Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Fuggit, work can wait, the first proposal is in final edit and the second one is under control, so why delay my response. Re: your question of what do I find ridiculous: Not the subject of the referenced paper, certainly. Rather our little group's pronounced tendency to niggle and (dare I say it?) pontificate over the true, deep, and (dare I say it?) philosophical meanings of words. Like, say, just to pick a random sample: emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal, entropic, and forces. And now to hijack my own thread: the referenced paper mentions cosmology as one of the topic ares that the above terms are frequently used to describe. Since cosmology is one of my favorite spare time reading focus areas, I wanted to make an observation that the following reference makes very clearly, which is that *nobody* has even the slightest glimmer of understanding of our true cosmological origins. Even the events after that instant of the big bang, where it is postulated that our universe expanded from sub-atomic dimensions, through inflation (inflation? WTF caused that?) are only sparsely understood. Classical physicists like to duck the subject of What caused the big bang? by hiding behind the academic artifice of claiming that the question is meaningless because space-time did not exist before the big bang. But, we do like to pontificate here on FRIAM, don't we? Deeply, and philosophically. But rather than continuing in the usual vein of debating (deeply, but with much pontification) the true meaning, of, say emergence again, let's take the discussion in a new direction. Sorry for the Facebook link, but the original article is buried behind a NewScientist paywall. The article nicely addresses my thoughts on that other question you asked me, i.e. where do I think life comes from. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=501821756549668set=a.477892902275887.114170.334816523250193type=1theater --TrollBoi On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Stephen Guerin stephen.gue...@redfish.comwrote: Ok Troll-Boy, I'll bite. Here's the paper referenced in the phys.org post: http://www.alexwg.org/publications/PhysRevLett_110-168702.pdf Are these concepts so foreign that you hope to watch a thread thrash on the semantics and meanings of this theoretical worldview? Is there something in Hewitt's paper that strikes you as ridiculous, hogwosh or complexity babble? The ideas in the paper restate what is obvious to many of the practitioners on this list. Namely that structure formation and origin of life may well be best understood as nature's response to imposed non-equilibrium gradients. To many this is a core idea of Complexity. This mechanism has been linked as a causal mechanism for the emergence of autonomous intelligent emergent behavior since (1980, Kugler, Kelso and Turvey http://web.haskins.yale.edu/Reprints/HL0297.pdf), (2000 Kauffmanhttp://www.amazon.com/Investigations-Stuart-A-Kauffman/dp/0195121058/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8qid=1366685204sr=8-2keywords=investigations), (2005 Jun and Hubler http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC545530/and 2011 Hubler et alhttp://icmt.illinois.edu/workshops/fluctuations2011/Talks/Hubler_Alfred_ICMT_May_2011.pdf) and (2007 Morowitz and Smithhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cplx.20191/abstract) among others. I haven't actually seen the software entropica referenced in the paper and the claims may be a little over stated but the core ideas you quote emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal entropic, and forces are not new and strike me as matter of fact. These same ideas have thrashed on the list almost exactly 10 years ago: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.org.region.new-mexico.santa-fe.friam/256 Doug, where do you think intelligent behavior (ie life) comes from? Do you have a view? a pet theory? too busy? --- -. . ..-. .. ... - .-- --- ..-. .. ... stephen.gue...@redfish.com 1600 Lena St #D1, Santa Fe, NM 87505 office: (505) 995-0206 tollfree: (888) 414-3855 mobile: (505) 577-5828 fax: (505) 819-5952 tw: @redfishgroup skype: redfishgroup gvoice: (505) 216-6226 redfish.com | simtable.com On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.netwrote: http://phys.org/news/2013-04-emergence-complex-behaviors-causal-entropic.html It is with much anticipation that we await the detailed discussions that are sure to follow which will cover the meanings of emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal entropic, and forces. --Doug -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins * http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile* 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.netwrote: snip --TrollBoi On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Stephen Guerin stephen.gue...@redfish.com wrote: Ok Troll-Boy, I'll bite. ... Nick: Just for fun, I looked Troll up for us: (slightly self referential .. this itself is at least OT) -- Owen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) Troll (Internet) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)#mw-navigationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)#p-search This article is about internet slang. For other uses, see Troll (disambiguation) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(disambiguation). [image: Page semi-protected]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Protection_policy#semi In Internet slang http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_slang, a *troll* ( pron.: / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_Englishˈhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key t http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Keyrhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key oʊ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Keylhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English, /http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English ˈ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Keythttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key r http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Keyɒhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key l http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English) is