"strata in geology have *some* precedent (shears and folds) for that, but I can't think of a biological example"
Epidermis, dermis, hypodermis? They interact. Frank Wimberly Phone (505) 670-9918 On Jun 9, 2017 10:12 PM, "Steven A Smith" <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote: > Vlad - > > I find your use/choice/settling-upon "lamina/laminae" seems very > motivated, though I can't articulate why. I suppose because it has some > connotation related to concepts like "laminar flow" which is structurally > similar to the vulgar (your implication not mine) "layer" which connotes > the "laying down of" a series of membranes or strata. I'm not sure I know > how to think about ply which seems to be derived from the world of > engineered "laminates", suggesting perhaps a small number (under 5?) and > engineered rather than "grown" or "evolved"? > > The idea of one lamina penetrating another is fascinating... it seems like > strata in geology have *some* precedent (shears and folds) for that, but I > can't think of a biological example, nor can I guess what you were trying > to achieve by developing methods for said penetration? > > I appreciate your offering the insight that networks (can?) offer a > redistribution of "stress" (which I take to include engineering/mechanical > stress, but also hydrostatic pressure, even semantic stresses in a concept > graph/network) ? > > As a long time practicioner in the field of 3D Viz, I understand your > affinity for it, but feel it has it's limits. Not all concepts ground > directly out in 3D Geometry, but require much more subtle and complex > metaphorical basis which in turn might be *rendered* as a 3D object (more > to the point, a complex system projected down into a 3D space using > geometric primitives?) > > I do agree with what I think is your supposition that our evolution as > animal/mammal/primate/omnivore/predator has given us tools for 3D spatial > reasoning, but I think we are also blessed (cursed) with topological > reasoning (graphs/networks) of which linguistics/semiotics might simply be > a (signifcant) subset of? I would claim that code is primarily topological, > though in a somewhat degenerate fashion. I used to wonder why the term > "spaghetti code" was used in such derision, I suspect the most interesting > code might very well be so arbitrarily complex as to deserve that term. I > understand that taking (otherwise) simple linear structures and rendering > them unrecognizeable with jumps/goto's is pathological. > > I think I will have to think a little (lot) more about your description of > your stack of rectangular matrices, self-avoiding walks and > Hamiltonian/Eulerian (processes?). I will attempt to parse more of this > and respond under separate cover. > > Referencing your (imaginary) namesake, I am feeling mildly impaled on my > own petard here! > > - Steve > > On 6/9/17 6:51 PM, Vladimyr wrote: > >> Nicholas, >> I hear your plea and would come to your defense if we were closer. >> >> I have a small story that explains my attitude to layer from an >> Advanced Composite Engineering view point. >> It took me probably 3 years to eradicate the word in my laboratory We >> were using various materials and filament >> winding with robotic machines. The basic concept is to use lamina as a >> term to describe an entity with specific material properties. >> When we talked about many lamina then we used the term laminae each was >> composed of any number of lamina >> having a unique material property set and referenced to local and global >> coordinates. This aggressive language facilitated >> structural analysis of complex structures. Each lamina had a designation >> to allow it to function within a laminate . no one really cared >> very much about what a single lamina of unidirectional Carbon fiber >> thought of the terminology. What mattered was the finished structure >> with interacting laminates and monolithic components to remain intact >> when used by people. >> >> Layer is a word used by simpletons or illiterates that never have to >> analyze why something failed and killed good people. >> The Onion is a metaphor for some complicated word gamers or a hamburger >> condiment but one must specify which context before >> breaking into a brawl. >> >> We had other terms used at the same time as layer, such as plies from the >> lumber industry but they were easier to eradicate. >> >> Our specificity was a consequence of our Mathematics and our robots. >> Matrix Stacking was the key procedure we used. >> In our case no lamina ever penetrated another, until I violated the >> social norms and found a method to do so but that innovation >> never found a mathematical support structure nor does it have a >> biological analogue. >> >> The language seems to control the way your group thinks. English was my >> third language so I am not so biased about some words >> as some of you seem. Now the conversation is sliding ever closer to my >> interests, graph theory and networks, though I seem unique >> in seeing engineered structures as networks that can or cannot >> redistribute stress. >> >> Since language can become a tool of Control Freaks I tend to favour 3D >> images to explain critical matters. They usually shut down the bickering. >> >> But lately I have gone a bit rogue using stacks of images and video to >> try and explain what twirls in my head. Nicholas and Steve Smith >> seem to be punching in the right direction. I ran into a problem with >> some of my code that was wholly unexpected and it actually >> was the circularity condition. You had to view it from a certain location >> to see the Circularity , anywhere else you