Do you know anyone else working on this?  
 
In thinking over what the measure of  'distance'  between nodes in
networks means (the nominally 5 degrees of separation for people and 19
degrees for web pages) it's occurred to me there are two very different
sides of connection.     Natural system networks tend to be
exceptionally well connected *as a whole* , but the trade-off is that
their sub-nets become exceptionally self-centered *as parts*.
Thinking of highly connected nodes as 'hubs' explains how large complex
systems can work as a whole, but thinking of the regions they connect as
'hives' explains how they can retain their independence as parts.
What we seem to have in the scale-free design of natural systems is also
new evidence of how nature operates with lots of  'different worlds'.
One opportunity that presents is a way to find the functional boundaries
of independent system parts topologically.   Not the least benefit would
be to help us discover the correct ways to aggregate our data for other
things.   
 
The information boundaries surrounding self-connected parts of whole
systems also seem to define structural limits for the 'world views' for
things looking out from their insides.    While the system as a whole
may be well connected, those global connections would naturally tend to
be hidden for observers building their own world view from within its
locally well connected parts.    
 
I've been trying to explain my observation that the world views of
people are often exceptionally different, and yet we remain largely
unaware of it, mostly ignore it in conversation, and are relatively
uninterested in the deep communication problem it produces.    I have a
list of other 'good reasons', but if it's a natural consequence of the
scale-free topology of natural system networks, that could explain a lot
about why humans so regularly fail to communicate but think they do.
That our individual understandings of 'the universe' develop in relation
to sub-networks having local information horizons in every direction, it
means every 'hive' looks like the 'whole'.    When real complex systems
also cross-connect many kinds of  local networks at once (environment,
work, family, community, friendships, beliefs, interests, etc.)  it adds
completeness to the natural topological 'illusion'.    Perhaps the very
'independence' of our world views is further evidence of how deeply
embedded in a larger system they are.
 
Does that make sense?
 

Phil Henshaw                       ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
680 Ft. Washington Ave 
NY NY 10040                       
tel: 212-795-4844                 
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]          
explorations: www.synapse9.com <http://www.synapse9.com/>     
 
============================================================
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

Reply via email to