Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Robert Wall]

No.  My bad Glen.  I guess I have buttons I didn't think I had ... Thanks
for the follow-up explanation. Much appreciated.

My objective, to be sure, was not seeking agreement, except on the general
concept of "being in the zone." It was they only way to be sure we could
start on the same page ... a meeting of the minds, as it were. Remember I
came late to the thread. I kept digging for a root, but the hole was just
getting deeper and deeper.  Then it seemed that someone was filling the
hole with me in it. 

Iconoclast, I am not.  Not smart enough. Maybe why I drag guys
like Csikszentmihalyi to the party. But, as I think Vladimyr was saying, I
could have been taking Csikszentmihalyi's idea further than even he
intended it to be taken ... to the level of a society as a whole.  Even in
wonder, it may have just been too far too early. But well intended, as it
has been, for me, a search for a plausible approach at *normalizing *a society
to where it stops presenting us all with one unsolved existential threat
after another. So it has been a personal mission to understand this.  A
hobby of sorts. In this thread, I started with and concluded that I didn't
think it was possible to do what I was suggesting. Still, sometimes we
learn about an issue by throwing hypothetical solutions at it from every
corner of thought. Knowing why something isn't or may not be possible is
still insight ... even though it may sound like nonsense. 

So what's next to try on this quest? Complexity science?   Certainly,
zeitgeists can be seen as emergent phenomena. Problem?  Is emergent
behavior even controllable?

Context switch: To understand bird evolution you are going to have to go
back pretty far.  There is strong evidence that they are first cousins to
the dinosaurs. Landscapes and climates (conditionals) have changed
drastically since the Mesozoic Era. But has bird song reflected this?  It
would be interesting to contemplate how the first birds sounded compared to
birds of our day.  We seem to know how many of them looked.  Could their
sound be detected in a way similar to the way linguist try to piece back
the evolution of human language, back to its origins? And I don't know how
they do this reliably.

Fractals being patterns that are repeated in patterns at all levels of
scale (and tempo) seem to suggest a building up of complexity from very
simple rules like with *cellular automata*. Bird songs have grammar--rules,
that need to be learned from generation to generation. Variations could
creep in just from the variations that occur in the parents, just like with
human genetics. Speciation (morphological differences) makes not only a new
bird but likely a new bird song from different vocal engines.  Bird songs
of all types *have *been crudely reproduced with cellular automata. I
dunno.  I am not really addressing the question which I think is how to
determine if bird song patterns are spatially correlated, but maybe it's a
start ... tip-toe .. tip-toe ...

[image: Inline image 1]

Cheers


On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 8:29 AM, ┣glen┫  wrote:

> Oops.  I'm sorry if I've offended you.  I am contrarian and tend to seek
> out areas of disagreement, rather than agreement.
>
> On 02/24/2017 07:14 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
> > The "as if" was the key.  The "as if" alludes to the behavioral
> manifestation. Yes?
>
> Yes, of course.  However, this is the subject of the conversation.  If we
> allow the "as if" to work its magic on us, we can be tricked into taking
> the illusion seriously.  So, by calling out the nonsensical materials
> surrounding the "as if", I'm trying to avoid that.
>
> > I notice that you seem to use the words "useless" and  "nonsense"
> [usually with the adjective /utter /] a lot when you post replies.
>
> Yes, you're right.  And I apologize if my usage is inferred to mean
> something more than it is.  What I mean by "useless" is that I have no use
> for it.  I can't formulate a use case.  What I mean by "nonsense" is that
> it makes no sense to me.  I should pepper my replies with more social salve
> like "to me" and "in my opinion".  It's difficult, though, because that
> overhead interferes with the actual content.  But please don't think my
> attribution of "useless" and "nonsense" imply that I haven't read or tried
> to make use/sense of that content.  My colleagues constantly mention work
> like that of Csikszentmihalyi and I've studied what I can to extract
> elements I can use, often to no avail.
>
> I'm certain my failure is due to my own shortcomings.  But it is true.  I
> have too much difficulty applying tools that rely fundamentally on
> thoughts/minds/ideas/etc across tasks and domains.
>
> > In a strange way, though, throughout this whole thread, you actually
> make my point.  Thanks!  Language can be a problem.  Symbolic reference.
> Imprecision. But the bottom-line is that I feel you really didn't (even try
> to) understand anything I said, and, apparently, I don't really 

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Nick Thompson]

Thank you, Vladimyr, 

 

As any member of the local congregation will tell you, I am a sucker for the 
plausible.  I am also interested in bringing new blood into our conversations 
and in guiding the conversations back toward complexity in order to bring back 
some of the old blood that has gone a-wandering.  Hence my attempt to introduce 
the question of birdsong and fractality.  

 

Here is an example of a bit of bird song.

 



 

Some bird song is temporally fractal: i.e., it is hiearchically organized and 
the principles of organization are repeated at different levels of 
organization.  Unfortunately, the song above … a mockingbird song … is NOT 
fractally organized, and it’s the only one I can find on my computer at the 
moment.  But you can see what it would be for a song to be so organized.   
Crows “ordinary” cawing is fractal in that it consistes of temporal units 
divided into temperal units;  both a caw, and a burst of caws, are temporal 
units.  Raven “drumming” is similar.  Cardinal singing is similary divided into 
temporal units of temporal units, but unfortunately, there is a morphological 
level between the “song” and the “note” in cardinal singing, (cardinals sing in 
runs) so it is not strictly speaking fractal,  if I understand the concept.  

 

To be a thousand percent honest, I have to confess that I don’t know what it 
would mean for bird song to be spacially fractal.  I am guilty, often, of 
throwing stuff out to friam just because I don’t have a clue, and hoping to be 
educatied.  But because of song learning, it is often observed that songs are 
more similar locally than at longer distances.  Where that could be conceived 
as spacially fractal in any sense, I don’t know. 

 

I THINK this is a case of Thompson having taken a flyer and getting shot down, 
and perhaps we should all just tip-toe away in respectful silence. 

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Vladimyr Burachynsky
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2017 1:51 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Nick,

Thank-you and let's talk about the birds in their complex landscape. Are they 
hatched with the neural equipment to sing... or do they discriminate their most 
ideal voices from the orchestra, only after learning their father's voice?

 

Do they mimic the Caruso's among themselves and regale these stars with more  
favorable advances

 

that leaves a large problem ... to sing in perfect mimicry  they would only 
confuse eachother and throw flowers at the wrong feet.

 

So as the birds can distinguish each other so we can distinguish opera stars. 
Does the Fractal component hide a unique cipher code?

Is it audibly detectable at great distance.

I am not much of a bird watcher anymore but can recall a few voices;  Ravens, 
Jays, Larks, Poor-wills/snipes? , Herons,Loons, ... That's a surprise I recall 
more than I thought at first. Not a very melodious group upon reflection, 
ah...If I close my eyes and concentrate they come alive again.

 

Only the crow  family in my experience tries to imitate other voices. Indeed I 
used to charm Ravens with my mimicry while working in the far north. I recall 
someone stating that Ravens could imitate the sound of a Honda Generator. But I 
can attest that they can change sounds as if they were speaking and the glass 
bell clang usually gets their attention. Crows do not like it so much since 
they fear Ravens. I suspect wolves understand some Raven calls. Just a northern 
perspective of mine.

 

I think the thread has merits and hope not to have caused anyone to spill a 
drink.

vib 

 

-Original Message-

From: Friam [ <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com> 
mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Nick Thompson

Sent: February-25-17 12:56 AM

To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Speaking for the audience ... 

 

Or at least one member, thereof.   I have not understood a word any of you guys 
have said since I introduced the thread a week or so ago.  That's Ok.  That's 
great, in fact.  It's the nature of the FRIAM beast.  I love it when you 
experts go crazy on this list.

 

So long as you go NICE crazy.   If you are going to get grumpy, you can't do it 
on my thread.Ok? 

 

A point of this thread was to introduce  Alberto to FRIAM.  He should know we 
don't DO grumpy, here. (We really don't, A.)  No apologies necessary.   Just 
stop. 

 

As a fellow madman, I love you like brothers.  

 

Thanks, 

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University  
<http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Robert Wall]

G! 
New day...

On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 8:30 AM ┣glen┫  wrote:

> Oops.  I'm sorry if I've offended you.  I am contrarian and tend to seek
> out areas of disagreement, rather than agreement.
>
> On 02/24/2017 07:14 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
> > The "as if" was the key.  The "as if" alludes to the behavioral
> manifestation. Yes?
>
> Yes, of course.  However, this is the subject of the conversation.  If we
> allow the "as if" to work its magic on us, we can be tricked into taking
> the illusion seriously.  So, by calling out the nonsensical materials
> surrounding the "as if", I'm trying to avoid that.
>
> > I notice that you seem to use the words "useless" and  "nonsense"
> [usually with the adjective /utter /] a lot when you post replies.
>
> Yes, you're right.  And I apologize if my usage is inferred to mean
> something more than it is.  What I mean by "useless" is that I have no use
> for it.  I can't formulate a use case.  What I mean by "nonsense" is that
> it makes no sense to me.  I should pepper my replies with more social salve
> like "to me" and "in my opinion".  It's difficult, though, because that
> overhead interferes with the actual content.  But please don't think my
> attribution of "useless" and "nonsense" imply that I haven't read or tried
> to make use/sense of that content.  My colleagues constantly mention work
> like that of Csikszentmihalyi and I've studied what I can to extract
> elements I can use, often to no avail.
>
> I'm certain my failure is due to my own shortcomings.  But it is true.  I
> have too much difficulty applying tools that rely fundamentally on
> thoughts/minds/ideas/etc across tasks and domains.
>
> > In a strange way, though, throughout this whole thread, you actually
> make my point.  Thanks!  Language can be a problem.  Symbolic reference.
> Imprecision. But the bottom-line is that I feel you really didn't (even try
> to) understand anything I said, and, apparently, I don't really understand
> anything you have said in as much as I have tried.  And I am not sure it is
> because of the imprecision of language, though. It is something else that
> leads you to just find disagreement.  As often said, it is much easier to
> sound smart by tearing something down than to constructively build on
> something. Maybe that applies here.  Not sure. Hope not.
>
> I don't intend to tear anything down and am under no illusions regarding
> my own lack of intelligence.  I'm a solid C student and am always
> outmatched by my friends and colleagues.  (That's from a lesson my dad
> taught me long ago.  If you want to improve your game, choose opponents
> that are better than you are.  So I make every attempt to hang out with
> people far smarter than I am.  That they tolerate my idiocy is evidence of
> their kindness.)
>
> But the point, here, is that you offered a solution to the problem I
> posed.  And I believe your solution to be inadequate.  So, I'm simply
> trying to point out that it is inadequate and why/how it is inadequate. ...
> namely that your concept of optimal or efficient embedding in an
> environment is too reliant on the vague concept of mind/thought.
>
> If birdsong retains its temporal fractality despite the bird being
> embedded in a non-fractal environment, then we should look elsewhere ...
> somewhere other than the birds' minds.  Vladimyr's argument posted last
> night may demonstrate that I'm wrong, though.  I don't know, yet.
>
> --
> ␦glen?
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[┣glen┫]

Oops.  I'm sorry if I've offended you.  I am contrarian and tend to seek out 
areas of disagreement, rather than agreement.

On 02/24/2017 07:14 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
> The "as if" was the key.  The "as if" alludes to the behavioral 
> manifestation. Yes?

Yes, of course.  However, this is the subject of the conversation.  If we allow 
the "as if" to work its magic on us, we can be tricked into taking the illusion 
seriously.  So, by calling out the nonsensical materials surrounding the "as 
if", I'm trying to avoid that.

> I notice that you seem to use the words "useless" and  "nonsense" [usually 
> with the adjective /utter /] a lot when you post replies.

Yes, you're right.  And I apologize if my usage is inferred to mean something 
more than it is.  What I mean by "useless" is that I have no use for it.  I 
can't formulate a use case.  What I mean by "nonsense" is that it makes no 
sense to me.  I should pepper my replies with more social salve like "to me" 
and "in my opinion".  It's difficult, though, because that overhead interferes 
with the actual content.  But please don't think my attribution of "useless" 
and "nonsense" imply that I haven't read or tried to make use/sense of that 
content.  My colleagues constantly mention work like that of Csikszentmihalyi 
and I've studied what I can to extract elements I can use, often to no avail.

