NY NY 10040
tel: 212-795-4844
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
explorations: www.synapse9.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Carl Tollander
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 10:03 PM
About Ruby:
It's flexible like Perl, painstakingly clear like Python (good
Python), and much more fluid than Java.
So we got 3 qualities, flexibility ( for those who can stand on their
own heads, ow),
clarity (both goodoldfashioned and newandimproved)
and fluidity. What you mean by fluidity's
OK, why is growth a physics problem and not, say, an algebraic topology
problem
or a genetic regulatory net problem, or an epigenesis problem, or a
sociology problem,
or something? All would state the problem somewhat differently, drawing on
different insights. So, if you can answer that, you
I can't really read math.
Is not Ruby math?
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Owen asks:
Given what *we* want to do, and given the recent advances in desktop,
workstation, and server computing, and given our experiences over the
last year with things like the Blender Render Farm .. what would be
the most reasonable way for us to take a step or two toward higher
Cool!
So, if we get some coasters made of these, (a hot side and a cold side),
and we set
a mug of our favorite beverage on it, where do the Bénard cells form?
Spacecraft could get a lot easier to design as a result of this. And I
can at last get
rid of that stupid fan in the laptop.
Don't
I got 'nuttin, not even an acknowledgment. Just sent them a ping.
Carl
J T Johnson wrote:
All:
I have received my acceptance for the Lake Arrowhead conference
(http://www.hcs.ucla.edu/arrowhead.htm) in April and I wonder if
anyone else has? If so, my money-saving plan is to try and
Curious. I was wondering if, since the frigatebirds are aligning into
formations without
flapping, if it would be easier to perceive if there were differences in
the yaw of the
bird wing or body relative to its position in the formation. If so,
several hypotheses
about aerodynamics on formation
Oh dear, I just dropped my cell phone.
On the concrete.
From, oh, say, 10 feet.
How sad...
Giles Bowkett wrote:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/the-apple-iphone/
today around 9am pst
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group
Download available at
http://monalisa.caltech.edu/monalisa__Download__.fdt.html
Carl
J T Johnson wrote:
Of interest. Yes, it was lab conditions, but on a pretty good-sized
lab bench. But hasn't someone recently mentioned a demo of 40Gbps
through Lambda Rail?
Researchers Set
Kleenex. Xerox. It's the iPhone, whatever they call it legally.
C
Robert Holmes wrote:
Oops. The iPhone may not be called the iPhone for much longer:
http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/07/01/10/2320257.shtml
Meanwhile in the UK...
http://tinyurl.com/ycojk8
R
Carl: do you think policy modeling, and category theory in general,
could handle encoding an organization?
To date, the efforts I'm aware of speak to a Category Theory (CT)
environment
where agents equipped with identities navigate and create additional
model structure
among categorified
Suggest taking a look at Gougen
http://www-cse.ucsd.edu/users/goguen/ps/manif.ps.gz
(see also Mikhail's references).
or any of the earlier Baez stuff. I particularly like:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/planck/node5.html as a quick introduction.
Stanford:
I strongly second the Mazur paper - it's going to important to get a
good handle on
what Category Theory folks mean by equivalence.
Carl
Mikhail Gorelkin wrote:
Here is a gentle (conceptual) introduction into the category theory
Some of this morning's discussions made use of the definitions of
Properties, Structure and Stuff
found at this page:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/qg-spring2004/s04week01.pdf
Be ye not intimidated by all the associated quantum gravity fu.
C.
Folks that are interested in the structure of scientific communities
might be
interested in some of David Corfield's work. It's aimed primarily at the
intersection of the math and philosophy communities, but seems to me to
have
some cross-application to some of the issues in this thread. The
Some of interested in the emergence of genetic regulatory networks
(particularly whether those dynamics may apply to some aspects of social
networks) may have seen this article in the last couple days:
http://www.playfuls.com/news_006486_New_Study_Proves_Cancer_Metastasis_Can_Be_Stopped_.html
Well,
Nicholas Thompson wrote:
Ok, let me ask the question less coyly. Most of the impact of complexity
has been to tunnel under and loosen the foundations of ordinary science.