someone who posts inflammatory,[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)#cite_note-1 extraneous http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/extraneous#Adjective, or off-topic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-topicmessages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion response[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)#cite_note-PCMAG_def-2 or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)#cite_note-IUKB_def-3 The noun *troll* may also refer to the provocative message itself, as in: That was an excellent troll you posted. While the word *troll* and its associated verb *trolling* are associated with Internet discourse, media attention in recent years has made such labels subjective http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/subjective#English, with trolling describing intentionally provocative actions and harassmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harassmentoutside of an online context. For example, mass media has used *troll* to describe a person who defaces Internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families.[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)#cite_note-4 [5]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)#cite_note-Trolling:TheTodayShowExplorestheDarkSideoftheInternet-5 It has been asserted that the verb to *troll* originates from Old Frenchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_French *troller*, a hunting term. A verb trôler is found in modern French-English dictionaries, where the main meaning given is to lead, or drag, somebody about. In modern English usage, the verb to *trollhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolling_(fishing) * describes a fishing technique of slowly dragging a lure or baited hook from a moving boat.[6]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)#cite_note-merriam-webster-6 A similar but distinct verb, to trawl, describes the act of dragging a fishing net (not a line). Whereas trolling with a fishing line is recreational, trawling with a net is generally a commercial activity. 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Whenever I go down to Portland State University, there's a fundamentalist preacher standing on a bench asserting that all the people walking around are morally in danger. He talks and talks, rails and rails. Yet the students discuss their classes or their social networks, study their books, talk on their phones, eat their lunch, etc. No matter how loud the preacher yells about the behavior and moral degradation of the people around him, nobody listens. They continue to do what they do, sometimes listening in amusement to the preacher, or playing Amen, brother games with him, but mostly ignoring him. I have some ideas about why his protestations have no effect. But it would help, especially in a conversation like this, if the preacher, himself, were to give some practical hint as to _how_ the discussion could be taken in a new direction. Or even in what new direction the preacher would like us to take the discussion. (Aside from thumbing some bible or other.) Mostly, the preacher seems to want to preach, with no discussion being possible. Anytime anyone tries to approach the preacher and _discuss_ whatever, the preacher ends up ranting and railing about how that person just doesn't get it and always falls into the standard immorality they exhibited before they tried to start a discussion with the preacher. On 04/23/2013 08:16 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: Fuggit, work can wait, the first proposal is in final edit and the second one is under control, so why delay my response. Re: your question of what do I find ridiculous: Not the subject of the referenced paper, certainly. Rather our little group's pronounced tendency to niggle and (dare I say it?) pontificate over the true, deep, and (dare I say it?) philosophical meanings of words. Like, say, just to pick a random sample: emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal, entropic, and forces. And now to hijack my own thread: the referenced paper mentions cosmology as one of the topic ares that the above terms are frequently used to describe. Since cosmology is one of my favorite spare time reading focus areas, I wanted to make an observation that the following reference makes very clearly, which is that *nobody* has even the slightest glimmer of understanding of our true cosmological origins. Even the events after that instant of the big bang, where it is postulated that our universe expanded from sub-atomic dimensions, through inflation (inflation? WTF caused that?) are only sparsely understood. Classical physicists like to duck the subject of What caused the big bang? by hiding behind the academic artifice of claiming that the question is meaningless because space-time did not exist before the big bang. But, we do like to pontificate here on FRIAM, don't we? Deeply, and philosophically. But rather than continuing in the usual vein of debating (deeply, but with much pontification) the true meaning, of, say emergence again, let's take the discussion in a new direction. Sorry for the Facebook link, but the original article is buried behind a NewScientist paywall. The article nicely addresses my thoughts on that other question you asked me, i.e. where do I think life comes from. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=501821756549668set=a.477892902275887.114170.334816523250193type=1theater --TrollBoi -- glen == Hail Eris! 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Wait, to be fair, Doug simply 1 - Presented a pointer to an interesting article 2 - Explained why the article was interesting to him Where's the problem? I'm amazed at the article and would love to see the stunts that the program uses to increase entropy locally .. if I get it. -- Owen On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:34 AM, glen ropella g...