I'm certain my failure is due to my own shortcomings.  But it is true.  I have 
too much difficulty applying tools that rely fundamentally on 
thoughts/minds/ideas/etc across tasks and domains.

> In a strange way, though, throughout this whole thread, you actually make my 
> point.  Thanks!  Language can be a problem.  Symbolic reference. Imprecision. 
> But the bottom-line is that I feel you really didn't (even try to) understand 
> anything I said, and, apparently, I don't really understand anything you have 
> said in as much as I have tried.  And I am not sure it is because of the 
> imprecision of language, though. It is something else that leads you to just 
> find disagreement.  As often said, it is much easier to sound smart by 
> tearing something down than to constructively build on something. Maybe that 
> applies here.  Not sure. Hope not.

I don't intend to tear anything down and am under no illusions regarding my own 
lack of intelligence.  I'm a solid C student and am always outmatched by my 
friends and colleagues.  (That's from a lesson my dad taught me long ago.  If 
you want to improve your game, choose opponents that are better than you are.  
So I make every attempt to hang out with people far smarter than I am.  That 
they tolerate my idiocy is evidence of their kindness.)

But the point, here, is that you offered a solution to the problem I posed.  
And I believe your solution to be inadequate.  So, I'm simply trying to point 
out that it is inadequate and why/how it is inadequate. ... namely that your 
concept of optimal or efficient embedding in an environment is too reliant on 
the vague concept of mind/thought.

If birdsong retains its temporal fractality despite the bird being embedded in 
a non-fractal environment, then we should look elsewhere ... somewhere other 
than the birds' minds.  Vladimyr's argument posted last night may demonstrate 
that I'm wrong, though.  I don't know, yet.

-- 
␦glen?


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

Nick,
Thank-you and let's talk about the birds in their complex landscape. Are they 
hatched with the neural equipment to sing... or do they discriminate their most 
ideal voices from the orchestra, only after learning their father's voice?

Do they mimic the Caruso's among themselves and regale these stars with more  
favorable advances

that leaves a large problem ... to sing in perfect mimicry  they would only 
confuse eachother and throw flowers at the wrong feet.

So as the birds can distinguish each other so we can distinguish opera stars. 
Does the Fractal component hide a unique cipher code?
Is it audibly detectable at great distance.
I am not much of a bird watcher anymore but can recall a few voices;  Ravens, 
Jays, Larks, Poor-wills/snipes? , Herons,Loons, ... That's a surprise I recall 
more than I thought at first. Not a very melodious group upon reflection, 
ah...If I close my eyes and concentrate they come alive again.

Only the crow  family in my experience tries to imitate other voices. Indeed I 
used to charm Ravens with my mimicry while working in the far north. I recall 
someone stating that Ravens could imitate the sound of a Honda Generator. But I 
can attest that they can change sounds as if they were speaking and the glass 
bell clang usually gets their attention. Crows do not like it so much since 
they fear Ravens. I suspect wolves understand some Raven calls. Just a northern 
perspective of mine.

I think the thread has merits and hope not to have caused anyone to spill a 
drink.
vib 

-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Nick Thompson
Sent: February-25-17 12:56 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

Speaking for the audience ... 

Or at least one member, thereof.   I have not understood a word any of you guys 
have said since I introduced the thread a week or so ago.  That's Ok.  That's 
great, in fact.  It's the nature of the FRIAM beast.  I love it when you 
experts go crazy on this list.

So long as you go NICE crazy.   If you are going to get grumpy, you can't do it 
on my thread.Ok? 

A point of this thread was to introduce  Alberto to FRIAM.  He should know we 
don't DO grumpy, here. (We really don't, A.)  No apologies necessary.   Just 
stop. 

As a fellow madman, I love you like brothers.  

Thanks, 

Nick 

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University 
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/


-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Vladimyr Burachynsky
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 7:49 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

Gentlemen and audience,

The tempest ( Glen) and the captain of a small vessel (Robert) lashed to the 
mast. Are not in any form of disagreement by their own admissions.
OK, from my vantage point in the cold inhospitable North Lands , I sense a 
salient exchange of cannon fire.

Let's look at events Robert Wall introduced a novel idea Flow affecting 
individuals.
Vladimyr suggested that the description of Flow might be extended to Society or 
Social Groups. And that multiple low dimensional view points could recover 
higher dimensional realities.

Glen strongly protests this assertion.
Robert got backhanded when Glen denied that  Flow could be extended from the 
original individual to a group of individuals. I don't think Robert knew it was 
coming. If I am asked to judge this I will accuse Vladimyr of Meddling give 
points to Glen and a yellow flag for bending the rules of discourse. The two 
remain at the same point score and Vladimyr was told to leave the arena or shut 
up and just watch.
So complying with the judges warning...

he goes into the recesses of the internet and presents a coup against one of 
Glen's points about low and high dimensionality. 
This was a past attempt to compile two or more complex ideas into his personal 
self study device having no external value until Glen's position was declared.
https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkxz3QBcDOoGZ2Lop
https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=14A5CDB09AEE4237=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212460=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212223=OneUp
both links to same site. It demonstrates Geometric Projection as a tool 
developed by early Renaissance Artists.


Next Vladimyr will demonstrate a complex system reduced to a lower dimension 
raising a point suggesting that complex ideas may be reduced to simple but 
dynamic neural structures and shared with other minds as memes.
https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=14A5CDB09AEE4237=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212236=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212223=OneUp
https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkTzqvvk6JnRRFJX2
again both links to same display.
Vladimyr is trying to demonstrate the imminent feasibility of mapping complex 
ideas from higher dimensions  into lower dime

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Nick Thompson]

Speaking for the audience ... 

Or at least one member, thereof.   I have not understood a word any of you guys 
have said since I introduced the thread a week or so ago.  That's Ok.  That's 
great, in fact.  It's the nature of the FRIAM beast.  I love it when you 
experts go crazy on this list.

So long as you go NICE crazy.   If you are going to get grumpy, you can't do it 
on my thread.Ok? 

A point of this thread was to introduce  Alberto to FRIAM.  He should know we 
don't DO grumpy, here. (We really don't, A.)  No apologies necessary.   Just 
stop. 

As a fellow madman, I love you like brothers.  

Thanks, 

Nick 

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/


-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Vladimyr Burachynsky
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 7:49 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

Gentlemen and audience,

The tempest ( Glen) and the captain of a small vessel (Robert) lashed to the 
mast. Are not in any form of disagreement by their own admissions.
OK, from my vantage point in the cold inhospitable North Lands , I sense a 
salient exchange of cannon fire.

Let's look at events Robert Wall introduced a novel idea Flow affecting 
individuals.
Vladimyr suggested that the description of Flow might be extended to Society or 
Social Groups. And that multiple low dimensional view points could recover 
higher dimensional realities.

Glen strongly protests this assertion.
Robert got backhanded when Glen denied that  Flow could be extended from the 
original individual to a group of individuals. I don't think Robert knew it was 
coming. If I am asked to judge this I will accuse Vladimyr of Meddling give 
points to Glen and a yellow flag for bending the rules of discourse. The two 
remain at the same point score and Vladimyr was told to leave the arena or shut 
up and just watch.
So complying with the judges warning...

he goes into the recesses of the internet and presents a coup against one of 
Glen's points about low and high dimensionality. 
This was a past attempt to compile two or more complex ideas into his personal 
self study device having no external value until Glen's position was declared.
https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkxz3QBcDOoGZ2Lop
https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=14A5CDB09AEE4237=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212460=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212223=OneUp
both links to same site. It demonstrates Geometric Projection as a tool 
developed by early Renaissance Artists.


Next Vladimyr will demonstrate a complex system reduced to a lower dimension 
raising a point suggesting that complex ideas may be reduced to simple but 
dynamic neural structures and shared with other minds as memes.
https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=14A5CDB09AEE4237=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212236=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212223=OneUp
https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkTzqvvk6JnRRFJX2
again both links to same display.
Vladimyr is trying to demonstrate the imminent feasibility of mapping complex 
ideas from higher dimensions  into lower dimensions that all humans do daily.
This process of mapping to neural networks is a new area of science. Currently 
being investigated by Dr. Kate Jeffery here is an essay from Aeon
https://aeon.co/essays/how-cognitive-maps-help-animals-navigate-the-world?utm_source=Aeon+Newsletter_campaign=6652cf6dd1-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_01_25_medium=email_term=0_411a82e59d-6652cf6dd1-69341065

So complexity can be represented in lower dimensions as human beings do so all 
the time. Maps from lower dimensions can be re-constructed to display higher 
dimensionality admittedly subject to losses known or unknown depending on 
protocol.  Back and forth.
But Glen and all of us now must shift discussion to protocols and measures of 
veracity.

So where does this leave Robert Wall, relax sir , you may feel blasted but you 
are in a congregation and Flow is a useful symbol but needs more deliberation.
I have read your links for hours and rankle at the looseness of the pertinent 
details I wish for more at a neurological level. 
And just what does a detachment from moral restrictions mean when like many 
misanthropes ,  I think they never existed in the first place.

Perhaps society shapes our young brains and only the obstreperous, 
misanthropic, autotelic, defiant bewhiskered cranks  act as contradictory 
forces. Are we contributing to a renormalization of society? or simply amusing 
ourselves in our twilight years.
the next Bell clang starts a new round of intellectual pugilism 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_boxing
Well Robert do you actually think the Flow is always positive, melodious or 
beneficent...
Joy has taken on a kind of Christian mantle and now dissociates itself from the 
Joys of victory or triumph. I recall Obama's announcement of bin Laden's 
assassination and the exp

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Carl Tollander]

Hell hath no fury as those who presume to speak for another...

On Feb 23, 2017 11:29 PM, "Nick Thompson" <nickthomp...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

> All—
>
>
>
> If you want to find the Dylan Roof key on your own emotional piano, think
> about the last time you indulged yourself in road rage.  According to one
> kind of evolutionary psychology, road rage is an instance of "altruistic
> punishment".  Altruistic punishment is selected at the group level.  When
> in that groove, we are so possessed that we are *willing to risk our own
> lives to support the norms of our perceived in-group*.
>
>
>
> Altruistic rage is by far the most dangerous emotion we experience.  Not
> how Trump works tirelessly to create the conditions that will foster it.
> Every genocide is preceded by “conditioning” to suppose that it is our
> highest duty to defend our values against those who do not share them.
>
> Nick Thompson
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Vladimyr
> Burachynsky
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 7:59 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <
> friam@redfish.com>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs
>
>
>
> Glen,
>
>
>
> I think Robert Wall is nudging close to an idea that he failed to
> adequately clarify but you may have nailed it while trying to deny it (this
> I call a backhanded strike). Last week there was a strange article about
> groups of people having the same memory that have no contact with each
> other. That shared memory was in fact  demonstrably false. It was regarding
> a misperceived memory of a TV show called Shazaam and some comedian called
> Sinbad... My mind retains utter garbage sometimes.
>
>
>
> I never saw it but then it never actually happened. The investigators
> explained that so many of the false memory components overlapped reality
> that the subjects truly believed some occurrence that was categorically
> disproved. So a society may well share memories of fictional events and act
> on delusions ie mobs.
>
>
>
> If an individual may fall into a groove then how else can mass insanity be
> better explained. I always recall that in history strange things happen on
> mass scale. For instance during the heated animosity between the Greeks and
> Latins a feud broke out over religious icons. West was Iconophilic and the
> east was Iconoclastic. The Latins were so pissed they assembled an armada
> in Rimini or Ravenna and sailed this monstrosity down the Adriatic to
> defend the faith. Somewhere between Brindisi and Corfu the greatest
> historical storm destroyed the entire fleet of ships sparing Byzantium a
> certain defeat. So Leo made a few compromises and things sort of settled
> down but then another group of serious iconoclasts  made trouble the
> Paulicians. Then the Muslims came along and the world is still fractured in
> many ways. It always struck me as the height of insanity to go to war over
> Symbols and I think Monty Python once made a skit out of crusaders and
> muslims beating the crap out of each other with religious banners and
> gilded reliquaries. While the armed knights and Saracens looked on in
> amazement. Whether this ever happened , I do not know, but can guess.
> Perhaps " the groove" has a darkside a suicidal aspect, such as the Battle
> of Gallipoli, as well as the neutral individual features we love to discuss
> openly.
>
>
>
> I always suspected that Hatred is transmitted from mothers to children as
> is influenza propagation. I recall some very strange conversations between
> my German Mother and Ukrainian Aunt that bordered on the rabid hatred of
> mad dogs. Then they just continued serving Christmas dinner in total
> silence,  when the men returned to the dinner table. My Uncle a  devout
> Catholic and former Ukrainian Cavalry Officer would think nothing of
> Beheading Russians long after he was defeated in the 1920's. Indeed he was
> otherwise a rational Civil Engineer with a penchant for Botany but he hated
> anything that sounded affiliated with Russia or Eastern Orthodoxy. I could
> never tell the difference except for the slanted foot support on the
> crucifix. Hardly enough reason for bloodshed.
>
>
>
> But Dylan Rouffe and Alexandre Bisonette slaughtered  defenseless
> congregations and showed no shame nor regret. They may be said to have been
> proud  of what they did. Anders Brevijk may well have been in a dark trench
> at the t

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Robert Wall]

>
>  (This is why Csikszentmihalyi's concept of "flow" is useless and annoying
> to me.)  It's pure nonsense to talk of mind at all.  So, it's nonsense to
> say that societies act as if with one mind.