Aeration (in moderation) is good for the garden. One likes to believe
we can do more,
though.
Is that
Joshua,
Along these lines -- just noticed this tonight on java.net --
https://cajo.dev.java.net/ -- I haven't gone through it in detail so
can't even begin to compare it to the RVM features of interest yet but
it looks mighty interesting.
Carl
Joshua Thorp wrote:
Marko,
Redfish is very
I remember the black widow - took up residence in some house plants - I
think we left it there to frolic.
Glen E. P. Ropella wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Heh, yeah, I miss that building. It had character before we moved in.
I even had a pet black widow. I presume
I may have mentioned this morning that this is probably important:
http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/node/13465/print
Carl
Nicholas Thompson wrote:
Hi all,
I think of our discussions as cumulative, so here is somethat that was
discussed today that I would like to nail down. We isolated the
From the article:
Artificial society modeling allows us to 'grow' social structures /in
silico/ demonstrating that certain sets of microspecifications are
/sufficient to generate/ the macrophenomena of interest.
The issue hinges on what sufficient to generate means for a
particular model in
Robert,
The discussions earlier this week about the nature of explanation
yielded 2 notions about the necessity of historical contingency in
modeling. One referred to 'real historical data', that is, the elements
of the model reflect a sampling of some actual situation, and can be
explained
...and lest we forget: http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/
The random number sequence test program 'ent' on the same site may be of
interest
C.
Owen Densmore wrote:
The octave mail list had this pointer to a quantum random number
generator:
http://pressesc.com/01184778212_qrbgs
the observed statisticscan be derived. Indeed.
Roger Critchlow wrote:
On 8/9/07, *Marcus G. Daniels* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right, generative social science, a.k.a. made up stuff...
Speaking of which, for those in the vicinity of Los Alamos:
These guys are so down on scenario planning, they might enjoy
http://www.gbn.com, or Peter Schwartz's The Art of the Long View from
1991. Regardless of what you think of the technique, the notion that it
is only used in current military and security circles is not supportable.
Richard
I've been getting enough mail on my comment that I feel I should clarify
the meaning:
Scenario planning has been around for quite awhile, the
military/government uses of it are but a small fraction of its overall
use, it is *not* so far as I can tell a sales tool for new weapons
systems, it
Alas, not in any place accessible right now, but if you're an Egan fan,
you might already know about his site,
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/SMFrame.html - Baez is also a
fan and occasionally does commentary on his work -
http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/
Carl
Marko A. Rodriguez
Could you say why those points are 'problems'? It seems to me that a
situated explanatory complexity (as opposed to descriptive) works
fine (I'm not necessarily suggesting it's better) so long as you have
situated the equivalences sufficiently. Ascribed (interesting word) can
be just as
Also, the October Sky and Telescope ($6, Smith's grocery store) reports
on an astronomy camera/software setup that lets you put easily stitch
together a large number of images to increase resolution. Imaging
Source's DMK 21AF04. Relatively inexpensive as these things go ($390,
At that same session, I was going on about the Kochen-Specker theorem,
asking for references, on the basis of Baez's comment about it in This
Week's Finds at http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week257.html. He was
discussion some ideas around the concept of a topos:
It basically means this:
So she seems to be saying that developing systems, at our scale, as they
acquire experience/structure, regularly encounter coupled pairs of
observables that cannot be simultaneously measured to 'high' precision?
Pioneering work, indeed, but challenging for the modeler! Certainly
messes with
Some are sympathetic but have reservations.
Sabine Hossenfelder:
http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2007/11/theoretically-simple-exception-of.html
and
Christine Dantas:
http://egregium.wordpress.com/2007/11/10/physics-needs-independent-thinkers/
and
Peter Woit:
You might go blind programming the thing with the thing. Screen is
pretty small and the keyboard is not designed for big fingers.
