I think the difficulty of the "triangle as emergence" problem is trying to imagine an situation where the "agents" (individual edges of a triangle) combine and re-combine in different configurations. But if they do, and if the environment selects structures based on strength, then I can see that the triangle (or pyramid, in 3 dimensions) is a "basin of attraction" that would emerge from this environment. In my mind, homogeneity is important ... although I prefer the phrase "self-similar," as the agents don't have to be completely the same ... they just have to be close to each other in their attributes that relate to the emergent property.
It's a good thought experiment, though. Thanks. -Ted On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Victoria Hughes <[email protected]>wrote: > Bad keyboard. Go to yer room. > > So what criteria or descriptors would you use to identify 'true' emergence? > > Tory > > > > > On Jun 9, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: > > I suppose that if, one were to show resistance to compression by number of >> sides of an open polygon one would show a non linear function. I have never >> been thrilled by the linearity criterion because transformation can usually >> get rid of it. So something that is emergent on a ordinary plot becomes >> non-emergent on a log plot. >> >> Sorry again to be so short; no disrespect, just hatred for the keyboard I >> am working on. >> >> N >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: Victoria Hughes <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Jun 8, 2009 12:26 PM >>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < >>> [email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] quick question >>> >>> Re ongoing conversations about emergent phenomena: >>> for the purposes of discussions here+the discuss list: >>> Is 'non-linearity' an acceptable descriptor? >>> >>> And out of curiousity how would you plot a linear progression of >>> attributes that includes 'triangleness'? What elements would you be >>> graphing? >>> >>> Tory >>> >>> On Jun 7, 2009, at 10:25 AM, Steve Smith wrote: >>> >>> Nick - >>>> >>>>> But surely we cannot reduce the strength of a triangle to the >>>>> strength of its parts because the strength of a triangle depends on >>>>> the ARRANGEMENT of those parts. And arrangement is not a property >>>>> of any of the parts. >>>>> >>>> after my missive on Tolerancing and my claim that "Emergence" >>>> requires "nonlinearity", I have to take a pause and accept that you >>>> may be correct that the example of a triangle and it's strength >>>> might be described as emergent. >>>> >>>> I hope that a "wise person" will weigh in here. I have to admit to >>>> being left wavering and curious on this one. >>>> >>>> Good question Nick. >>>> >>>> - Steve >>>> >>>> >>>> ============================================================ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> PS --Please if using the address [email protected] to reply, cc >> your message to [email protected]. Thanks. >> >> ============================================================ >> 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 >> >> > > ============================================================ > 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 >
============================================================ 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