Wow!  Try to be consistent at least.  Eh?  Who is saying that except you
with your previous groupthink examples?  Not me. That was my point.  They
can't.  The "as if" was the key.  The "as if" alludes to the behavioral
manifestation. Yes?

And, you seem to be easily annoyed and this is just one example with this
latest load of shit you have dropped on my attempt to explain.  I notice
that you seem to use the words "useless" and  "nonsense" [usually with the
adjective *utter *] a lot when you post replies.  Not sure if you mean to
be insulting or annoying, but you achieved it here this time. Another
backhand strike? So, you lost me half way through this reply. A sense of
hopelessness set in very early.

In a strange way, though, throughout this whole thread, you actually make
my point.  Thanks!  Language can be a problem.  Symbolic reference.
Imprecision. But the bottom-line is that I feel you really didn't (even try
to) understand anything I said, and, apparently, I don't really understand
anything you have said in as much as I have tried.  And I am not sure it is
because of the imprecision of language, though. It is something else that
leads you to just find disagreement.  As often said, it is much easier to
sound smart by tearing something down than to constructively build on
something. Maybe that applies here.  Not sure. Hope not.

Just taking the example of my "superseding the animal," I am talking about
superseding our "animal nature" and not talking about our distinctiveness
with other animals in terms of accomplishments or anything else like that.
How did you come up with that?!  I thought the context would have made what
I was saying abundantly clear.

Actually, in this, humans are both the same and distinctive from other
animals, but not in the way you counter, which is arguably a non-sequitur.
This from* Psychology Today*: Not So Different: Finding Human Nature in
Animal Nature

 (2016):

The big take-home message is that the emotional drives and instincts of
> humans and other animals are remarkably similar. Where things become very
> different -- and we have to admit that modern humans live very differently
> than other animals -- is when those drives and instincts interact with the
> social environment  to
> create behavior. Since humans have an exceedingly complex cultural history
> that is additive over the generations, that is a very different social
> milieu in which our drives give rise to behaviors. But the drives
> themselves are not so different.


So my bringing other animals into the discussion could be considered an
insult to all other animals.  Yes, we are actually distinctive, but to my
point, in our behavioral differences with these other animals. Animals are
incapable of evilness in the same way that we say humans can be evil. I am
sure, for example, that the author of the article titled "Man's more
enlightened, Human Nature versus our "more animal than human nature
" would
have understood what I was talking about in the context of this discussion
(it's not difficult to find other examples of others wondering how to get
society to stop shitting in their nest, so to speak.  And, we are arguably
approaching a time where we need an answer.):

Why is the world in such a terrible state, with so much crime, corruption,
> violence, injustice, material and spiritual poverty, and in general such a
> shameful testament to man's capacity for evil, indifference and stupidity?
> Notwithstanding that many of us - for the moment, at least - lead such
> pleasant and privileged lives.
>


> Things were no better in the past either; in many ways they were even
> worse (not for the privileged few, perhaps, as now, but certainly for the
> majority). The history of "civilisation", from its very beginnings to the
> present, not withstanding its great achievements, has largely been the
> history of violent conflict, injustice and of man's inhumanity towards and
> exploitation of his fellow man.



>
> Having an answer to this most important (and vital) of questions is
> essential if we are to meet man's most pressing challenge: the creation of
> diverse, just, humane, peaceful and *sustainable* human societies on our
> finite and vulnerable planet, *Spaceship Earth*.



> The answer, in fact, has been staring us in the face for more than 100
> years: since the publication of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and
> the scientific recognition of man's animal origins. Although lip service is
> paid to this most profound piece of scientific knowledge, for all
> practical, 

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

Gentlemen and audience,

The tempest ( Glen) and the captain of a small vessel (Robert) lashed to the 
mast. Are not in any form of disagreement by their own admissions.
OK, from my vantage point in the cold inhospitable North Lands , I sense a 
salient exchange of cannon fire.

Let's look at events Robert Wall introduced a novel idea Flow affecting 
individuals.
Vladimyr suggested that the description of Flow might be extended to Society or 
Social Groups. And that multiple low dimensional view points could recover 
higher dimensional realities.

Glen strongly protests this assertion.
Robert got backhanded when Glen denied that  Flow could be extended from the 
original individual to a group of individuals. I don't think Robert knew it was 
coming. If I am asked to judge this I will 
accuse Vladimyr of Meddling give points to Glen and a yellow flag for bending 
the rules of discourse. The two remain at the same point score and Vladimyr was 
told to leave the arena or shut up and just watch.
So complying with the judges warning...

he goes into the recesses of the internet and presents a coup against one of 
Glen's points about low and high dimensionality. 
This was a past attempt to compile two or more complex ideas into his personal 
self study device having no external value until Glen's position was declared.
https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkxz3QBcDOoGZ2Lop
https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=14A5CDB09AEE4237=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212460=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212223=OneUp
both links to same site. It demonstrates Geometric Projection as a tool 
developed by early Renaissance Artists.


Next Vladimyr will demonstrate a complex system reduced to a lower dimension 
raising a point suggesting that complex ideas may be reduced to simple but 
dynamic neural structures and shared with other minds as memes.
https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=14A5CDB09AEE4237=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212236=14A5CDB09AEE4237%212223=OneUp
https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkTzqvvk6JnRRFJX2
again both links to same display.
Vladimyr is trying to demonstrate the imminent feasibility of mapping complex 
ideas from higher dimensions  into lower dimensions that all humans do daily.
This process of mapping to neural networks is a new area of science. Currently 
being investigated by Dr. Kate Jeffery here is an essay from Aeon
https://aeon.co/essays/how-cognitive-maps-help-animals-navigate-the-world?utm_source=Aeon+Newsletter_campaign=6652cf6dd1-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_01_25_medium=email_term=0_411a82e59d-6652cf6dd1-69341065

So complexity can be represented in lower dimensions as human beings do so all 
the time. Maps from lower dimensions can be re-constructed to display higher 
dimensionality admittedly subject to losses known or unknown depending on 
protocol.  Back and forth.
But Glen and all of us now must shift discussion to protocols and measures of 
veracity.

So where does this leave Robert Wall, relax sir , you may feel blasted but you 
are in a congregation and Flow is a useful symbol but needs more deliberation.
I have read your links for hours and rankle at the looseness of the pertinent 
details I wish for more at a neurological level. 
And just what does a detachment from moral restrictions mean when like many 
misanthropes ,  I think they never existed in the first place.

Perhaps society shapes our young brains and only the obstreperous, 
misanthropic, autotelic, defiant bewhiskered cranks  act as contradictory 
forces. Are we contributing to a renormalization of society? or simply amusing 
ourselves in our twilight years.
the next Bell clang starts a new round of intellectual pugilism 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_boxing
Well Robert do you actually think the Flow is always positive, melodious or 
beneficent...
Joy has taken on a kind of Christian mantle and now dissociates itself from the 
Joys of victory or triumph. I recall Obama's announcement of bin Laden's 
assassination and the explosion of unrestrained American Joy

Flow is probably best described with multiple orders of derivatives within the 
human minds. Let's work on this .



vib


-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: February-24-17 4:48 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs


OK.  Yes, thanks, that helps.  But I do think you disagree with me, only I may 
not have made myself clear enough for you to realize we disagree.  I'll 
interleave in the hopes of making my objections in context.

On 02/24/2017 01:44 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
> The last quote, to me, says that a group acting toward a common goal in, say 
> the way an individual in that group would, does *not *imply that the 
> "symbolic references" used to act rationaly in the world are all in align or 
> even perhaps in synchopation under an fMRI. YES! I can agree with this. And I 
> don't think that I disagreed.

But that's not what I'm saying.  Perha

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[glen ☣]

OK.  Yes, thanks, that helps.  But I do think you disagree with me, only I may 
not have made myself clear enough for you to realize we disagree.  I'll 
interleave in the hopes of making my objections in context.

On 02/24/2017 01:44 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
> The last quote, to me, says that a group acting toward a common goal in, say 
> the way an individual in that group would, does *not *imply that the 
> "symbolic references" used to act rationaly in the world are all in align or 
> even perhaps in synchopation under an fMRI. YES! I can agree with this. And I 
> don't think that I disagreed.

But that's not what I'm saying.  Perhaps you're making what I'm saying much 
stronger.  Or perhaps what you're saying is entirely different.  I can't tell 
because you're leaping too far.  I'm only saying that if the stuff that causes 
our behavior is aligned, we need something _other_ than our behavior to 
demonstrate that alignment.  I'm trying to focus on the difference between 
thought and action.  You seem to be conflating that with the difference between 
individuals and groups.

The thought vs. action dichotomy is critical to my rhetoric about individuals 
vs. groups.  But it's more fundamental and must be made before (independently) 
of any rhetoric about individual vs. group.

> And I do even agree with you that there are examples of goups that do act as 
> if with "one mind" and even benevolently.

Again, I don't think I said that.  I don't think even an individual's thoughts 
matter.  (This is why Csikszentmihalyi's concept of "flow" is useless and 
annoying to me.)  It's pure nonsense to talk of mind at all.  So, it's nonsense 
to say that societies act as if with one mind.  But that does not mean they 
can't be "in the zone", because being in the zone has nothing to do with one's 
mind.

> Market-oriented co-ops are such a phenomenon, which I discussed in another 
> thread, especially with Marcus who seemed to see these as an bane to society 
> as unmanaged enterprises, which they are not. Perspective is sharpened by 
> exposure.  My company transitionsed to an ESOP, but the intended economic 
> benefit was eventually corrupted by the management team that used this 
> preferred organizational form to basically enrich themselves at the expense 
> of what the ERISA originally intended--cooperative, community-oriented 
> corprorate behavior.  Stakeholders in the welfare of the community. At the 
> grassroots, it was enything but a co-operative.  It was a vehicle to enrich 
> the corporate management. But where it works, it is beautiful.

If you see these co-ops as technological innovations, then I'd argue that their 
use and ABUSE can both be examples of society being "in the zone".  The same is 
true of the cell phone and space travel.  It's totally irrelevant whether the 
co-ops relate to the beliefs, desires, and intentions of the humans involved 
(if such things exist).  What would matter is the society's beliefs, desires, 
and intentions (if such exists).  The only stakeholder is society.  The 
individuals are as expendable as sand, or fossil fuel, or bacteria.

> But I do kind of see where a "meeting of the minds" between us may have been 
> derailed here about what we each mean concerning /being in the zone/" at a 
> level of society.  And I fault myself for this in joining the underlying 
> threaded thoughts late, perhaps, and not being more clear in the 
> distinctions. It has to do with the phrase "as a whole."  I will use 
> market-oriented co-ops again as a useful example to make my point a bit more 
> clear. Cooperatives cannot seem to take root here in this country [e.g., 
> public banks] because of another blocking cultural, Hayekian meme: "a free 
> market under capitalism will save us all." This meme has been forcefully in 
> play for the last thirty-five years with it's high priest being Milton 
> Friedman and the Chicgo School of Economics.  What have been the results?

No worries about joining late or miscomm. or anything.  That's why we're here.  
But I disagree about _why_ co-ops can't take root.  A) They have taken root ... 
at least up here in the PacNW.  But B) any inability to take root has nothing 
to do with shared ideologies like that from Hayek or whoever.  They fail to 
take root because of _behavior_, not thought/ideas.