@ropella.name wrote: Whenever I go down to Portland State University, there's a fundamentalist preacher standing on a bench asserting that all the people walking around are morally in danger. He talks and talks, rails and rails. Yet the students discuss their classes or their social networks, study their books, talk on their phones, eat their lunch, etc. No matter how loud the preacher yells about the behavior and moral degradation of the people around him, nobody listens. They continue to do what they do, sometimes listening in amusement to the preacher, or playing Amen, brother games with him, but mostly ignoring him. I have some ideas about why his protestations have no effect. But it would help, especially in a conversation like this, if the preacher, himself, were to give some practical hint as to _how_ the discussion could be taken in a new direction. Or even in what new direction the preacher would like us to take the discussion. (Aside from thumbing some bible or other.) Mostly, the preacher seems to want to preach, with no discussion being possible. Anytime anyone tries to approach the preacher and _discuss_ whatever, the preacher ends up ranting and railing about how that person just doesn't get it and always falls into the standard immorality they exhibited before they tried to start a discussion with the preacher. On 04/23/2013 08:16 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: Fuggit, work can wait, the first proposal is in final edit and the second one is under control, so why delay my response. Re: your question of what do I find ridiculous: Not the subject of the referenced paper, certainly. Rather our little group's pronounced tendency to niggle and (dare I say it?) pontificate over the true, deep, and (dare I say it?) philosophical meanings of words. Like, say, just to pick a random sample: emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal, entropic, and forces. And now to hijack my own thread: the referenced paper mentions cosmology as one of the topic ares that the above terms are frequently used to describe. Since cosmology is one of my favorite spare time reading focus areas, I wanted to make an observation that the following reference makes very clearly, which is that *nobody* has even the slightest glimmer of understanding of our true cosmological origins. Even the events after that instant of the big bang, where it is postulated that our universe expanded from sub-atomic dimensions, through inflation (inflation? WTF caused that?) are only sparsely understood. Classical physicists like to duck the subject of What caused the big bang? by hiding behind the academic artifice of claiming that the question is meaningless because space-time did not exist before the big bang. But, we do like to pontificate here on FRIAM, don't we? Deeply, and philosophically. But rather than continuing in the usual vein of debating (deeply, but with much pontification) the true meaning, of, say emergence again, let's take the discussion in a new direction. Sorry for the Facebook link, but the original article is buried behind a NewScientist paywall. The article nicely addresses my thoughts on that other question you asked me, i.e. where do I think life comes from. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=501821756549668set=a.477892902275887.114170.334816523250193type=1theater --TrollBoi -- glen == Hail Eris! 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 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Oh, and I'm 200% with Doug about our deadly embrace tendency, quibbling about words and sucking the life out of otherwise interesting conversations. Now *that's* trolling! -- Owen On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote: Wait, to be fair, Doug simply 1 - Presented a pointer to an interesting article 2 - Explained why the article was interesting to him Where's the problem? I'm amazed at the article and would love to see the stunts that the program uses to increase entropy locally .. if I get it. -- Owen On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:34 AM, glen ropella g...@ropella.name wrote: Whenever I go down to Portland State University, there's a fundamentalist preacher standing on a bench asserting that all the people walking around are morally in danger. He talks and talks, rails and rails. Yet the students discuss their classes or their social networks, study their books, talk on their phones, eat their lunch, etc. No matter how loud the preacher yells about the behavior and moral degradation of the people around him, nobody listens. They continue to do what they do, sometimes listening in amusement to the preacher, or playing Amen, brother games with him, but mostly ignoring him. I have some ideas about why his protestations have no effect. But it would help, especially in a conversation like this, if the preacher, himself, were to give some practical hint as to _how_ the discussion could be taken in a new direction. Or even in what new direction the preacher would like us to take the discussion. (Aside from thumbing some bible or other.) Mostly, the preacher seems to want to preach, with no discussion being possible. Anytime anyone tries to approach the preacher and _discuss_ whatever, the preacher ends up ranting and railing about how that person just doesn't get it and always falls into the standard immorality they exhibited before they tried to start a discussion with the preacher. On 04/23/2013 08:16 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: Fuggit, work can wait, the first proposal is in final edit and the second one is under control, so why delay my response. Re: your question of what do I find ridiculous: Not the subject of the referenced paper, certainly. Rather our little group's pronounced tendency to niggle and (dare I say it?) pontificate over the true, deep, and (dare I say it?) philosophical meanings of words. Like, say, just to pick a random sample: emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal, entropic, and forces. And now to hijack my own thread: the referenced paper mentions cosmology as one of the topic ares that the above terms are frequently used to describe. Since cosmology is one of my favorite spare time reading focus areas, I wanted to make an observation that the following reference makes very clearly, which is that *nobody* has even the slightest glimmer of understanding of our true cosmological origins. Even the events after that instant of the big bang, where it is postulated that our universe expanded from sub-atomic dimensions, through inflation (inflation? WTF caused that?) are only sparsely understood. Classical physicists like to duck the subject of What caused the big bang? by hiding behind the academic artifice of claiming that the question is meaningless because space-time did not exist before the big bang. But, we do like to pontificate here on FRIAM, don't we? Deeply, and philosophically. But rather than continuing in the usual vein of debating (deeply, but with much pontification) the true meaning, of, say emergence again, let's take the discussion in a new direction. Sorry for the Facebook link, but the original article is buried behind a NewScientist paywall. The article nicely addresses my thoughts on that other question you asked me, i.e. where do I think life comes from. