notifications@github.com wrote:

From my basic physics, you would measure properties about a wave such as period amplitude etc. If you were to measure something like mass, density, or volume it would be of the water body in which the seiche is occurring no?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/EnvironmentOntology/envo/issues/834?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAAMMOONQXFXY4SIR3QMX33QFOPJXA5CNFSM4IJHMCW2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD4VNAHI#issuecomment-522899485, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAMMOIQ7VONZGUETGVANPTQFOPJXANCNFSM4IJHMCWQ .