> Which of these memes could be equivalent to Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's [and I 
> don't mean to push this guy forward, but only this idea] Optimal Experience 
> at the level of society as a whole: (1) profit-driven coorporatism or (2) 
> community-oriented cooperatism?  First off, I am exclusively talking about 
> the behavioral end that leans toward what is good for society--the whole 
> tribe, such that the tribe benefits in an egalitarian sense. Arguably, as a 
> tribe we are not moving in any such direction. But there are pockets of 
> co-operative behavior like we saw at Standing Rock.  But, what happened?  The 
> pipe got laid anyway and the planet 

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Robert Wall]

>
> Anyway, so I disagree with the idea that society, as a group, can't be "in
> the zone". But I believe that the thoughts inside the members of the
> society are not really _shared_ thoughts. The societal groove does not
> depend on isomorphic relationships between the insides of the members'
> heads. (holography again) And the extent to which individuals' grooves map
> to societal grooves is unclear (and probably complex).


I did get your email, and my takeaway of what you said seems to be
summarized in your concluding paragraph above from that post.  Then, to be
constructive at seeking understanding, couple that with the quote I used to
introduce my last post and perhaps we can examine where there is a better
meeting of the minds on the topic of* being in the groove* at the level of
a society.

It's a mistake to infer that the complicated spaces (the deluded people's
> minds/brains/bodies/culture) are the same just because their projections
> (the things they say and do) are the same.


The last quote, to me, says that a group acting toward a common goal in,
say the way an individual in that group would, does *not *imply that the
"symbolic references" used to act rationaly in the world are all in align
or even perhaps in synchopation under an fMRI. YES! I can agree with this.
And I don't think that I disagreed.  Our symbolic references are only how
we have objectified the world since birth.  Even if aligned--highly
unlikely--we have individual free will and intentionality to determine out
behavior.  This can explain how folks sometimes come across knowing how to
appear moral and how to game morality at the same time toward less moral
goals. The Pope recently implied it is better to be an atheist than a a
crappy Christian .
I think he was referring to being committed in mind and action. Apparently,
in his view, this doesn't seem to be happening at the level of society as a
whole.

And I do even agree with you that there are examples of goups that do act
as if with "one mind" and even benevolently.  Market-oriented co-ops are
such a phenomenon, which I discussed in another thread, especially with
Marcus who seemed to see these as an bane to society as unmanaged
enterprises, which they are not. Perspective is sharpened by exposure.  My
company transitionsed to an ESOP, but the intended economic benefit was
eventually corrupted by the management team that used this preferred
organizational form to basically enrich themselves at the expense of what
the ERISA originally intended--cooperative, community-oriented corprorate
behavior.  Stakeholders in the welfare of the community. At the grassroots,
it was enything but a co-operative.  It was a vehicle to enrich the
corporate management. But where it works, it is beautiful.

But I do kind of see where a "meeting of the minds" between us may have
been derailed here about what we each mean concerning *being in the zone*"
at a level of society.  And I fault myself for this in joining the
underlying threaded thoughts late, perhaps, and not being more clear in the
distinctions. It has to do with the phrase "as a whole."  I will use
market-oriented co-ops again as a useful example to make my point a bit
more clear. Cooperatives cannot seem to take root here in this country
[e.g., public banks] because of another blocking cultural, Hayekian meme:
"a free market under capitalism will save us all." This meme has been
forcefully in play for the last thirty-five years with it's high priest
being Milton Friedman and the Chicgo School of Economics.  What have been
the results?

Which of these memes could be equivalent to Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's [and
I don't mean to push this guy forward, but only this idea] Optimal
Experience at the level of society as a whole: (1) profit-driven
coorporatism or (2) community-oriented cooperatism?  First off, I am
exclusively talking about the behavioral end that leans toward what is good
for society--the whole tribe, such that the tribe benefits in an
egalitarian sense. Arguably, as a tribe we are not moving in any such
direction. But there are pockets of co-operative behavior like we saw at
Standing Rock.  But, what happened?  The pipe got laid anyway and the
planet weeps. Your take on "effective altruism" is another example, I
think, of how we as a society would rather game the moral landscape to give
the illusion of being "for the people." I really do not mean to be so
pessimistic and my analysis will hopefully bear this out.

What this comes down to is this. To be *in the zone* at the level of a
society as a whole in a similar way as could happen at the level of an
individual--such that we would say there is a Flow characterized as an
Optimal Experience, we would NOT expect there to be an alignment of
symbolic references.  Precisely the opposite, if we are to regard the
thoughts of the many philosophers and linguists on this topic to be wise.
What we would expect instead is 

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[glen ☣]

Perhaps you did not see my previous response where I outlined what I think 
exhibit societal states (yes, at the societal layer, as a whole) of being in 
the zone.  If so, could you explain whether you agree or disagree that those 
are examples of what you discuss below?  If you didn't get the email, which 
happens to me often enough, the response is here:

  http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/2017-February/048807.html

To be clear, my refutation of the claim that low-D spaces are similar because 
high-D space are similar was not intended as a referent for your society in the 
zone as a whole.  But I did proffer the examples listed above (e.g. stigmergy) 
as referents.

And when you say "/complicated spaces/ presumed to be the imperfectly shared 
sets of symbolic references we would call worldviews", that is definitely not 
tantamount to the same as what I said.  My refutation was about the 
_presumption_.  The assertion is if P then Q, where P = lowD spaces are similar 
and Q = highD spaces are similar.  I'm not really trying to say anything other 
than not(P=>Q).  If the complicated internal spaces of people do match up or 
are shared in some way, then we need a different way of showing that they are 
shared (perhaps fMRI?).

And to be clear that we're still on topic, whether or not the fractality of 
birds' songs is or can be related to the fractality of their landscapes is a 
question about the soundness of P=>Q and how/whether the similarity of bird 
brains can be established.


On 02/24/2017 10:45 AM, Robert Wall wrote:
> It's a mistake to infer that the complicated spaces (the deluded people's 
> minds/brains/bodies/culture) are the same just because their projections (the 
> things they say and do) are the same.
> 
> 
> Yeah, and that is not the same as what I meant for a society being /in the 
> zone/ as a whole, though Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi does initiate his talk with 
> examples of a kind of mass hysteria brought about by cataclysmic events when 
> introducing a topic he calls the Optimal Experience.  Presumably, he used 
> mass hysteria for contrast, but I think clumsily because he doesn't relate an 
> Optimal Experience at the level of society. The examples of folks who 
> demonstrate the phenomenon he is relating are individuals like Albert 
> Einstein.  So what is he talking about?  What am I talking about?  What are 
> y' all talking about?  The symbols seem the same, but we seem to be talking 
> past one another. It happens ...
> 
> Trying to be a bit clearer here and not at all retaliating with any backhand 
> strike, the idea I am nudging forth is one that seems to be rare even among 
> individuals, nevermind societies. We recognize its occurrence in the works of 
> others we often describe as geniuses, but that may belie its true rate of 
> occurrence. It is metaphorically called "Flow."  It's a /positive /effect and 
> not a hysterical one, which perhaps is the opposite of the "flow" that 
> Vladimyr describes through historical accounts. I see Flow as the place to 
> find wisdom, understanding, craft, art, poetry ... not mayhem.  In his essay 
> /The Question Concerning Technology/, Martin Heidegger effectively sees Flow 
> as the way to save us from what he calls technological enframement ... the 
> ultimate sociological delivery system of debilitating symbolic references. 
> [not saying technology is bad, but that enframement is a danger]. 
> 
> In a recent discussion about Henri Bergson, the preeminent French philosopher 
> of the early twentieth century, I came to dwell on some writing about 
> Bergson's comparing intuition to intellect:
> 
> Science promises us well-being, or, at the most, pleasure, but 
> philosophy, through the Intuition to which it leads us, is capable of 
> bestowing upon us Joy. The future belongs to such an intuitive philosophy, 
> Bergson holds, for he considers that the whole progress of Evolution is 
> towards the creation of a type of being whose Intuition will be equal to his 
> Intelligence. Finally, by Intuition we shall find ourselves in—to invent a 
> word—"intunation" with the /élan vital/, with the Evolution of the whole 
> universe, and this absolute feeling of "at- one-ment" with the universe will 
> result in that emotional synthesis which is deep Joy, which Wordsworth* [* 
> /Lines "composed above Tintern Abbey, 1798./*]* describes as:
> 
> "that blessed mood
> In which the burthen of the mystery,
> In which the heavy and the weary weight
> Of all this unintelligible world,
> Is lightened:—that serene and blessed mood,
> In which the affections gently lead us on,—
> Until, the breath of this corporeal frame
> And even the motion of our human blood
> Almost suspended, we are laid asleep
> In body, and become a living soul:
> While with an eye made quiet by the power
> Of harmony and the deep power of joy
> We see into the life of things."
> 
> "... a type of being whose Intuition will be equal to his Intelligence."  
> 

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Robert Wall]

>
> It's a mistake to infer that the complicated spaces (the deluded people's
> minds/brains/bodies/culture) are the same just because their projections
> (the things they say and do) are the same.


Yeah, and that is not the same as what I meant for a society being *in the
zone* as a whole, though Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi does initiate his talk
with examples of a kind of mass hysteria brought about by cataclysmic
events when introducing a topic he calls the Optimal Experience.
Presumably, he used mass hysteria for contrast, but I think clumsily
because he doesn't relate an Optimal Experience at the level of society.
The examples of folks who demonstrate the phenomenon he is relating are
individuals like Albert Einstein.  So what is he talking about?  What am I
talking about?  What are y' all talking about?  The symbols seem the same,
but we seem to be talking past one another. It happens ...

Trying to be a bit clearer here and not at all retaliating with any
backhand strike, the idea I am nudging forth is one that seems to be rare
even among individuals, nevermind societies. We recognize its occurrence in
the works of others we often describe as geniuses, but that may belie its
true rate of occurrence. It is metaphorically called "Flow."  It's a *positive
*effect and not a hysterical one, which perhaps is the opposite of the
"flow" that Vladimyr describes through historical accounts. I see Flow as
the place to find wisdom, understanding, craft, art, poetry ... not
mayhem.  In his essay *The Question Concerning Technology*, Martin
Heidegger effectively sees Flow as the way to save us from what he calls
technological enframement ... the ultimate sociological delivery system of
debilitating symbolic references. [not saying technology is bad, but that
enframement is a danger].

In a recent discussion about Henri Bergson, the preeminent French
philosopher of the early twentieth century, I came to dwell on some writing
about Bergson's comparing intuition to intellect:

Science promises us well-being, or, at the most, pleasure, but philosophy,
through the Intuition to which it leads us, is capable of bestowing upon us
Joy. The future belongs to such an intuitive philosophy, Bergson holds, for
he considers that the whole progress of Evolution is towards the creation
of a type of being whose Intuition will be equal to his Intelligence.
Finally, by Intuition we shall find ourselves in—to invent a
word—"intunation" with the *élan vital*, with the Evolution of the whole
universe, and this absolute feeling of "at- one-ment" with the universe
will result in that emotional synthesis which is deep Joy, which Wordsworth
* [* *Lines "composed above Tintern Abbey, 1798.**]* describes as:

"that blessed mood
In which the burthen of the mystery,
In which the heavy and the weary weight
Of all this unintelligible world,
Is lightened:—that serene and blessed mood,
In which the affections gently lead us on,—
Until, the breath of this corporeal frame
And even the motion of our human blood
Almost suspended, we are laid asleep
In body, and become a living soul:
While with an eye made quiet by the power
Of harmony and the deep power of joy
We see into the life of things."

"... a type of being whose Intuition will be equal to his Intelligence."
 This is Heidegger with his *Dasein *.
Is it also Nietzsche with his *Übermensch*?

Is the problem with societies that they cannot behold the world intuitively
... without symbols? This *may *be impossible even ... because we humans
are led by the rational ... tainted, of course, by self-interest.  The
rational perspective ultimately leads to the conclusion that the universe
is nothing but a bunch of particles, as it has Steven Weinberg. We relate
to each other mostly symbolically.  To relate on an intuitive level, well
that's called empathy, sympathy, understanding, ... love. None of these
properties can be embraced rationally. They are beyond language.