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=501821756549668set=a.477892902275887.114170.334816523250193type=1theater --TrollBoi -- glen == Hail Eris! 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 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Well, to be *totally* fair, Owen, I wasn't just pointing out an article in one of my interest areas. I was also using it as an opportunity to gently criticize some of my FRIAM colleagues. Just a little bit. --Doug On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote: Oh, and I'm 200% with Doug about our deadly embrace tendency, quibbling about words and sucking the life out of otherwise interesting conversations. Now *that's* trolling! -- Owen On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.netwrote: Wait, to be fair, Doug simply 1 - Presented a pointer to an interesting article 2 - Explained why the article was interesting to him Where's the problem? I'm amazed at the article and would love to see the stunts that the program uses to increase entropy locally .. if I get it. -- Owen On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:34 AM, glen ropella g...@ropella.name wrote: Whenever I go down to Portland State University, there's a fundamentalist preacher standing on a bench asserting that all the people walking around are morally in danger. He talks and talks, rails and rails. Yet the students discuss their classes or their social networks, study their books, talk on their phones, eat their lunch, etc. No matter how loud the preacher yells about the behavior and moral degradation of the people around him, nobody listens. They continue to do what they do, sometimes listening in amusement to the preacher, or playing Amen, brother games with him, but mostly ignoring him. I have some ideas about why his protestations have no effect. But it would help, especially in a conversation like this, if the preacher, himself, were to give some practical hint as to _how_ the discussion could be taken in a new direction. Or even in what new direction the preacher would like us to take the discussion. (Aside from thumbing some bible or other.) Mostly, the preacher seems to want to preach, with no discussion being possible. Anytime anyone tries to approach the preacher and _discuss_ whatever, the preacher ends up ranting and railing about how that person just doesn't get it and always falls into the standard immorality they exhibited before they tried to start a discussion with the preacher. On 04/23/2013 08:16 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: Fuggit, work can wait, the first proposal is in final edit and the second one is under control, so why delay my response. Re: your question of what do I find ridiculous: Not the subject of the referenced paper, certainly. Rather our little group's pronounced tendency to niggle and (dare I say it?) pontificate over the true, deep, and (dare I say it?) philosophical meanings of words. Like, say, just to pick a random sample: emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal, entropic, and forces. And now to hijack my own thread: the referenced paper mentions cosmology as one of the topic ares that the above terms are frequently used to describe. Since cosmology is one of my favorite spare time reading focus areas, I wanted to make an observation that the following reference makes very clearly, which is that *nobody* has even the slightest glimmer of understanding of our true cosmological origins. Even the events after that instant of the big bang, where it is postulated that our universe expanded from sub-atomic dimensions, through inflation (inflation? WTF caused that?) are only sparsely understood. Classical physicists like to duck the subject of What caused the big bang? by hiding behind the academic artifice of claiming that the question is meaningless because space-time did not exist before the big bang. But, we do like to pontificate here on FRIAM, don't we? Deeply, and philosophically. But rather than continuing in the usual vein of debating (deeply, but with much pontification) the true meaning, of, say emergence again, let's take the discussion in a new direction. Sorry for the Facebook link, but the original article is buried behind a NewScientist paywall. The article nicely addresses my thoughts on that other question you asked me, i.e. where do I think life comes from. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=501821756549668set=a.477892902275887.114170.334816523250193type=1theater --TrollBoi -- glen == Hail Eris! 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 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 -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins *
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
glen wrote: or playing Amen, brother games with him The preacher and entourage can be humiliated without cost. That's worse than the preaching IMO. I say step up and take them apart, point by point, or stay silent. Marcus 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Doug, I want to participate in your anti-discussion discussion, but I cannot master the facebook link. Each time I click on it it invites me to create a gmail account (which I already have, but do not use). It won't let me link to the old account. So, I start another one. And then, somehow, I never get to the link you are offering me. So I do it again, and accumulate another gmail account. I am up to about six, now, and getting weary. So, unless you can use words (rather than links), I will have to watch from afar. God knows, that probably wouldn't be a bad thing. Nick From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Douglas Roberts Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 9:16 AM To: Stephen Guerin; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration