I am entering the discussion not to contribute: this seems to be among the best FIS threads I recall.
Instead, I want to open a metadiscussion. The background is that I have had some conversation with the board about FIS next steps. I am promoting the idea of focused workshops as one activity. This is motivated by two factors. One is that I believe that to the extent that we have a purpose, that purpose is furthered by producing something more targeted and concise than what can be done via flowing email. A second is that my company will allow me to sponsor some of these assuming that I can make some tenuous case that they further a corner of science that is relevant to our work. This involves models and notations of emergent systems which are concerns central to FIS. I literally make a case that the "success" of FIS (or something like it) is critical to the success of my efforts. So the meta topic that I would like to introduce is this: There seems to be general agreement that there is some order in the unperceived world, supplemented by perceived order. I see some differences in where the line is drawn and what the nature of that line is. Also what the "nature" of the implicit order is. We haven't touched much yet on how these two might not be conceptually similar. Also, we haven't yet mentioned much about the kind of order that may illuminate dynamics of emergence. If FIS were to host a workshop, say for a few days. And we had some sponsorship, say for travel and a facilitator/editor... And we chose something associated with the current discussion, perhaps focusing on the effect and utility of models on order... 1) What would be a reasonable agenda for such a project: scope, focus, goals? 2) What purpose would it serve in a scientific context? Let me start the metaconversation by repeating something I have said before. I think we are at the threshold of a new science that provides a better, deeper set of principles for understanding things in terms of self-organizing systems. I believe that it will help address problems that seem "very hard" or impossible with standard methods, and indeed insist that to be the definition of "new science." Therefore, I would propose that the workshop focus on something like a specific problem, and work through issues of models, notations, order, emergence. In the worst case, the product will be a crisp description of the different options, approaches and philosophies with possible test protocols. If we are scientists, and as passionate and insightful as the discussion shows, we may as well get serious, yes? -Ted -- __________ Ted Goranson Sirius-Beta _______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