Bergson insists as well, and correctly I think, that we are often misled by
the imprecision of language, something he doesn't trust as getting things
adequately conveyed to others because language is loaded with, well, *symbolic
reference*. And this leads to a "Tower of Babel" phenomenon at the level of
society as manifest in all social media. The quote I used at the beginning
of this post by Glen is tantamount to saying the same thing ... *complicated
spaces* presumed to be the imperfectly shared sets of symbolic references
we would call worldviews.  Islamaphobia, for one, is not a what I would
call an Optimal Experience. Nor does it approach wisdom on any level.

*A parable*: In concert with the roots of this thread--is *being in the
zone* delusional?--Bergsonian view of this situation may see society as
multiple billion organic simulators crawling the planet, who have evolved
far enough to loosely self-organized into tribes and set up a system of
patterned utterances to communicate within tribal sets 

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[glen ☣]

Thanks for the link, Jon.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/battlecode-releases-2017/releases/specs-1.6.2.html
> In a race to be the most benevolent, factions must either donate the most to 
> the cause, or destroy anyone more altruistic than they are.

That last part is hilarious.  It reminded me of the libertarian nonsense of 
"effective altruism": http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Effective_altruism ... an 
N-entendre for the word "gaming".

On 02/23/2017 10:29 AM, Jon Zingale wrote:
> ​Thank you, those responsible for the
> discussion regarding simulation​ and
> the real. Here is a competition currently
> sponsored by MIT where competitors write
> AI to perform automated war: BattleCode .


-- 
☣ glen


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[┣glen┫]

I think I anticipated your backhanded strike. >8^D  I did this with my (badly 
mangled) reference to (and skepticism about) the holographic principle ... or 
behaviorism in psychology ... or hidden markov models ... or state space 
reconstruction methods ... or by any of a huge number of other symbols.

A many to one projection from a complicated space to a simple space 
_facilitates_ shared delusion because it makes the complicated things _seem_ 
similar even though they're not.  That is what explains your shared delusions 
like Shazaam.  It's a mistake to infer that the complicated spaces (the deluded 
people's minds/brains/bodies/culture) are the same just because their 
projections (the things they say and do) are the same.

Although you're invocation of Occam's razor seems appropriate, your assertion 
(similarities in the low dimension space are caused by similarities in the high 
dimension space) is not the simplest explanation at all.  The simplest 
explanation is the one identified in that paper about the fractal dimension of 
Rorcshach blots (still on topic!) and that identified by Lakoff about Trump's 
language.  A medium with low dimension allows the high dimension participants 
to "fill in the gaps".


On 02/23/2017 06:58 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky wrote:
> I think Robert Wall is nudging close to an idea that he failed to adequately 
> clarify but you may have nailed it while trying to deny it (this I call a 
> backhanded strike). Last week there was a strange article about groups of 
> people having the same memory that have no contact with each other. That 
> shared memory was in fact  demonstrably false. It was regarding a 
> misperceived memory of a TV show called Shazaam and some comedian called 
> Sinbad... My mind retains utter garbage sometimes.
> 
> I never saw it but then it never actually happened. The investigators 
> explained that so many of the false memory components overlapped reality
> that the subjects truly believed some occurrence that was categorically 
> disproved. So a society may well share memories of fictional events and act 
> on delusions ie mobs.

-- 
␦glen?


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Nick Thompson]

All—

 

If you want to find the Dylan Roof key on your own emotional piano, think about 
the last time you indulged yourself in road rage.  According to one kind of 
evolutionary psychology, road rage is an instance of "altruistic punishment".  
Altruistic punishment is selected at the group level.  When in that groove, we 
are so possessed that we are willing to risk our own lives to support the norms 
of our perceived in-group.  

 

Altruistic rage is by far the most dangerous emotion we experience.  Not how 
Trump works tirelessly to create the conditions that will foster it.  Every 
genocide is preceded by “conditioning” to suppose that it is our highest duty 
to defend our values against those who do not share them. 

Nick Thompson

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Vladimyr Burachynsky
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 7:59 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Glen,

 

I think Robert Wall is nudging close to an idea that he failed to adequately 
clarify but you may have nailed it while trying to deny it (this I call a 
backhanded strike). Last week there was a strange article about groups of 
people having the same memory that have no contact with each other. That shared 
memory was in fact  demonstrably false. It was regarding a misperceived memory 
of a TV show called Shazaam and some comedian called Sinbad... My mind retains 
utter garbage sometimes.

 

I never saw it but then it never actually happened. The investigators explained 
that so many of the false memory components overlapped reality that the 
subjects truly believed some occurrence that was categorically disproved. So a 
society may well share memories of fictional events and act on delusions ie 
mobs.

 

If an individual may fall into a groove then how else can mass insanity be 
better explained. I always recall that in history strange things happen on mass 
scale. For instance during the heated animosity between the Greeks and Latins a 
feud broke out over religious icons. West was Iconophilic and the east was 
Iconoclastic. The Latins were so pissed they assembled an armada in Rimini or 
Ravenna and sailed this monstrosity down the Adriatic to defend the faith. 
Somewhere between Brindisi and Corfu the greatest historical storm destroyed 
the entire fleet of ships sparing Byzantium a certain defeat. So Leo made a few 
compromises and things sort of settled down but then another group of serious 
iconoclasts  made trouble the Paulicians. Then the Muslims came along and the 
world is still fractured in many ways. It always struck me as the height of 
insanity to go to war over Symbols and I think Monty Python once made a skit 
out of crusaders and muslims beating the crap out of each other with religious 
banners and gilded reliquaries. While the armed knights and Saracens looked on 
in amazement. Whether this ever happened , I do not know, but can guess. 
Perhaps " the groove" has a darkside a suicidal aspect, such as the Battle of 
Gallipoli, as well as the neutral individual features we love to discuss openly.

 

I always suspected that Hatred is transmitted from mothers to children as is 
influenza propagation. I recall some very strange conversations between my 
German Mother and Ukrainian Aunt that bordered on the rabid hatred of mad dogs. 
Then they just continued serving Christmas dinner in total silence,  when the 
men returned to the dinner table. My Uncle a  devout Catholic and former 
Ukrainian Cavalry Officer would think nothing of Beheading Russians long after 
he was defeated in the 1920's. Indeed he was otherwise a rational Civil 
Engineer with a penchant for Botany but he hated anything that sounded 
affiliated with Russia or Eastern Orthodoxy. I could never tell the difference 
except for the slanted foot support on the crucifix. Hardly enough reason for 
bloodshed.

 

But Dylan Rouffe and Alexandre Bisonette slaughtered  defenseless congregations 
and showed no shame nor regret. They may be said to have been proud  of what 
they did. Anders Brevijk may well have been in a dark trench at the time of his 
methodical depredations of children, again no shame. No one mentions that that 
slaughter by a single man exceeded anything in the Old Testament perhaps a 
Cuiness World Record. Populism may well be a filthy outpouring of bottled up 
hatred. And the perverted demagogues revel in the delusion that they can 
manipulate it to their personal benefits.

 

It is not a welcome insight into human nature, I apologize for  disturbing the 
peace.

 

Well Canada is sending taxis to the border to rescue Somali's ignorant of our 
cold. Now our old ladies think the sky is falling because

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

Glen,

I think Robert Wall is nudging close to an idea that he failed to adequately 
clarify but you may have nailed it while trying to deny it (this I call a 
backhanded strike). Last week there was a strange article about groups of 
people having the same memory that have no contact with each other. That shared 
memory was in fact  demonstrably false. It was regarding a misperceived memory 
of a TV show called Shazaam and some comedian called Sinbad... My mind retains 
utter garbage sometimes.

I never saw it but then it never actually happened. The investigators explained 
that so many of the false memory components overlapped reality
that the subjects truly believed some occurrence that was categorically 
disproved. So a society may well share memories of fictional events and act on 
delusions ie mobs.

If an individual may fall into a groove then how else can mass insanity be 
better explained. I always recall that in history strange things happen on mass 
scale. For instance during the heated animosity between the Greeks and Latins a 
feud broke out over religious icons. West was Iconophilic and the east was 
Iconoclastic. The Latins were so pissed they assembled an armada in Rimini or 
Ravenna and sailed this monstrosity down the Adriatic to defend the faith. 
Somewhere between Brindisi and Corfu the greatest historical storm destroyed 
the entire fleet of ships sparing Byzantium a certain defeat. So Leo made a few 
compromises and things sort of settled down but then another group of serious 
iconoclasts  made trouble the Paulicians. Then the Muslims came along and the 
world is still fractured in many ways. It always struck me as the height of 
insanity to go to war over Symbols and I think Monty Python once made a skit 
out of crusaders and muslims beating the crap out of each other with religious 
banners and gilded reliquaries. While the armed knights and Saracens looked on 
in amazement. Whether this ever happened , I do not know, but can guess. 
Perhaps " the groove" has a darkside a suicidal aspect, such as the Battle of 
Gallipoli, as well as the neutral individual features we love to discuss openly.

I always suspected that Hatred is transmitted from mothers to children as is 
influenza propagation. I recall some very strange conversations between my 
German Mother and Ukrainian Aunt that bordered on the rabid hatred of mad dogs. 
Then they just continued serving Christmas dinner in total silence,  when the 
men returned to the dinner table. My Uncle a  devout Catholic and former 
Ukrainian Cavalry Officer would think nothing of Beheading Russians long after 
he was defeated in the 1920's. Indeed he was otherwise a rational Civil 
Engineer with a penchant for Botany but he hated anything that sounded 
affiliated with Russia or Eastern Orthodoxy. I could never tell the difference 
except for the slanted foot support on the crucifix. Hardly enough reason for 
bloodshed.

But Dylan Rouffe and Alexandre Bisonette slaughtered  defenseless congregations 
and showed no shame nor regret. They may be said to have been proud  of what 
they did. Anders Brevijk may well have been in a dark trench at the time of his 
methodical depredations of children, again no shame. No one mentions that that 
slaughter by a single man exceeded anything in the Old Testament perhaps a 
Cuiness World Record. Populism may well be a filthy outpouring of bottled up 
hatred. And the perverted demagogues revel in the delusion that they can 
manipulate it to their personal benefits.

It is not a welcome insight into human nature, I apologize for  disturbing the 
peace.

Well Canada is sending taxis to the border to rescue Somali's ignorant of our 
cold. Now our old ladies think the sky is falling because of a few refugees 
trying to run from Trump. Back in the 1960's and 70's we took in hundreds of 
American draft dodgers  and the sun remained in Orbit. 

I must admit that I had some fun today speaking to a millennial visitor that 
could no longer abide liberal visciousness  in the media. Left or right they 
are both resorting to fascistic techniques. He expected me to support the right 
but i laughed it off, I am more of a centrist anarchist I confessed, the other 
side of the sphere, so there was no need to abuse my hospitality.


vib 



-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: February-23-17 5:12 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs


Right, I think I got that you meant society being in the zone.  You expressed 
doubt and I disagree with you -- meaning only that I have less doubt. 8^)  I 
think society can (and does, often) get into a zone/groove/flow.  Some symptoms 
that are often complained about are "mob behavior", "groupthink", etc.  Some 
symptoms that are lauded are "wisdom of crowds", "negative freedoms" (freedom 
to 

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

To the congregation,

 

Oops, someone is watching….

 

I had Better pull up my trousers and get a shave

Jeez, I was only running off at the mouth about getting into TensorFlow code.

 

vib

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Jon Zingale
Sent: February-23-17 12:29 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

​Thank you, those responsible for the

discussion regarding simulation​ and

the real. Here is a competition currently

sponsored by MIT where competitors write

AI to perform automated war: BattleCode <https://www.battlecode.org/> .

 

Jon Zingale

 


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[glen ☣]

Right, I think I got that you meant society being in the zone.  You expressed 
doubt and I disagree with you -- meaning only that I have less doubt. 8^)  I 
think society can (and does, often) get into a zone/groove/flow.  Some symptoms 
that are often complained about are "mob behavior", "groupthink", etc.  Some 
symptoms that are lauded are "wisdom of crowds", "negative freedoms" (freedom 
to _not_ be mugged, etc.), low unemployment, etc.