Fuggit, work can wait, the first proposal is in final edit and the second one is under control, so why delay my response. Re: your question of what do I find ridiculous: Not the subject of the referenced paper, certainly. Rather our little group's pronounced tendency to niggle and (dare I say it?) pontificate over the true, deep, and (dare I say it?) philosophical meanings of words. Like, say, just to pick a random sample: emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal, entropic, and forces. And now to hijack my own thread: the referenced paper mentions cosmology as one of the topic ares that the above terms are frequently used to describe. Since cosmology is one of my favorite spare time reading focus areas, I wanted to make an observation that the following reference makes very clearly, which is that nobody has even the slightest glimmer of understanding of our true cosmological origins. Even the events after that instant of the big bang, where it is postulated that our universe expanded from sub-atomic dimensions, through inflation (inflation? WTF caused that?) are only sparsely understood. Classical physicists like to duck the subject of What caused the big bang? by hiding behind the academic artifice of claiming that the question is meaningless because space-time did not exist before the big bang. But, we do like to pontificate here on FRIAM, don't we? Deeply, and philosophically. But rather than continuing in the usual vein of debating (deeply, but with much pontification) the true meaning, of, say emergence again, let's take the discussion in a new direction. Sorry for the Facebook link, but the original article is buried behind a NewScientist paywall. The article nicely addresses my thoughts on that other question you asked me, i.e. where do I think life comes from. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=501821756549668 https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=501821756549668set=a.4778929022758 87.114170.334816523250193type=1theater set=a.477892902275887.114170.334816523250193type=1theater --TrollBoi On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Stephen Guerin stephen.gue...@redfish.com wrote: Ok Troll-Boy, I'll bite. Here's the paper referenced in the phys.org post: http://www.alexwg.org/publications/PhysRevLett_110-168702.pdf Are these concepts so foreign that you hope to watch a thread thrash on the semantics and meanings of this theoretical worldview? Is there something in Hewitt's paper that strikes you as ridiculous, hogwosh or complexity babble? The ideas in the paper restate what is obvious to many of the practitioners on this list. Namely that structure formation and origin of life may well be best understood as nature's response to imposed non-equilibrium gradients. To many this is a core idea of Complexity. This mechanism has been linked as a causal mechanism for the emergence of autonomous intelligent emergent behavior since (1980, Kugler, Kelso and Turvey http://web.haskins.yale.edu/Reprints/HL0297.pdf ), (2000 Kauffman http://www.amazon.com/Investigations-Stuart-A-Kauffman/dp/0195121058/ref=sr _1_2?ie=UTF8qid=1366685204sr=8-2keywords=investigations ), (2005 Jun and Hubler http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC545530/ and 2011 Hubler et al http://icmt.illinois.edu/workshops/fluctuations2011/Talks/Hubler_Alfred_ICM T_May_2011.pdf ) and (2007 Morowitz and Smith http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cplx.20191/abstract ) among others. I haven't actually seen the software entropica referenced in the paper and the claims may be a little over stated but the core ideas you quote emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal entropic, and forces are not new and strike me as matter of fact. These same ideas have thrashed on the list almost exactly 10 years ago: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.org.region.new-mexico.santa-fe.friam/256 Doug, where do you think intelligent behavior (ie life) comes from? Do you have a view? a pet theory? too busy? --- -. . ..-. .. ... - .-- --- ..-. .. ... stephen.gue...@redfish.com 1600 Lena St #D1, Santa Fe, NM 87505 office: (505) 995-0206
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Continuing the tone of thoughtful musing ... In academia, there is a phenomenon I used to call fog-horns on a shrouded bay that characterized most academic discussions and ALL faculty meetings. Everybody would politely listen while each person would say what they always said. Year after year. It got so bad that if somebody was sick, one of the others of us would sound his horn at the appropriate time, just to keep things the same. Isn't this the place where Joe says .? I think all human beings, like your street-corner ranter, have a tendency in this direction -- to come to the meeting with a permanent opinion and seek validation by making others listen to it. What has always fascinated me is the possibility of an actual dialectic ... a conversation in which people change and arrive at new positions as they try to integrate two fundamental facts I respect you and I disagree with you. I would be out of FRIAM in a flash, if I didn't see that happening from time to time. Nick -Original Message- From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ropella Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 10:35 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration Whenever I go down to Portland State University, there's a fundamentalist preacher standing on a bench asserting that all the people walking around are morally in danger. He talks and talks, rails and rails. Yet the students discuss their classes or their social networks, study their books, talk on their phones, eat their lunch, etc. No matter how loud the preacher yells about the behavior and moral degradation of the people around him, nobody listens. They continue to do what they do, sometimes listening in amusement to the preacher, or playing Amen, brother games with him, but mostly ignoring him. I have some ideas about why his protestations have no effect. But it would help, especially in a conversation like this, if the preacher, himself, were to give some practical hint as to _how_ the discussion could be taken in a new direction. Or even in what new direction the preacher would like us to take the discussion. (Aside