Nevertheless, despite the language deficiencies :-) I did the
order/donation thing a couple days ago. Not expecting to see any OLPC
atoms before the new year,
Approximate Shipping Dates:
http://laptopgiving.org/en/shipping-information.php
Carl
Owen Densmore wrote:
We participated as well, but do not yet have the critter.
BTW: I was thinking that the 632 Complex might conceive of a XO
project of some sort, possibly even using local school kids as
: the XO:
1 - How many of us have or will get an XO, probably via the Give1Get1
program?
I have one coming before Jan 15 according to a recent email from
them. Claiborne has one. Tom Johnson is getting one. Ditto Carl
Tollander. That's 4. Could the rest of us getting one shout
http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2007/12/the_qgtqft_blues.html#comments
Note esp. the comments. Those who sympathize might also enjoy Cheng's
article:
http://www.cheng.staff.shef.ac.uk/morality
C.
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group
Just remember it doesn't go to sleep when you close the lid ! :-)
Tom Johnson wrote:
The major contradiction I have to what he says is regarding battery
time. The claim is six to 24 hrs. I'm lucky to get three hours.
-tj
On Dec 31, 2007 4:19 PM, Owen Densmore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yup. Still finding out how deeply my assumptions about how laptops
should behave go.
C.
Tom Johnson wrote:
Ah, good point. Did yours arrive?
-T.
On Dec 31, 2007 6:22 PM, Carl Tollander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just remember it doesn't go to sleep when you
Switchboard is closed for the break, so no news there.
Owen Densmore wrote:
Is St John's open? If not, other plans?
-- Owen
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
I think the G1G1 program that 'ended' on Dec 31 will make a comeback.
OLPC needs the bux
more than ever now and a lot of folks in the US (well, Santa Fe anyway)
want one.
Douglas Roberts wrote:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/06/0654212
--
Doug Roberts, RTI International
The problem with a low memory machine that dual boots, is that there's
this thing that you never use taking up precious space. For the XO
folks right now, its about the bucks and hanging onto their core of
open-source developers. (I bet they can get another $6M out of MS
before they run into
Anybody with an OLPC and a bluetooth dongle solution?
Carl
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Same show, somewhat easier link.
http://www.scribemedia.org/2008/02/20/greener-gadgets-jepsen/
*highly* recommended. Note particularly the speed with which XO
elements were brought from spec to implementation.
Note that if you just go to the greenergadgets site there is a shorter
version -
It kinda depends on the usage model. If the project has a lot of
personnel churn and there is a mix of windows and Linux (like my current
one), then cvs or anything centrally administered becomes a bit more
problematic. I am inclined based on recent experiences to agree with
Linus
Of possible interest to Category Theory buffs:
John Baez and Mike Stay have a new paper entitled:
Physics, Topology, Logic and Computation: A Rosetta Stone
at: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/rosetta.pdf
In the subsequent discussion at the N-Category Cafe
at:
Depends on the sub-atomic particles. I'm in the midst of his latest
book (simultaneous with Rigden's 'Hydrogen'), and have vowed to finish
it sometime. It looks like biologists can indulge in teleological
arguments, but physicists (and, heaven forfend, mathematicians) may
not. One wonders
More on this on the Tuesday Science section of the NYT.
Owen Densmore wrote:
Here's the economist article Robert referred to:
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11288385
This is one class magazine, IMHO
-- Owen
/Adopted and proclaimed
by the founders of the Digital Standards Organization
in The Hague on 21 May 2008.
I always believed open standards were the future. Now I have evidence.
/
Dale Schumacher wrote:
The Hague Declaration
http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2008/06/urban_myths_in_contemporary_co.html
Egan fans (and others!) may find this of interest.
C.
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
A tract on how the history might work, again, *sigh*:
http://www.dcorfield.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/HowMathematicians.pdf
The point being, that mathematics, like Cluetrain products, are
conversations, and that those that coalesce and progress don't get made
without some awareness of the continuity
Perhaps the invention is intrinsic? The either/or conundrum seems
artificial, unless one buys into a narrower definition of mathematician.
C.
Prof David West wrote:
Mathematicians have asserted both positions - some believing that math
is a process of discovery of the intrinsic nature of
Well, the geneological enquiry (as described) seemed more adversarial
than the traditional - the G guy is trying to discredit the other guy by
showing that he is just on a power trip of some sort. I tend to look at
them as subtractive (G) and additive (T) sculpture - complementary if
some
given at Boot Time.
Prof David West wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 14:39:40 -0600, Carl Tollander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Perhaps the invention is intrinsic? The either/or conundrum seems
artificial, unless one buys into a narrower definition of mathematician.
C.
the mathematician
and invention along) as the current system.
It seems more of a jazz ethic than an academic ethic.
CT
Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
Carl Tollander wrote:
the G guy is trying to discredit the other guy by
showing that he is just on a power trip of some sort. I tend to look at
them as subtractive
Why computational thinking rather than complexity thinking or (egad)
category thinking or political ethics or conflict resolution or good
design or shop or? What makes computational thinking more enabling
(if not more fundamental)?
ct
Owen Densmore wrote:
I'm not sure how many of
Coherent is good, but an epithet we usually reserve for scientific
theories more than science per se.
Michael Agar wrote:
Damned if I know. Clarity of an assertion about how the world works with
intent to revise against subsequent experience?
Probably spent too much time in Vienna.
Mike
Holding ourselves apart from nature,
We are surprised when nature pays our work no mind.
Were our methods unsound?
Phil Henshaw wrote:
I think what may be holding back the math is our failure to go to the next
level and consider change as a physical process. When you do that you find
what
Is this a model?
Enjoy the moment,
We will clean it up in post.
Steve Smith wrote:
Held apart from nature
Nature pays our work no mind
Were methods unsound?
Holding ourselves apart from nature,
We are surprised when nature pays our work no mind.
Were our methods unsound?
]
505-455-7333 - Office
505-670-8195 - Cell
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Carl Tollander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this a model?
Enjoy the moment,
We will clean it up in post.
Steve Smith wrote:
Held apart from nature
Nature pays
Doug, Owen,
It's not one thread. The subject headers just make it look that way;
actually there are several, all interleaved. They all recently seem to
be about modeling in its various guises. It's very easy to yield to
the temptation to get cosmic when you're talking about modeling, which
With it, not about it.
Using Math, we open up new worlds, unify conflicts, create new horizons.
Oh yeah, you can calculate with it too. Nice, but not necessary.
The world may be made of it. Nice, but not necessary.
We might be good at it. Nice, but not necessary.
C.
Owen Densmore wrote:
OK.
I've been urging more people to read Stephenson's Quicksilver, for
some sense of how new theories are embedded in historical context. The
first of many fine pithy quotes from the book,
Those who assume hypotheses as first principles
of their specualtions...may indeed form an
Nice tv conversation between Sabine Hossenfelder
(backreaction.blogspot.com) and Peter Woit (Not Even Wrong --
www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress) on physics and institute funding.
Not actually about string theory, but really seems to be about how
fields develop and get funded, maybe
Not sure that the Cosmic Pez Dispenser of Picassos would have produced a
similar Guernica painting five years later. Insights are historically
situated, as you say. Any of these players, in a different milieu or
time would have different insights, but insights they would have.
This doesn't
Günther,
it == The Crowd. Sorry, was attempting an argument against the
strawman view that the crowd needn't listen, but got caught up in the
overpith.