My reference to my individual state of mind when I'm engaged in social activity 
was probably misleading, however.  What I should have referred to is something 
like stigmergy or the co-constructed landscape, infrastructure.  Some of us 
complain about the entitlement of the younger generations.  But really it's a 
good thing that they feel entitled ... entitled to walk down dark alleys 
without being killed ... entitled to buy a state of the art automobile for only 
$25k ... entitled to drive that automobile and experience the (waning) culture 
of Route 66.  Etc.

These are "society in a groove".  And it's a good thing for the most part.  
There are risks, e.g. populism, riots, the absence of critical thinking ... not 
knowing how to start a fire without a lighter, etc.

Anyway, so I disagree with the idea that society, as a group, can't be "in the 
zone".  But I believe that the thoughts inside the members of the society are 
not really _shared_ thoughts.  The societal groove does not depend on 
isomorphic relationships between the insides of the members' heads. (holography 
again)  And the extent to which individuals' grooves map to societal grooves is 
unclear (and probably complex).


On 02/22/2017 12:18 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
>> As for being in the zone socially, I disagree, though I don't particularly
>> care about any jargonal co-option of the term.  During hearty arguments,
>> mostly with religious people, I definitely lose myself in exactly the same
>> way I lose myself after that 3rd mile when running.  I have no illusions
>> that my zone is in any way shared by the people I'm arguing with, though
>> ... no more than I think you and I share internal constructs mediated by
>> the word "blue"
> 
> 
> To be clear, Glen, I was referring to a society being "in the zone" as a
> whole. Maybe this could mean an alignment of symbolic references.  Not
> sure, but, like you, somewhat dubious that this could happen. Within my
> philosophy group, we have discussed the idea of *conscious
> evolution*--becoming,
> say, wiser, by being "in the zone" so to speak--*with respect to the
> individua*l.  And I do see this as kind of a Csikszentmihalyi-est "being in
> the zone," a period of selfless awareness of a task or challenge. It's a
> neurological phenomenon. The objective is to make the period last as long
> as possible. Society is not very good at being selfless, even for a moment.
> 
> Perhaps with the assistance of Hebbian learning, say, over time this is
> possible for individuals who work at it to remain in this state longer than
> is typical.  It becomes a skill or practice.  But bubbling this up to the
> level of a society does not seem possible.  Religion hasn't and won't do it
> because that's a model that requires blind credulity to the provided
> surreal symbols.  Even in the context of Hebbian learning, where are the
> "societal neurons" that need to be rewired from their inculcated states?
> They tend to be imbued in the laws and in the prevailing morality memes.
> But these are just things to be gamed to ensure a *face validity* with our
> self-full life simulations.
> 
> The key component to any smart system is feedback.  But, we live in a
> society that is running open loop.  Another form of loopiness or delusion,
> I guess ... believing that everything will work out in the long run.  We
> are exceptional. We have democratic elections ... Hmmm,  I think the
> awakening is happening.  Maybe there is hope?  Is that a drone I hear above
> ... Oh, it's just an Amazone delivery ... or is it?  :-)



-- 
☣ glen


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Jon Zingale]

​Thank you, those responsible for the
discussion regarding simulation​ and
the real. Here is a competition currently
sponsored by MIT where competitors write
AI to perform automated war: BattleCode .

Jon Zingale

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Robert Wall]

way I lose myself after that 3rd mile when running.  I have no illusions
> that my zone is in any way shared by the people I'm arguing with, though
> ... no more than I think you and I share internal constructs mediated by
> the word "blue"


To be clear, Glen, I was referring to a society being "in the zone" as a
whole. Maybe this could mean an alignment of symbolic references.  Not
sure, but, like you, somewhat dubious that this could happen. Within my
philosophy group, we have discussed the idea of *conscious
evolution*--becoming,
say, wiser, by being "in the zone" so to speak--*with respect to the
individua*l.  And I do see this as kind of a Csikszentmihalyi-est "being in
the zone," a period of selfless awareness of a task or challenge. It's a
neurological phenomenon. The objective is to make the period last as long
as possible. Society is not very good at being selfless, even for a moment.

Perhaps with the assistance of Hebbian learning, say, over time this is
possible for individuals who work at it to remain in this state longer than
is typical.  It becomes a skill or practice.  But bubbling this up to the
level of a society does not seem possible.  Religion hasn't and won't do it
because that's a model that requires blind credulity to the provided
surreal symbols.  Even in the context of Hebbian learning, where are the
"societal neurons" that need to be rewired from their inculcated states?
They tend to be imbued in the laws and in the prevailing morality memes.
But these are just things to be gamed to ensure a *face validity* with our
self-full life simulations.

The key component to any smart system is feedback.  But, we live in a
society that is running open loop.  Another form of loopiness or delusion,
I guess ... believing that everything will work out in the long run.  We
are exceptional. We have democratic elections ... Hmmm,  I think the
awakening is happening.  Maybe there is hope?  Is that a drone I hear above
... Oh, it's just an Amazone delivery ... or is it?  :-)

Cheers


On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky <vbur...@shaw.ca>
wrote:

> Thanks for the structure of thought .
>
>
>
> So am I an Iconoclast because I am all too aware of the misuse of Icons (
> simulations). I taught FEM and CAD and
>
> saw puzzlement on the, soon to be, engineers faces. I have watched
> engineers sneak out of the lecture hall when I started showing slides of
>
> summation of stacked matrices flying across the screen.
>
>
>
> So this alludes to a possible intrinsic Tautology or Loopiness in our
> brains. The representation is conflated with the speculative but unknown
> reality (since it is never completely understood anyway) Switching from one
> state to the other might be called metaphysical thinking. A wonderful
> source of confusion.
>
> Being totally immersed in a computer game might be said to be in the
> groove but when one man fights another and we call that being in the groove
> then are we conflating two models. If one is slaughtering the enemies on a
> game platform one can say he is free of ethics or morality. When Bruce Lee
> does the same on film
>
> many thought it real. but those who actually fought in life knew it was BS
> on  constrained/elevated ropes.
>
>
>
> If the  mirror neurons discussed at length do as described then they must
> occupy configurations near identical to neurons trained by self discovery
> (learning)
>
> Then actual differentiation would seem very difficult.
>
>
>
> I have a daughter  formally trained as a M.Sc. BioMedical Artist and we
> used to argue about symbolic thinking , she pro and I con. But the
> strangest part is that I am also or was considered a fair artist and
> illustrator for a time. Indeed I use symbols very well but mistrust others
> with lesser skill. Yet the most skillful are the most dangerous at least in
> engineering. She would regularly remark that I sketched in perspective
> complex machinery that did not yet exist and then built the working
> prototypes. Nothing elegant but functional. She claimed only to draw what
> already  really existed dead or alive, I always thought those arguments
> were small expeditions into some form of knowledge about human thinking.
> She thought otherwise unfortunately, but I have never had the fortune to
> meet another with her combination of talents.  Somewhere in this
> quasi-church may be others lurking in the shadows.
>
>
>
> I admit to being a rather visual thinker so data visualization is my hobby
> now. And understanding Normal People, since they are so many...
>
> Perhaps this is not exactly the correct thread but miss the song of larks
> on the prairie fields. A few notes brings back so many memories and the
> smells
>
> of clover a

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[┣glen┫]

I don't know anything about Minecraft.  But I do play some video games.  And 
although I dig the "strategy" games most, I also like those with lots of side 
quests and territory to explore.  The main reason is because I enjoy estimating 
the underlying axioms.  E.g. I recently found a cool bug in Assassin's Creed 
Rogue where you can fall through the ground and swim to any place on the map.  
I liken that to a singularity in our world.  If I could just find that sliver 
where the tilings don't quite match up, I could slip through the cosmic egg and 
become a demigod. 8^)  This is, of course, why the squares made the 
psychedelics illegal ... they don't want you wandering around exploring the 
cracks in the cosmic egg.

On 02/21/2017 03:05 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> My almost five-year old grandson definitely likes being deluded in that 
> sense, I think, when he plays Minecraft.  The appeal is obvious:  he can 
> wander around the world without adults saying "don't go there", he acquires 
> and manages his "inventory", he can build amazing structures, he can dig deep 
> into the earth, he can explode huge quantities of TNT.  We limit him to about 
> an hour a day.

-- 
␦glen?


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

Glen, 
You are assuming that a very elaborate sophisticated machine based model will 
work better than swarms of  microbots stitching micro sized jpegs together.

Evolution by its persistence seems to prove that some small part is working 
correctly. This gives me some faith that we are not a lost cause. Furthermore 
the Impact of civilization has been underestimated. Writing allows the distant 
dead to still contribute to current investigations making their insights almost 
contemporary. I read the announcements of Google's   "Deep Think" and 
"TensorFlow" this week and was delighted to hear that this is Open Source Code.

I have a sense that AI's will become a stabilizing foundation of civilization 
and memory will no longer be limited to a single life time. Or a single POV.

A swarm of gnats with digital cameras and microphones may make a difference to 
all of us sooner than  a grand Nova Zeus machine.

Oh goody more Code to play with.
vib


-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: February-21-17 4:26 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs


Tesselation vs. approximation: Ah, right.  I was sloppy with my language.  
Sorry.

What you say in the blurb below is questionable because it implies something 
about the representations ... something like an equivalence of expressive power 
or somesuch.  If there is such a thing as expressive power, then a stronger 
representation should not be recoverable from a weaker one.  But I suppose if 
they all are built from the same type of basis set, then multiple weak ones 
allow recovery of strong ones.

I'm always fascinated by the emphasis we (all) place on coherence and internal 
consistency.  It seems like some sort of rhetorical fallacy, perhaps the 
fallacy fallacy.  Perhaps we can arrive at the truth in spite of completely 
flawed (e.g. self-inconsistent) representations?  Even a broken clock (Trump) 
is right (a)periodically.

On 02/21/2017 01:09 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky wrote:
> In some manner every representation whatever default settings have been 
> applied should be recoverable with every other representation and coherent.
> The more coherent viewpoints the closer the approximation of Truth.


--
☣ glen


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe 
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

Thanks for the structure of thought .

 

So am I an Iconoclast because I am all too aware of the misuse of Icons ( 
simulations). I taught FEM and CAD and

saw puzzlement on the, soon to be, engineers faces. I have watched engineers 
sneak out of the lecture hall when I started showing slides of 

summation of stacked matrices flying across the screen.

 

So this alludes to a possible intrinsic Tautology or Loopiness in our brains. 
The representation is conflated with the speculative but unknown reality (since 
it is never completely understood anyway) Switching from one state to the other 
might be called metaphysical thinking. A wonderful source of confusion.

Being totally immersed in a computer game might be said to be in the groove but 
when one man fights another and we call that being in the groove then are we 
conflating two models. If one is slaughtering the enemies on a game platform 
one can say he is free of ethics or morality. When Bruce Lee does the same on 
film

many thought it real. but those who actually fought in life knew it was BS on  
constrained/elevated ropes.

 

If the  mirror neurons discussed at length do as described then they must 
occupy configurations near identical to neurons trained by self discovery 
(learning)

Then actual differentiation would seem very difficult. 

 

I have a daughter  formally trained as a M.Sc. BioMedical Artist and we used to 
argue about symbolic thinking , she pro and I con. But the strangest part is 
that I am also or was considered a fair artist and illustrator for a time. 
Indeed I use symbols very well but mistrust others with lesser skill. Yet the 
most skillful are the most dangerous at least in engineering. She would 
regularly remark that I sketched in perspective complex machinery that did not 
yet exist and then built the working prototypes. Nothing elegant but 
functional. She claimed only to draw what already  really existed dead or 
alive, I always thought those arguments were small expeditions into some form 
of knowledge about human thinking. She thought otherwise unfortunately, but I 
have never had the fortune to meet another with her combination of talents.  
Somewhere in this quasi-church may be others lurking in the shadows.

 

I admit to being a rather visual thinker so data visualization is my hobby now. 
And understanding Normal People, since they are so many...

Perhaps this is not exactly the correct thread but miss the song of larks on 
the prairie fields. A few notes brings back so many memories and the smells

of clover and honey.

vib

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Robert Wall
Sent: February-21-17 2:46 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Hi Glen,

 

What you describe as flow or being in the zone has been precisely written 
<https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000W94FE6/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8=1>
  and talked 
<https://www.ted.com/talks/mihaly_csikszentmihalyi_on_flow#t-396713>  about by 
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi as the Optimal Experience.  No one will experience this 
quite the same way, as the flow experience requires both skill and challenge in 
an area where flow will occur. By his own statements, Einstein is said to have 
been in flow when he synthesized the concept of General and Special Relativity. 
At the time he was arguably very skilled in math and physics and, of course, 
very challenged.

