Ontology

Overview / Open Energy Ontology / Class - occurrent

Label: occurrent

Editor note:

BFO 2 Reference: every occurrent that is not a temporal or spatiotemporal region is s-dependent on some independent continuant that is not a spatial region

Editor note:

BFO 2 Reference: s-dependence obtains between every process and its participants in the sense that, as a matter of necessity, this process could not have existed unless these or those participants existed also. A process may have a succession of participants at different phases of its unfolding. Thus there may be different players on the field at different times during the course of a football game; but the process which is the entire game s-depends_on all of these players nonetheless. Some temporal parts of this process will s-depend_on on only some of the players.

Editor note:

Occurrent doesn't have a closure axiom because the subclasses don't necessarily exhaust all possibilites. An example would be the sum of a process and the process boundary of another process.

Editor note:

Simons uses different terminology for relations of occurrents to regions: Denote the spatio-temporal location of a given occurrent e by 'spn[e]' and call this region its span. We may say an occurrent is at its span, in any larger region, and covers any smaller region. Now suppose we have fixed a frame of reference so that we can speak not merely of spatio-temporal but also of spatial regions (places) and temporal regions (times). The spread of an occurrent, (relative to a frame of reference) is the space it exactly occupies, and its spell is likewise the time it exactly occupies. We write 'spr[e]' and `spl[e]' respectively for the spread and spell of e, omitting mention of the frame.

Sub classes:

process

view

Definition:

p is a process = Def. p is an occurrent that has temporal proper parts and for some time t, p s-depends_on some material entity at t. (axiom label in BFO2 Reference: [083-003])

Editor note:

BFO 2 Reference: The realm of occurrents is less pervasively marked by the presence of natural units than is the case in the realm of independent continuants. Thus there is here no counterpart of ‘object’. In BFO 1.0 ‘process’ served as such a counterpart. In BFO 2.0 ‘process’ is, rather, the occurrent counterpart of ‘material entity’. Those natural – as contrasted with engineered, which here means: deliberately executed – units which do exist in the realm of occurrents are typically either parasitic on the existence of natural units on the continuant side, or they are fiat in nature. Thus we can count lives; we can count football games; we can count chemical reactions performed in experiments or in chemical manufacturing. We cannot count the processes taking place, for instance, in an episode of insect mating behavior.Even where natural units are identifiable, for example cycles in a cyclical process such as the beating of a heart or an organism’s sleep/wake cycle, the processes in question form a sequence with no discontinuities (temporal gaps) of the sort that we find for instance where billiard balls or zebrafish or planets are separated by clear spatial gaps. Lives of organisms are process units, but they too unfold in a continuous series from other, prior processes such as fertilization, and they unfold in turn in continuous series of post-life processes such as post-mortem decay. Clear examples of boundaries of processes are almost always of the fiat sort (midnight, a time of death as declared in an operating theater or on a death certificate, the initiation of a state of war)

process attribute

view

Definition:

A process attribute is a dependent occurrent that existentially depends on a process.

process boundary

view

Definition:

p is a process boundary =Def. p is a temporal part of a process & p has no proper temporal parts. (axiom label in BFO2 Reference: [084-001])

spatiotemporal region

view

No description found.

temporal region

view

Editor note:

Temporal region doesn't have a closure axiom because the subclasses don't exhaust all possibilites. An example would be the mereological sum of a temporal instant and a temporal interval that doesn't overlap the instant. In this case the resultant temporal region is neither 0-dimensional nor 1-dimensional

Back to the super classes:

entity

view

Editor note:

BFO 2 Reference: In all areas of empirical inquiry we encounter general terms of two sorts. First are general terms which refer to universals or types:animaltuberculosissurgical procedurediseaseSecond, are general terms used to refer to groups of entities which instantiate a given universal but do not correspond to the extension of any subuniversal of that universal because there is nothing intrinsic to the entities in question by virtue of which they – and only they – are counted as belonging to the given group. Examples are: animal purchased by the Emperortuberculosis diagnosed on a Wednesdaysurgical procedure performed on a patient from Stockholmperson identified as candidate for clinical trial #2056-555person who is signatory of Form 656-PPVpainting by Leonardo da VinciSuch terms, which represent what are called ‘specializations’ in [81

Editor note:

Entity doesn't have a closure axiom because the subclasses don't necessarily exhaust all possibilites. For example Werner Ceusters 'portions of reality' include 4 sorts, entities (as BFO construes them), universals, configurations, and relations. It is an open question as to whether entities as construed in BFO will at some point also include these other portions of reality. See, for example, 'How to track absolutely everything' at http://www.referent-tracking.com/_RTU/papers/CeustersICbookRevised.pdf