Carl
Günther Greindl wrote:
Carl,
Carl Tollander wrote:
Cosmic Pez Dispenser
I like that picture :-))
situated
A fellow over on the NCC fell into this for a bit, (as, I think, we all
do from time to time). I liked Baez's comment around the eggs.
http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2008/07/causality_in_discrete_models_o.html#c018025
C
Orlando Leibovitz wrote:
Marcus,
If all of your email messages
be mistaken. It also got me to go back and blow the dust off of
the Tristan Needham book.
C.
Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
Carl Tollander wrote:
I was fortunately (hoo boy!) wrong, this is different and may be much
related to my questions about observers, but I came away very motivated
Agreed. Nobody convinced me that Rosen was ever really doing category
theory anyhow. If all you need is the category Set, why mobilize
algebraic topology? Leave the hyper-dimensional warp drive in the garage.
Russell Standish wrote:
The standard language of maps (aka functions) over sets
Ken,
Yah, brief Wedtech conversation on Abramsky March last year.
http://web.comlab.ox.ac.uk/oucl/work/samson.abramsky/bertinoro05.pdf
Actually I think it was in terms of a world's best abstract
conversation, but fun nonetheless.
Anyhow, not enough air in the sails at the time to follow
Thought about this quite a bit over the last few,
though not much traction on this list. Among other things I'm interested
in the functor category between GRNs and Metabolic Networks
and how they might mutually select (one really needs N-cats and NTs).
Though since I have little official
John,
How do you feel about Goldblatt's book on Topoi? I've been working
through it slooowly and like it so far, but I'm not sure whether it is
leaving important things out. In particular, if you need something to
understand the exposition, say, sheaves, then he goes back and tells you
just
Has anybody used this? http://www.suitable.com/tools/seismac.html
I have an upcoming project that needs a cheap seismograph for a month or so.
C.
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's
If he lived in different times and had said, People in general do not
willingly watch TV if they can have anything else to amuse them., would
we say this was (1) an observation about people being reluctant to watch
TV, or (2) an observation about a collective rational response to the
low
Recent accessible stuff from the Emergent Gravity conference here:
http://www.rle.mit.edu/emergent/
Review and some paper links here:
http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2008/08/emergent-gravity.html
My favorite so far (emergent locality!) here:
http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.0861v2
Emergence may
Is the mirror accelerating? (trick question)
Douglas Roberts wrote:
Interesting reflection, Frank.
--Doug
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Frank Wimberly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Makes me wonder...if there were a large mirror 71.5 light years
away could
An emergent idea is one relatively few people are paying attention to.
If we indulged in specifics, the ideas would cease to be emergent.
So I think its kind of like we're using averted vision. A post that
points out an
emergent idea is not necessarily inviting a collective hot needle of
things the group does.
Jack
- Original Message -
From: Carl Tollander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group friam@redfish.com
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Young but distant gallaxies
An emergent idea
Doubtless, but since ignoring it we are, knowing of it we do not.
Evidence alone won't find it (no matter how well or variously or
repetitively presented).
You have to ask a right question.
Punctuation may help too; maybe some hyphens.
Phil Henshaw wrote:
Is there anything else around
Nick,
Leave us not conflate clarity, concision and expressiveness. One may
make tradeoffs, for example one may choose one computer language for its
large number of libraries and ability to say a great many things in many
ways, at the expense of concision and clarity.
As to envy, I think
I've had a copy for a bit. I'll bring it by FRIAM. It's ok.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My daughter, an urban planner in Bruxelles, recommended that I read
/The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable / by
epistemologist Nassim Nicholas Taleb. I did look it up and found it
might be
Mark Newman's 2008 presidential election cartogram page is available.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2008
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures,
While you're on the subject of doctors and surveys,
http://www.physiciansfoundations.org/news/news_show.htm?doc_id=728872
Checking out the Complete Survey Report Analysis link won't take up
too much time, and as more companies enter the open enrollment season
for health plans it's something
OK. Might have something to contribute on 2,3,7,12,16.