from thumbing some bible or other.) Mostly, the preacher seems to want to preach, with no discussion being possible. Anytime anyone tries to approach the preacher and _discuss_ whatever, the preacher ends up ranting and railing about how that person just doesn't get it and always falls into the standard immorality they exhibited before they tried to start a discussion with the preacher. On 04/23/2013 08:16 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: Fuggit, work can wait, the first proposal is in final edit and the second one is under control, so why delay my response. Re: your question of what do I find ridiculous: Not the subject of the referenced paper, certainly. Rather our little group's pronounced tendency to niggle and (dare I say it?) pontificate over the true, deep, and (dare I say it?) philosophical meanings of words. Like, say, just to pick a random sample: emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal, entropic, and forces. And now to hijack my own thread: the referenced paper mentions cosmology as one of the topic ares that the above terms are frequently used to describe. Since cosmology is one of my favorite spare time reading focus areas, I wanted to make an observation that the following reference makes very clearly, which is that *nobody* has even the slightest glimmer of understanding of our true cosmological origins. Even the events after that instant of the big bang, where it is postulated that our universe expanded from sub-atomic dimensions, through inflation (inflation? WTF caused that?) are only sparsely understood. Classical physicists like to duck the subject of What caused the big bang? by hiding behind the academic artifice of claiming that the question is meaningless because space-time did not exist before the big bang. But, we do like to pontificate here on FRIAM, don't we? Deeply, and philosophically. But rather than continuing in the usual vein of debating (deeply, but with much pontification) the true meaning, of, say emergence again, let's take the discussion in a new direction. Sorry for the Facebook link, but the original article is buried behind a NewScientist paywall. The article nicely addresses my thoughts on that other question you asked me, i.e. where do I think life comes from. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=501821756549668set=a.47789290 2275887.114170.334816523250193type=1theater --TrollBoi -- glen == Hail Eris! 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 Applied Complexity Group
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Oh dear, I have it bad .. I really would like to discuss the article! Oh well, -- Owen 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Well, then stop pejoratizing other people's passions. Just do your thing. Don't feel judged when other people do a different thing, don't feel slighted when other people don't want to do your thing, don' t judge others for doing something you don't understand. Just do you damned thing. It's really quite easy. To be honest, I have never been much excited by cosmology. Sitting agog in wonder is not something that makes me particularly happy. But that's just me. I love the fact that it excites you (and Doug), and I will follow the conversation a vague sort of way to see where it turns out. Who knows? I may find out that I need to be more interested in it. So: discuss it, already! N From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 11:58 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration Oh dear, I have it bad .. I really would like to discuss the article! Oh well, -- Owen 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Hi Doug, I know this isn't the main point of the thread, and perhaps already stuff you know, in which case apologies for redundancy: Even the events after that instant of the big bang, where it is postulated that our universe expanded from sub-atomic dimensions, through inflation (inflation? WTF caused that?) I think current understanding of inflation and the cosmological constant have all grown out of the way we think about the Higgs mechanism and the energy in the vacuum. I did have a chance to ask a real cosmologist this to be sure I wasn't mistaken, and I believe what I will say below is right. The point of Higgs was that the vacuum underwent a freezing transition as it cooled, in one of the bowl-to-mexican-hat potentials that one always sees illustrated in explanations of magnetization etc. (keyword for a google search would be Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking, and apologies that I can't write more here, since I should be working). The general kind of freezing mechanism is used for a lot of stuff and reasonably well understood (understanding why pi mesons are roughly massless, how magnetization forms, etc.) The interesting thing is that the massless particle that should have been formed when the Higgs vacuum froze was eaten (as they say in the jargon) by the previously-massless weak bosons because it had weak charge, and that made them massive. (Keyword here would be interaction of gauge fields with Goldstone bosons.) But all that is essentially background. The point for this discussion is that when the vacuum could be frozen into the low-energy rim of the hat, but starts out on the high-energy center (the part where the crown of your head goes), it has energy to give. If it can succeed in freezing, that creates a shower of massive matter. But if it is delayed in collapsing to the frozen vacuum, like water that is supercooled before it can freeze into its proper crystal, that excess vacuum energy becomes a source of stress energy-momentum for gravitation. That stress energy momentum is the cosmological constant, and it drives exponential expansion. Since the Higgs is a very high-energy-scale field (on people-scales), the cosmological constant associated with not-yet-having-relaxed is huge. I don't know whether inflation people still think it was the Higgs of the weak boson that drove initial inflation, but I believe that was the proposal back when Alan Guth was working on these things. In that parlance, the current small-but-not-zero cosmological constant is a tiny residual vacuum energy-momentum that hasn't succeeded in relaxing away into a more stable, truly zero-energy, vacuum. This is probably not a great answer to the question of what