[MrMcCall]

Spacial dynamics don't need abstract thinking because they're concrete. For example: throwing a ball, or catching a ball.

Understanding the physics or logic behind complex moving pieces does require abstract thinking, but that's not what your brain does to perform physical feats.

We saw them, practiced dealing with them, then became proficient, or not.

[Tor3]

I'm talking about the time analyzing, not the time executing. And that's definitely abstract. And, as I mentioned, this applies to my design work too. And when programming. No words involved, until I write the documentation.

[MrMcCall]

> I'm talking about the time analyzing, not the time executing.

I see, and I agree.

> And when programming. No words involved, until I write the documentation.

Your variable names must be horrible ;-)

I do get your point about visualizing software relationships in the design phase, though. I'd still say, as a 40+ year programmer, that we can never escape the concept-words that are the foundation of programming, e.g. types, variables, functions, classes, encapsulation, pipeline, executable, etc.

Even if we are not consciously thinking of the terms, my guess is that, at a certain level of proficiency, we are using them at a kindof subconscious level.

It's an interesting meta-topic, and I won't say you're wrong, but we've certainly stumbled into a mostly unexplored land where no map yet exists. That's why programming is so challenging, difficult, and fascinating.

Peace be with you, friend.