From: Thomas Lunde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Shucks, Jay that's why the scientific model can't discover it which was the
>point of this whole conversation. The mathematics of chaos posits an
>attractor as the place where energy is pulled towards. It is this
>concentration of energy which emerges into form. If the attractor moves or
Remember Thonas that when physical systems become chaotic,
they either become more complex -- and require more energy --
or they collapse. [ Ilya Prigogine. Order out of Chaos.
Bantam Books, New York, 1984 ]
Chaos theory agrees with Joseph Tainter's paper:
"Systems of problem solving develop greater complexity and
higher costs over long periods. In time such systems either
require increasing energy subsidies or they collapse."
http://dieoff.org/page134.htm
Energy is the key to complex social systems ... and we are
running out of energy ... and will almost certainly collapse.
Here is a sample of the exciting new discipline of post-energy
economics:
----------------------------------------------------------------
In this curious society which seems to have bypassed Karl Marx in
economics, there is one common value, apart from language, to
which all Ik hold tenaciously. It is ngag, "food." This is not a
cynical quip—there is no room for cynicism with the Ik. It is
clearly stated by the Ik themselves in their daily conversation,
in their rationale for action and thought. It is the one standard
by which they measure right and wrong, goodness and badness. The
very word for 'good,' marang, is defined in terms of food.
"Goodness," marangik, is defined simply as "food," or, if you
press, this will be clarified as "the possession of food," and
still further clarified as "individual possession of food." Then
if you try the word as an adjective and attempt to discover what
their concept is of a "good man," iakw anamarang, hoping that the
answer will be that a good man is a man who helps you fill your
own stomach, you get the truly Icien answer: a good man is one
who has a full stomach. There is goodness in being, but none in
doing, at least not in doing to others.
So we should not be surprised when the mother throws her child
out at three years old. She has breast-fed it, with some ill
humor, and cared for it in some manner for three whole years, and
now it is ready to make its own way. I imagine the child must be
rather relieved to be thrown out, for in the process of being
cared for he or she is carried about in a hide sling wherever the
mother goes, and since the mother is not strong herself this is
done grudgingly. Whenever the mother finds a spot in which to
gather, or if she is at a water hole or in her fields, she
loosens the sling and lets the baby to the ground none too
slowly, and of course laughs if it is hurt. I have seen Bila and
Matsui do this many a time. Then she goes about her business,
leaving the child there, almost hoping that some predator will
come along and carry it off. This happened once while I was
there—once that I know of, anyway—and the mother was delighted.
She was rid of the child and no longer had to carry it about and
feed it, and still further this meant that a leopard was in the
vicinity and would be sleeping the child off and thus be an easy
kill. The men set off and found the leopard, which had consumed
all of the child except part of the skull; they killed the
leopard and cooked it and ate it, child and all. That is Icien
economy, and it makes sense in its own way. [Turnbull, 1972]
----------------------------------------------------------
Jay