caused inflation, but to the extent that having melted the vacuum to see the un-frozen Higgs as a particle seems to get everything right that we can measure, from only this minimal model, it is hard to see from here what would guide us to a more thorough characterization. It is remarkable, though, that the vacuum can have un-relaxed energy. I should understand these things better than I do, but I was a bad student when I should have been learning them. Eric 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.netwrote: I've never heard of inflation being attributed to the Higg's boson. Not looking something up in Wikipedia is almost as big a sin as not googling something… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)#Theoretical_status 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Douglas Roberts wrote at 04/23/2013 10:33 AM: BEFORE THE BIG BANG, OUTSIDE THE UNIVERSE... [...] Another concept is that of a cyclic universe. Derived from string theory, the hypothesis postulates that our Universe is a four-dimensional brane in a higher-dimensional space. It repetitively collides with another such brane. The collisions result in tremendous release of energy and creation of matter which we'd observe as the Big Bang. Again, it turns out that these periodic collisions of branes also must have a beginning. And to be fair, there are other cyclic models like Penrose's CCC. On CCC-predicted concentric low-variance circles in the CMB sky http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5162 -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. -- C. S. Lewis 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Actually, Alan Guth .. who started the whole inflation thing .. went after it initially via a thermodynamic approach. Same mexican hat. AG also thinks GUT is misspelled .. the T is a theory so therefore should be GUTh. -- Owen On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:45 PM, glen e. p. ropella g...@tempusdictum.comwrote: Douglas Roberts wrote at 04/23/2013 10:33 AM: BEFORE THE BIG BANG, OUTSIDE THE UNIVERSE... [...] Another concept is that of a cyclic universe. Derived from string theory, the hypothesis postulates that our Universe is a four-dimensional brane in a higher-dimensional space. It repetitively collides with another such brane. The collisions result in tremendous release of energy and creation of matter which we'd observe as the Big Bang. Again, it turns out that these periodic collisions of branes also must have a beginning. And to be fair, there are other cyclic models like Penrose's CCC. On CCC-predicted concentric low-variance circles in the CMB sky http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5162 -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. -- C. S. Lewis 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 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Thanks Robert and Owen too, Yes, many sins. in all possible arenas. The only limit is how fast one can commit them E On Apr 23, 2013, at 5:30 PM, Robert Holmes wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net wrote: I've never heard of inflation being attributed to the Higg's boson. Not looking something up in Wikipedia is almost as big a sin as not googling something… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)#Theoretical_status 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 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Actually, I did look at WP, just not at that entry. As an aside, it is fascinating in its own way how little FRIAM bullshit matters, when viewed from behind the comfortable haze produced by Rosarita served up at the Dragon Room. On Apr 23, 2013 5:09 PM, Eric Smith desm...@santafe.edu wrote: Thanks Robert and Owen too, Yes, many sins. in all possible arenas. The only limit is how fast one can commit them E On Apr 23, 2013, at 5:30 PM, Robert Holmes wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.netwrote: I've never heard of inflation being attributed to the Higg's boson. Not looking something up in Wikipedia is almost as big a sin as not googling something… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)#Theoretical_status 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 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 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
As an aside, it is fascinating in its own way how little FRIAM bullshit matters, when viewed from behind the comfortable haze produced by Rosarita served up at the Dragon Room. Why don't you put down that Nexus 4 you love so much and be sociable? Marcus mail2web.com - Microsoft® Exchange solutions from a leading provider - http://link.mail2web.com/Business/Exchange 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] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
http://phys.org/news/2013-04-emergence-complex-behaviors-causal-entropic.html It is with much anticipation that we await the detailed discussions that are sure to follow which will cover the meanings of emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal entropic, and forces. --Doug -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins * http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile* 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Popcorn is popped and buttered; knees are crossed in my Adirondack chair. Carry on. P. On Apr 22, 2013, at 7:09 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net wrote: http://phys.org/news/2013-04-emergence-complex-behaviors-causal-entropic.html It is with much anticipation that we await the detailed discussions that are sure to follow which will cover the meanings of emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal entropic, and forces. --Doug -- Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile 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 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