would see either columns or >> helices. >> >> I had not specifically written the code to do any of these, my brain was >> jumping to conclusions. I had the code on one screen and the graphics >> running beside on the left. >> >> I had to spend hours staring and watching my own brain fight over which >> reality to accept. Evolution has left us many peculiar brain structures >> that were once useful but now >> a hindrance. >> >> Complexity may be real, but it may also be an unnatural effort for some >> brains. Words are nearly useless in this arena. So well maybe are the 2D >> excel charts. Steve may just be accidentally >> flattering my interests having recently been reading up on Graph Theory. >> Indeed I wonder about Nodes and unusual valences. To illustrate my own bent >> mental models I used >> my mental models to write code and translate a Stack of Rectangular >> Matrices (6 in total) 28 rows and 162 columns Each represents a Self >> Avoiding walk neither Eulerian or Hamiltonian, >> or a little of each since I work in 3D at least. I did the unthinkable... >> I connected Nodes to Nodes of different Matrices, then I purged nodes only >> connected to those of each sheet. What remained >> I plotted as surfaces in 3D. Then I converted these vertex positions into >> Object files .obj which now can be printed by 3D printers when scaled >> properly. So there gentleman I can now print my >> Mad Mental Models but that is just the beginning I have established a >> methodology to distinguish rigid Body Motion from Growth and present them >> simultaneously. But now it get`s very weird, >> To see the growth I had to do much fiddling with code. The growth must be >> synchronized to the frame rate of the display. Or to my brain throughput >> capacity. >> I have seen great Hollywood animations and may have repeated what is >> already well known but generally out of reach for academics. I use >> Processing to display these moving 3D objects with some difficulty >> but it does work. >> >> So take a look you may have to download >> >> https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkyNFoHD7DbjevjZM >> >> This Flower is the intersection of 5 Self Avoiding Walk Graphs in 3D >> space, each Matrix is tubular they are nested inside each other as like a >> Russian Doll. >> Not an Onion .I applied a growth factor to a single region of the fifth >> matrix while moving the entire structure via rotation. Examination of any >> single Matrix would >> never reveal the existence of the whole entity but a combination of any >> two would give the wrong conclusion but only some vague insight that >> something exists but not what it is. >> Oh each frame is a complete 3D structure so this may mean the video is 4D >> yet you are seeing it on a 2D display device pretty good for a geezer. >> Next each edge needs to be given some material properties amenable to >> change perhaps based on proximity. >> >> I suppose any man that goes this far must be quite Mad Indeed , but I >> hope it helps keep us engaged and civil. >> It looks like it may be possible to target each region with unique Growth >> Factors or engineering properties. >> >> I hope this qualifies as useful. >> vib >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Nick Thompson >> Sent: June-09-17 3:02 PM >> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: >> Any non-biological complex systems? >> >> Sorry. Slip of the "pen". Layers it is. >> >> Nick >> >> Nicholas S. Thompson >> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University >> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ? >> Sent: Friday, June 09, 2017 3:06 PM >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: >> Any non-biological complex systems? >> >> >> Ha! I don't know if this is fun or not. But you are making me giggle. >> So that's good. 8^) >> >> On 06/09/2017 11:54 AM, Nick Thompson wrote: >> >>> But wait a minute! Holding a side the mathematical meaning of model for >>> a minute, what is the difference between a model and a metaphor? >>> >> >> I recently made an ass of myself arguing this very point with Vladimyr >> and Robert. But to recap, "model" is too ambiguous to be reliable without >> lots of context. Onions are definitely not metaphors. When you bit into >> one, your body reacts. To the best of my knowledge, no such reaction >> occurs when you bite into a metaphor. >> >> >> In which case, don't we get to examine which features of an onion you >>> have in mind? >>> >> >> The feature I care about is the 3 dimensional near-symmetry and the fact >> that the concept of levels is less useful in such a situation. We could >> also use Russian dolls instead of onions, if that would be clearer. >> >> >> If your notion of an onion is just a project of your notion of levels of >>> complexity, then how does it help to say that levels of complexity (or >>> whatever) are onion-like? >>> >> >> Sheesh. I'm trying to stop you from using the word "level". That's all >> I'm doing. Maybe you're too smart for your own good. I don't care about >> ANYTHING else at this point, simply that the word "level" sucks. Stop >> using it. >> >> >> Remember, I am the guy who thinks that a lot of the problems we have in >>> evolutionary science arise from failing to take Darwin's metaphor (natural >>> selection) seriously enough. >>> >> >> Yes, I know. That's why it baffles me that you can't see my point that >> layer is better than level. >> >> >> -- >> ☣ glen >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe >> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe >> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >> > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove