> Colin Hales wrote: > > Here is another possible confusion: �emergence� as a descriptive artefact vs > > �emergence� as real layered behaviour in a real system. The wording > > initially looks as if you think emergence is not real. The emergence is real > > (whatever we consider real is!). Example: There are at least 6 fundamental > > layers of emergence from quantum froth to mind. The agreed view appears to > > be that any formal mathematics of each layer stops at each layer whereas an > > algorithmic approach generates/spans the layers, which are delineated by an > > appropriately sensitised observer. Both styles of description seem > > appropriate and able to coexist provided their character is understood.
I presented a general systems model of complexity~emergence at the first Complexity conference held in Nashua, New Hampsire USA by NECSI in 1997 in which I stipulated a very specific relationship involved in inter-tier production of emergent complexity. The layers do couple in very specific ways - at any level of layering~tiering identifiable. Info~energy which recursively loops between the state-nodes of two or more agents in a reference frame binds the agents into a narrower behavior mode. I.e., increased distribution of information~energy in one tier of organization can cause behavior localization in an adjacent tier. Rephrased: natural or induced entropy increases in one tier can effectively produce negentropic complexity formation in the next higher tier of organixation (Rose, 1973). Designing the algorithm involved is the key to human survival and evolution. Jamie Rose Ceptual Institute