 

However, I prefer Alfred North Whitehead's (et al.) concept that we are all 
always in flow. We just don't alway realize it. In his Process Philosophy, as 
conveyed  in his Process and Reality, he writes about the two modes of 
perceptual experience: (1) Presentational Immediacy [the bits of data that get 
presented to us through our senses--or imagination] and (2) Causal Efficacy 
[the conditioning of the present by the past]. Curiously, Csikszentmihalyi says 
that we can only process data from our senses at a rate of 110 bit/sec.  
Reading this post likely will chew up 60 bits/sec. of that bandwidth. 

 

Why I bring this up at all is that Whitehead thinks that what integrates these 
two modes into the whole of what we perceive is Symbolic Reference. Symbolic 
reference is kind of like how we tag bits of our real-world immersion for 
building a largely symbolic but sustainable--for us individually--worldview. 
Most time these symbolic references are provided to us--inculcated--by others 
like with a religion or by our parents.  Most are satisfied with that. In your 
friend's case, I believe it is possible that y' all were 
unsettling--challenging--his worldview ... or, he challenging yours. 

 

Flow is not likely to be aroused in a social context. It is an inner state ... 
what the Greeks and Csikszentmihalyi would say is the entering into an 
alternate reality devoid of our sense of self.  Your existence melts away in 
such a state. So our symbols get challenged

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Frank Wimberly]

My almost five-year old grandson definitely likes being deluded in that sense, 
I think, when he plays Minecraft.  The appeal is obvious:  he can wander around 
the world without adults saying "don't go there", he acquires and manages his 
"inventory", he can build amazing structures, he can dig deep into the earth, 
he can explode huge quantities of TNT.  We limit him to about an hour a day.


Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505

wimber...@gmail.com wimbe...@cal.berkeley.edu
Phone:  (505) 995-8715  Cell:  (505) 670-9918


-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 2:26 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs


Well, to be clear, my comment was intended to agree with Vladimyr's point that 
I kinda like being _deluded_.  When you finally remove all the meaning from the 
math notation and just manipulate the markings, it can be very hypnotic.  What 
would otherwise seem to be meaningless syntax takes on a meaning of its own, 
regardless of any _symbolic_ intent.  (We _can_ coherently ask the question 
"What is it like to be a zombie".)  We can hold both [non-]Platonic positions, 
because that state depends on the context.  Remove all the a priori symbolism, 
and I become a Platonist.  Ground even a single term and I become a 
constructivist.

As for being in the zone socially, I disagree, though I don't particularly care 
about any jargonal co-option of the term.  During hearty arguments, mostly with 
religious people, I definitely lose myself in exactly the same way I lose 
myself after that 3rd mile when running.  I have no illusions that my zone is 
in any way shared by the people I'm arguing with, though ... no more than I 
think you and I share internal constructs mediated by the word "blue".

I enjoyed Eric's comment on representation precisely because I can't quite buy 
into the idea that we rely so heavily on "symbolic reference".  It relies way 
too much on the assumption that what goes on in our head is anything like what 
goes on out there in the ambience.


On 02/21/2017 12:46 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
> Why I bring this up at all is that Whitehead thinks that what integrates 
> these two modes into the whole of what we perceive is *Symbolic Reference*. 
> Symbolic reference is kind of like how we tag bits of our real-world 
> immersion for building a largely symbolic but sustainable--for us 
> individually--worldview. Most time these symbolic references are provided to 
> us--inculcated--by others like with a religion or by our parents.  Most are 
> satisfied with that. In your friend's case, I believe it is possible that y' 
> all were unsettling--challenging--his worldview ... or, he challenging yours. 
> 
> Flow is not likely to be aroused in a social context. [...]
> 
> Is mathematics invented or discovered?  This is a perennial topic that arises 
> within my philosophy group.  It never really gets resolved, but how could it 
> be?   It is the ultimate of symbolic reference systems because of its 
> precision in predicting the way the world manifests itself to our perception. 
> [...]
> 
> As I often do, I  kind of resonate with Vladimyr's thought, which you 
> included in your post. It is very Csikszentmihalyi-est. I do think 
> that simulations can lure us into thinking that they are an exact 
> dynamic facsimile of the reality which they try to abstract into an 
> analytical model.  There are all kinds of things about simulations 
> that can lead us astray. [...]
> 
> But, as Vladimyr muses, maybe this is the best we can do ... and 
> symbolic reference is what nature served up for us to cope, concerning 
> what we are perceiving.  But, as with all smart systems, a smart 
> entity will always try to challenge and refine those symbols with 
> continuous feedback--FLOW.  However, in the larger scheme of things, 
> it really doesn't matter if mathematics was invented or discovered. I 
> mean, where did the concept of a hammer come from? 樂

--
☣ glen


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe 
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[glen ☣]

Tesselation vs. approximation: Ah, right.  I was sloppy with my language.  
Sorry.

What you say in the blurb below is questionable because it implies something 
about the representations ... something like an equivalence of expressive power 
or somesuch.  If there is such a thing as expressive power, then a stronger 
representation should not be recoverable from a weaker one.  But I suppose if 
they all are built from the same type of basis set, then multiple weak ones 
allow recovery of strong ones.

I'm always fascinated by the emphasis we (all) place on coherence and internal 
consistency.  It seems like some sort of rhetorical fallacy, perhaps the 
fallacy fallacy.  Perhaps we can arrive at the truth in spite of completely 
flawed (e.g. self-inconsistent) representations?  Even a broken clock (Trump) 
is right (a)periodically.

On 02/21/2017 01:09 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky wrote:
> In some manner every representation whatever default settings have been 
> applied should be recoverable with every other representation and coherent.
> The more coherent viewpoints the closer the approximation of Truth.


-- 
☣ glen


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[glen ☣]

Well, to be clear, my comment was intended to agree with Vladimyr's point that 
I kinda like being _deluded_.  When you finally remove all the meaning from the 
math notation and just manipulate the markings, it can be very hypnotic.  What 
would otherwise seem to be meaningless syntax takes on a meaning of its own, 
regardless of any _symbolic_ intent.  (We _can_ coherently ask the question 
"What is it like to be a zombie".)  We can hold both [non-]Platonic positions, 
because that state depends on the context.  Remove all the a priori symbolism, 
and I become a Platonist.  Ground even a single term and I become a 
constructivist.

As for being in the zone socially, I disagree, though I don't particularly care 
about any jargonal co-option of the term.  During hearty arguments, mostly with 
religious people, I definitely lose myself in exactly the same way I lose 
myself after that 3rd mile when running.  I have no illusions that my zone is 
in any way shared by the people I'm arguing with, though ... no more than I 
think you and I share internal constructs mediated by the word "blue".

I enjoyed Eric's comment on representation precisely because I can't quite buy 
into the idea that we rely so heavily on "symbolic reference".  It relies way 
too much on the assumption that what goes on in our head is anything like what 
goes on out there in the ambience.


On 02/21/2017 12:46 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
> Why I bring this up at all is that Whitehead thinks that what integrates 
> these two modes into the whole of what we perceive is *Symbolic Reference*. 
> Symbolic reference is kind of like how we tag bits of our real-world 
> immersion for building a largely symbolic but sustainable--for us 
> individually--worldview. Most time these symbolic references are provided to 
> us--inculcated--by others like with a religion or by our parents.  Most are 
> satisfied with that. In your friend's case, I believe it is possible that y' 
> all were unsettling--challenging--his worldview ... or, he challenging yours. 
> 
> Flow is not likely to be aroused in a social context. [...]
> 
> Is mathematics invented or discovered?  This is a perennial topic that arises 
> within my philosophy group.  It never really gets resolved, but how could it 
> be?   It is the ultimate of symbolic reference systems because of its 
> precision in predicting the way the world manifests itself to our perception. 
> [...]
> 
> As I often do, I  kind of resonate with Vladimyr's thought, which you 
> included in your post. It is very Csikszentmihalyi-est. I do think that 
> simulations can lure us into thinking that they are an exact dynamic 
> facsimile of the reality which they try to abstract into an analytical model. 
>  There are all kinds of things about simulations that can lead us astray. 
> [...]
> 
> But, as Vladimyr muses, maybe this is the best we can do ... and symbolic 
> reference is what nature served up for us to cope, concerning what we are 
> perceiving.  But, as with all smart systems, a smart entity will always try 
> to challenge and refine those symbols with continuous feedback--FLOW.  
> However, in the larger scheme of things, it really doesn't matter if 
> mathematics was invented or discovered. I mean, where did the concept of a 
> hammer come from? 樂

-- 
☣ glen


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

Glen,

Thank You.

Now we enter into a salient area where dispute could arise if I take you too 
literally. 

The Mesh is irregular and can't be called a proper tessalation since there are 
no repeated elements or tiles. I assume VanHoutte only cheated slightly in his 
code'
The points positions on the surface are random but the connecting lines will be 
straight lines only touching the sphere at exactly the points. I suppose the 
Voronoi Cells can be regarded as highly irregular tiles that only touch the 
sphere at points. The higher my points count the better the resolution but the 
cells still only touch the sphere at points. The only way I know to place edges 
on a sphere is to use parametric equations connecting point to point using 
Geodesic Paths. Eventually those lines will converge on the 2  Pole Points and 
Pucker together.

There are several problems with the camera libraries I am using and this is 
probably due to the writers choice to keep the largest object centered in the 
screen.
There is also a back clipping plane that allows objects to disappear in the far 
distance, also a undisclosed camera field of view.


Indeed the earth mapping may be squashed as definitely is true of the sun. The 
two issues are only related by my inexcusable lack of technique.

In my effort to examine human visual bandwidth limitations some details are 
lost somewhere in the brain. For example some objects are spinning as well as 
rotating and others are translating  and rotating. The sun is growing while 
spinning but is not translating. It was my intent to baffle myself. What I did 
learn is that it is not difficult to do so, but that longer observation does 
establish and embed more details or features. So my brain might be overwhelmed 
in the short term but self corrects with time and effort. Other research shows 
that people see less than is really falling on their retinas. The brain only 
presents what it expects, not the truth. This undermines most philosophical 
discussions since our sight is less than virtuous.

In the case of Truth versus Representation we seem to be forced to apply 
imposed geometries and time... Or each observer imposes these elements and that 
is where most disputes arise. It seems humans need little reason to start to 
bicker.

I am slowly trying to build a website to present clever ideas  a very few are 
mine, but they all pertain to data visualization in some manner. 

In some manner every representation whatever default settings have been applied 
should be recoverable with every other representation and coherent.
The more coherent viewpoints the closer the approximation of Truth.
vib

vib

-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of ?glen?
Sent: February-21-17 10:13 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs


Works perfectly!  And cool music, BTW.  I see now that you were talking about a 
tesselation of the sphere's surface.  I thought you intended a 3D irregular 
grid.  Regardless, I certainly didn't notice the camera issue.  I did notice an 
odd squashing of the earth textured sphere, though.

On 02/20/2017 10:12 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky wrote:
> Glen,
> 
> The Voronoi Mesh  video distribution has been delayed by a connection 
> speed problem and currently can't even view my own cloud storage. I have 
> found a third oddity called for lack of anything better the camera position.
> as it moves I think at moments that the other two coordinate systems  become 
> conflated and it requires focused attention to account for distinct motions.
> 
> I think you have presented the problem in complex terms and have missed a 
> simple solution. Run it Backwards and forwards , just like in calculus.
> If you get the same input values from a certain output value set then it 
> usually got you full marks. I will get this problem solved yet.
> The most interesting insight is that each is connected by time... 
> 
> I am losing my vision so I wish to use what is left before it all 
> goes. This was all done in Processing  3.0.1 and I am learning it now but it 
> reminds me a  little of C++ from my old days. So if it runs backwards and 
> forwards just give a heuristic kick in the pants and watch...
> The original code libraries came from a physicist from Belgium, F. VanHoutte.
> There are so many things moving that my machine may not do a good job.
> My interest is to use these meshes to create Insect Wings for CGI.
> 
> https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkxtarv1AjHWv1xVr
> 
> It is on the site but you may have to download it and open to see it. Good 
> Luck.
> let me know if it works.

--
␦glen?


