--- Rob Withers <reefedjib at yahoo.com> wrote:

> It also struck me that we currently view Squeak as a
> system of groups (with nested groups and atomic
> groups
> - stateless, like the number 7), and the
> foundational
> recursive relation is the msg send.  Would you say
> that other ideas in this thread are trying to make
> our
> system more like a system of fields? ...and I use
> that
> term non-rigorously, not really knowing what a
> field-based algebra is defined. 

Alan, I looked here:
http://www.math.niu.edu/~beachy/aaol/frames_index.html
and I am not sure whether Squeak currently acts like
formally defined groups (it violates associativity?)
nor whether there is much parallel to algebraic fields
when we start talking about StarLogo and endocrine
systems and the field-theory of message propogation,
by Mario Tokoro, you had mentioned.  

I suppose I was asking whether there is any algebraic
formulism or foundation to this field-theory work, but
I am asking this from a position that I wont really
understand the answer.  So let me retract it, for the
moment, and I will reread Mr. Tokoro's work.

thanks!
Rob