Sorry, missed out of the PS .... and that topological fit is maybe more to do with "process".
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Ian Glendinning <[email protected]> wrote: > OK Magnus, as usual hopefully we're arguing about things we really agree on. > > So you need to make two cases. > > One that there is in fact a "level border" without fuzziness. > Two that your 3D-Fit idea is less fuzzy than any other living / > organic / biological definition. > > My (our) position is that 3D (I'd say 4D) fuzziness exists at ALL > levels from fundamental physics upwards through different kinds of > chemistry (including non-chemical-bonding physical chemistries) like > taste, smell, catalysis, RNA / DNA bases, etc .... so why is the real > 3D-Fit "especially" clear cut for the second level ? (Note especially > - you don't need to educate us in geometry and chemistry generally.) > > Any more to the point why such a definition is better, pragmatically - > Andy's point - than the original "organic" - living organism - > viewpoint. > > Ian > (PS for me "fit" and "quality" are near synonymous anyway - maybe ... > given where we're going with this ... the 3D geometry is spurious > anyway.) > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:11 AM, Magnus Berg <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi again >> >> I didn't say there are *no* fuzziness in our reality. >> >> What I said was that if fuzziness is relevant, we're *not* looking at a >> level border. >> >> Magnus >> >> >> On 2010-07-16 08:30, Ian Glendinning wrote: >>> >>> And Magnus, choice and fuzziness in computers ? >>> >>> Leaving the "free will" debate out of choice for now .... computers >>> are full of fuzziness, there are particular organically (human) >>> created arrangements of the fuzzy (noisy electrons, buzzing silicon >>> and germanium lattices, rising and falling potentials) processes that >>> flip and flop as switches to choose digitally at one level we've >>> arranged. >>> >>> Having introduced this digital order, we do of course re-introduced >>> unpredictability and randomizers to re-interrupt the neat digital >>> clock cycles with the noise again. >>> >>> Depends where you look Magnus .... and at what "scale". The >>> predictability and repeatability has a scale dependent element. >>> Ian >>> Moq_Discuss mailing list >>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >>> Archives: >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html >> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >> Archives: >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org/md/archives.html >> > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