+1 On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Pamela McCorduck pam...@well.com wrote: Popcorn is popped and buttered; knees are crossed in my Adirondack chair. Carry on. P. On Apr 22, 2013, at 7:09 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net wrote: http://phys.org/news/2013-04-emergence-complex-behaviors-causal-entropic.html It is with much anticipation that we await the detailed discussions that are sure to follow which will cover the meanings of emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal entropic, and forces. --Doug -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins * http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile* 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 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 -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins * http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile* 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
I don't know about you, Pamela, but I've run clean out of popcorn, and I've already re-crossed my knees twice. Truth be known, I'm particularly keen to follow the exposition on the meaning of the word through. Although forces is a close second, followed of course by causal. --Doug On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.netwrote: +1 On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Pamela McCorduck pam...@well.com wrote: Popcorn is popped and buttered; knees are crossed in my Adirondack chair. Carry on. P. On Apr 22, 2013, at 7:09 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net wrote: http://phys.org/news/2013-04-emergence-complex-behaviors-causal-entropic.html It is with much anticipation that we await the detailed discussions that are sure to follow which will cover the meanings of emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal entropic, and forces. --Doug -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins * http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile* 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 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 -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins * http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile* -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins * http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile* 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
Ok Troll-Boy, I'll bite. Here's the paper referenced in the phys.org post: http://www.alexwg.org/publications/PhysRevLett_110-168702.pdf Are these concepts so foreign that you hope to watch a thread thrash on the semantics and meanings of this theoretical worldview? Is there something in Hewitt's paper that strikes you as ridiculous, hogwosh or complexity babble? The ideas in the paper restate what is obvious to many of the practitioners on this list. Namely that structure formation and origin of life may well be best understood as nature's response to imposed non-equilibrium gradients. To many this is a core idea of Complexity. This mechanism has been linked as a causal mechanism for the emergence of autonomous intelligent emergent behavior since (1980, Kugler, Kelso and Turvey http://web.haskins.yale.edu/Reprints/HL0297.pdf), (2000 Kauffmanhttp://www.amazon.com/Investigations-Stuart-A-Kauffman/dp/0195121058/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8qid=1366685204sr=8-2keywords=investigations), (2005 Jun and Hubler http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC545530/and 2011 Hubler et alhttp://icmt.illinois.edu/workshops/fluctuations2011/Talks/Hubler_Alfred_ICMT_May_2011.pdf) and (2007 Morowitz and Smithhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cplx.20191/abstract) among others. I haven't actually seen the software entropica referenced in the paper and the claims may be a little over stated but the core ideas you quote emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal entropic, and forces are not new and strike me as matter of fact. These same ideas have thrashed on the list almost exactly 10 years ago: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.org.region.new-mexico.santa-fe.friam/256 Doug, where do you think intelligent behavior (ie life) comes from? Do you have a view? a pet theory? too busy? --- -. . ..-. .. ... - .-- --- ..-. .. ... stephen.gue...@redfish.com 1600 Lena St #D1, Santa Fe, NM 87505 office: (505) 995-0206 tollfree: (888) 414-3855 mobile: (505) 577-5828 fax: (505) 819-5952 tw: @redfishgroup skype: redfishgroup gvoice: (505) 216-6226 redfish.com | simtable.com On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.netwrote: http://phys.org/news/2013-04-emergence-complex-behaviors-causal-entropic.html It is with much anticipation that we await the detailed discussions that are sure to follow which will cover the meanings of emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal entropic, and forces. --Doug -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins * http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile* 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 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
Re: [FRIAM] Presented for FRIAMic Consideration
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Stephen Guerin stephen.gue...@redfish.comwrote: Ok Troll-Boy, I'll bite. [...] Doug, where do you think intelligent behavior (ie life) comes from? Do you have a view? a pet theory? too busy? Never too busy to respond to you, G-man. A slight time delay will be incurred, however, as I have two proposals to get out the door this week. But fear not, a saucy riposte is in the works... --TrollBoi --- -. . ..-. .. ... - .-- --- ..-. .. ... stephen.gue...@redfish.com 1600 Lena St #D1, Santa Fe, NM 87505 office: (505) 995-0206 tollfree: (888) 414-3855 mobile: (505) 577-5828 fax: (505) 819-5952 tw: @redfishgroup skype: redfishgroup gvoice: (505) 216-6226 redfish.com | simtable.com On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.netwrote: http://phys.org/news/2013-04-emergence-complex-behaviors-causal-entropic.html It is with much anticipation that we await the detailed discussions that are sure to follow which will cover the meanings of emergence, complex, behaviors, through, causal entropic, and forces. --Doug -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins * http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile* 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 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 -- *Doug Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net* *http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins*http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins * http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-672-8213 - Mobile* 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