BTW, adding this to the paper mashup on locality:
http://www.institutnicod.org/Reduction/7.OntComplSys.pdf
Backpack is getting heavy again
C.
jstafurik wrote:
DARPA has a BAA (Broad Agency Announcement) for 23 Mathematical
See the editorial and the interview
http://tinyurl.com/57ovw4
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Of late, I've become interested (AKA mildly obsessed) in/with William
Wimsatt's work. (hmmm, U of Chicago, aren't some folks recently in the
news from there?) Always liked the notion of processes selecting for
accessibility (to maybe see what I'm talking about, study the Hasegawa
dyptich
University, Los Angeles
o Check out my blog at http://russabbott.blogspot.com/
On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Carl Tollander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of late, I've become interested (AKA mildly obsessed) in/with
William Wimsatt's work. (hmmm, U of Chicago, aren't
A robust theory would then be one that is accessible by many
explanations, unifying them by showing how they could make equivalent
paths through an heuristic. It would serve to maintain open questions
by allowing them to be more local. A theory with only one explanation
would be a crappy
(sorry if this is a repeat)
A robust theory would then be one that is accessible by many
explanations, unifying them by showing how they could make equivalent
paths through an heuristic. It would serve to maintain open questions by
allowing them to be more local. A theory with only one
Yeah, there's some nifty stuff I would like to get my hands on, and it's
interesting to watch the JNLP operate, but I'm still having some trouble
getting all the demos to work. Will wait another week and see if things
clean up a bit before evaluating it further. We've seen the let's make
the
Those with copious amounts of time on their hands and an interest in
math might want to check out
http://www.ams.org/amsmtgs/2110_intro.html
There are a startlingly large number of registration fee scales: I liked
the idea of the Temporarily Employed fee.
Carl
What if triangles aren't always strong via compression, or don't need to
be in the same way, in larger structures?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensegrity
...though I think you were thinking of Space Frames -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_frame
Triangles are 'strong' in the sense they
These came up today during discussions at St. Johns.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/39306
and
http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2009/06/shrinking-betelgeuse.html
C.
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays
An odd time of year to be talking about Valentine's Day
Nicholas Thompson wrote:
the following passage caught me eye:
Half the never-ending hurt in this world seems to come from our
thinking we know what other people's intentions are from their actions...
Talk to me a bit about what an
So the bats are basically starving because they are waking up too often
and burning their fat reserves. What does it take to wake up a bat?
Light? Pheromones? Existential Angst? There's something that gets
them awake and moving en masse that the fungi fake. Maybe they
fluoresce a tiny
Would it be at all accurate to say you are looking for something akin to
an RNA-world? More a regulatory and mixing n-category gumbo than
simple recombination of DNA deck chairs? If so, one might look to
Caporale, Margulis, Nusslein-Volhard, Carroll, Edelman for more
biologically-inspired
enough, but since it was Russ's question
originally
Carl
Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
Carl Tollander wrote:
Rather, we are looking to world states as other regulatory systems or
n-categories (topoi?), themselves operating on-the-fly. I'm not
at all sure that simple rules and rule-rewrites
Look octonions (denizens of Octonia, which borders Philistia?) up in
'This Weeks Finds'John Baez wrote on 'em a bit awhile back...
glen e. p. ropella wrote:
Thus spake Owen Densmore circa 09-10-10 08:26 PM:
Has anyone read this?
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/octonions/conway_smith/
More specifically, http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/octonions/
Carl Tollander wrote:
Look octonions (denizens of Octonia, which borders Philistia?) up in
'This Weeks Finds'John Baez wrote on 'em a bit awhile back...
glen e. p. ropella wrote:
Thus spake Owen Densmore circa 09-10-10 08:26 PM
I believe, that anyone who has played jazz, in any of its forms, could
easily say yes. Those who have not played jazz, but have imagined
themselves doing so, might say no.
Nicholas Thompson wrote:
All,
Over the years I can remember many animated conversations among
psychologists
1 - 100 of 329 matches
Mail list logo