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe 
http://redfish.com/mail

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Robert Wall]

Hi Glen,

What you describe as *flow* or being *in the zone* has been precisely
written

and talked
 about
by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi as the Optimal Experience.  No one will
experience this quite the same way, as the flow experience requires
both skill and challenge in an area where flow will occur. By his own
statements, Einstein is said to have been in flow when he synthesized the
concept of General and Special Relativity. At the time he was arguably very
skilled in math and physics and, of course, very challenged.

However, I prefer Alfred North Whitehead's (et al.) concept that we are all
always in *flow*. We just don't alway realize it. In his *Process
Philosophy*, as conveyed  in his *Process and Reality*, he writes about the
two modes of perceptual experience: (1) *Presentational Immediacy* [the
bits of data that get presented to us through our senses--or imagination]
and (2) *Causal Efficacy* [the conditioning of the present by the past].
Curiously, Csikszentmihalyi says that we can only process data from our
senses at a rate of 110 bit/sec.  Reading this post likely will chew up 60
bits/sec. of that bandwidth. 

Why I bring this up at all is that Whitehead thinks that what integrates
these two modes into the whole of what we perceive is *Symbolic Reference*.
Symbolic reference is kind of like how we tag bits of our real-world
immersion for building a largely symbolic but sustainable--for us
individually--worldview. Most time these symbolic references are provided
to us--inculcated--by others like with a religion or by our parents.  Most
are satisfied with that. In your friend's case, I believe it is possible
that y' all were unsettling--challenging--his worldview ... or, he
challenging yours.

Flow is not likely to be aroused in a social context. It is an inner state
... what the Greeks and Csikszentmihalyi would say is the entering into
an alternate reality devoid of our sense of self.  Your existence melts
away in such a state. So our symbols get challenged or, perhaps, disappear
as well. French social philosophers Jean Baudrillard and Gilles Deleuze
also talk about symbolism, but it was at a social level.  As far as I am
concerned, Flow can't be achieved at the level of society ... but, boy I
wish that that were not so.  Csikszentmihalyi talks about the opposite of
Flow that occurs on a social level that often occurs when society has been
thrown into a chaos as with war or Trumpism. 樂

Is mathematics invented or discovered?  This is a perennial topic that
arises within my philosophy group.  It never really gets resolved, but how
could it be?   It is the ultimate of symbolic reference systems because of
its precision in predicting the way the world manifests itself to our
perception. This is not so true of our other symbols or abstractions. So
are they any different?  In a way, they are because mathematical symbols
form from an axiom-driven language. But, notwithstanding Jerry Fodor's
"built-in" syntactic language of thought, languages are human inventions
based on metaphors [if you like George Lakoff].  Languages work among
cultures because they are more or less conventional (acceptable) to a
culture.  The fact that they can be translated into other languages is
because we are all immersed in the same reality. In this way, I tend to
think of mathematics as invented. If you are a Platonist--a worldview--you
will likely disagree.

As I often do, I  kind of resonate with Vladimyr's thought, which you
included in your post. It is very Csikszentmihalyi-est. I do think that
simulations can lure us into thinking that they are an exact dynamic
facsimile of the reality which they try to abstract into an analytical
model.  There are all kinds of things about simulations that can lead us
astray. Fidelity is one thing, obviously.  But, I think that the worst
thing--and this is often the fate of a simulator because of time and
funding--is when they get so complicated that no one understands the
process for how the results were computed.  This--like with many neural
networks--is when the simulator just become an Oracle.  This is kind of
what happened with Henry Markam's Blue Brain Project
,
building a simulation of something for which they didn't know the first
principles.  I think also this is what John Horgan wrote about concerning
what was going on at the Santa Fe Institute in his *SA* article From
Complexity to Perplexity
.

But, as Vladimyr muses, maybe this is the best we can do ... and symbolic
reference is what nature served up for us to cope, concerning what we are
perceiving.  But, as with all smart systems, a smart entity will always try
to challenge and refine those symbols with 

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[glen ☣]

There's no doubt that there's some kernel of truth to the concept of "flow" or 
"in the zone".  I always make the mistake of thinking others have had similar 
experiences to mine.  But at our journal club a few weeks ago, while discussing 
whether math is invented or discovered, one guy kept conflating mathematical 
symbols with their semantic grounding.  A couple of us kept trying to make the 
point that after you've abstracted all the symbols away from their grounding, 
so that you're just manipulating the symbols, you get into the state where you 
start to think of the math, itself, as having an ontological existence.  You're 
"in the zone", so to speak, where the math becomes real as opposed to a proxy 
for the real.  That the other guy couldn't grok it could be a sign that he's 
never entered that zone, hamstrung by his grounding to physical reality.

Or, he could have simply felt defensive because he thought we kept attacking 
him ... you never know how some people interpret the milieu.

On 02/20/2017 10:44 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky wrote:
> Some music allows some people to focus longer. Maybe Taser jolts work for 
> others. The simulation lures us into fantasy lands. Which I kinda like 
> sometimes.
> Time links these sims of mine but temporality is a coincidence not a true 
> cause and we don't live long enough to test every contingency, so we make do 
> with delusions. There seems no path out of this box. The box just grows with 
> us.
> vib
> 
> So why did evolution place so much emphasis on time...

-- 
☣ glen


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[┣glen┫]

Works perfectly!  And cool music, BTW.  I see now that you were talking about a 
tesselation of the sphere's surface.  I thought you intended a 3D irregular 
grid.  Regardless, I certainly didn't notice the camera issue.  I did notice an 
odd squashing of the earth textured sphere, though.

On 02/20/2017 10:12 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky wrote:
> Glen,
> 
> The Voronoi Mesh  video distribution has been delayed by a connection speed 
> problem and currently can't even view my own cloud storage. I 
> have found a third oddity called for lack of anything better the camera 
> position. 
> as it moves I think at moments that the other two coordinate systems  become 
> conflated and it requires focused attention to account for distinct motions.
> 
> I think you have presented the problem in complex terms and have missed a 
> simple solution. Run it Backwards and forwards , just like in calculus.
> If you get the same input values from a certain output value set then it 
> usually got you full marks. I will get this problem solved yet.
> The most interesting insight is that each is connected by time... 
> 
> I am losing my vision so I wish to use what is left before it all goes. This 
> was all done in Processing  3.0.1 and I am learning it now but it reminds me 
> a  little of C++
> from my old days. So if it runs backwards and forwards just give a heuristic 
> kick in the pants and watch...
> The original code libraries came from a physicist from Belgium, F. VanHoutte.
> There are so many things moving that my machine may not do a good job.
> My interest is to use these meshes to create Insect Wings for CGI.
> 
> https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkxtarv1AjHWv1xVr
> 
> It is on the site but you may have to download it and open to see it. Good 
> Luck.
> let me know if it works.

-- 
␦glen?


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

From Glen,
And I agree that the illusions you mention are primarily associated with 
(inappropriate) reification through transforms.  You seem to be saying that 
some transforms present illusions and others present non-illusions (truth?).  I 
take the opposite position ... perhaps the post-modern position ... that all 
transforms present illusions (or all present truth).  The key is to know that 
you're seeing the image of a transform and cataloging that particular one 
(amongst its category of transforms that could have been used).  Then, whether 
your verification methods have failed you and the transform you're using is 
_not_ the one you think you're using, matters less -- and can be more readily 
debugged.
response by vib.

This sounds like a grad lounge debate. Indeed you are right. So to fix the 
problem force people to pay attention for more than 10 secs.
Some music allows some people to focus longer. Maybe Taser jolts work for 
others. The simulation lures us into fantasy lands. Which I kinda like 
sometimes.
Time links these sims of mine but temporality is a coincidence not a true cause 
and we don't live long enough to test every contingency, so we make do with 
delusions. There seems no path out of this box. The box just grows with us.
vib

So why did evolution place so much emphasis on time...


-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: February-20-17 11:09 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs


Rather than risk your thinking nobody wants to see it, I figured I'd chime in.  
I want to see the video of your cube surrounded by a voronoi tesselation.

The subject you raise comes up a lot in conversations with my clients.  The 
extent to which an actor's mechanism is local or global can be very important 
both functionally and technically.  Any spatial structure that is defined 
globally, then even if used only locally by an actor, presents a risk of 
inscription error (assuming one's conclusion).  But this often leads one down 
the road to ad infinitum problems with bottom-up modeling.  So, we have to 
compromise and allow at least some teleology.  The trick is to be disciplined 
or put in place checks and balances that help ensure acyclic reasoning.

And I agree that the illusions you mention are primarily associated with 
(inappropriate) reification through transforms.  You seem to be saying that 
some transforms present illusions and others present non-illusions (truth?).  I 
take the opposite position ... perhaps the post-modern position ... that all 
transforms present illusions (or all present truth).  The key is to know that 
you're seeing the image of a transform and cataloging that particular one 
(amongst its category of transforms that could have been used).  Then, whether 
your verification methods have failed you and the transform you're using is 
_not_ the one you think you're using, matters less -- and can be more readily 
debugged.

I.e. when we're looking at an ink blot, are we aware that the more prickly ones 
allow less ambiguity?

On 02/15/2017 06:20 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky wrote:
> I have been mulling over the thread about Representation versus Dynamicism  
> for a bit and the differences that language imposes whenever 
> cross-disciplines attempt to converse. Today I was struggling with some code 
> to create Voronoi Meshes nested within each other based on nested spheres. 
> All look well enough until I introduced a primitive solid, a Cube and tried 
> to make everything spin in space.
> 
> I needed to decide which entity or sets were coupled to which… So thinking of 
> FEM procedures I decided to make the Voronoi Sets occupy the Global 
> Coordinate Position and attach the Cube as a Local Coordinate   System. This 
> is rather arbitrary and can go either way. The problem appears somewhat akin 
> to our thread, but I am aware that these distinctions are contained within 
> the same Simulation and neither reflects a reality except by coincidence. To 
> cope with multiple coordinate systems one requires a pertinent transformation 
> matrix but if one is reckless the results are meaningless. The appearance of 
> coupled systems may be illusionary and mistaken as causative.
> 
> I thought today there was also a mention in Science Daily of fractals in 
> Rorsach tests the more fractals, the more imaginative the observer’s answer.
> 
> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170214162838.htm
> 
> It will take a few days but will try and make a video out of the apparent 
> incongruity of these objects. The Cube is lacking any distinctive edge 
> embellishments and troubles the mind as unreal somehow.
> 
> Language always hampers exchange of ideas.

--
☣ glen


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group l

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

Glen,

The Voronoi Mesh  video distribution has been delayed by a connection speed 
problem and currently can't even view my own cloud storage. I 
have found a third oddity called for lack of anything better the camera 
position. 
as it moves I think at moments that the other two coordinate systems  become 
conflated and it requires focused attention to account for distinct motions.

I think you have presented the problem in complex terms and have missed a 
simple solution. Run it Backwards and forwards , just like in calculus.
If you get the same input values from a certain output value set then it 
usually got you full marks. I will get this problem solved yet.
The most interesting insight is that each is connected by time... 

I am losing my vision so I wish to use what is left before it all goes. This 
was all done in Processing  3.0.1 and I am learning it now but it reminds me a  
little of C++
from my old days. So if it runs backwards and forwards just give a heuristic 
kick in the pants and watch...
The original code libraries came from a physicist from Belgium, F. VanHoutte.
There are so many things moving that my machine may not do a good job.
My interest is to use these meshes to create Insect Wings for CGI.

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkxtarv1AjHWv1xVr

It is on the site but you may have to download it and open to see it. Good Luck.
let me know if it works.
vib

-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: February-20-17 11:09 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs


Rather than risk your thinking nobody wants to see it, I figured I'd chime in.  
I want to see the video of your cube surrounded by a voronoi tesselation.

The subject you raise comes up a lot in conversations with my clients.  The 
extent to which an actor's mechanism is local or global can be very important 
both functionally and technically.  Any spatial structure that is defined 
globally, then even if used only locally by an actor, presents a risk of 
inscription error (assuming one's conclusion).  But this often leads one down 
the road to ad infinitum problems with bottom-up modeling.  So, we have to 
compromise and allow at least some teleology.  The trick is to be disciplined 
or put in place checks and balances that help ensure acyclic reasoning.

And I agree that the illusions you mention are primarily associated with 
(inappropriate) reification through transforms.  You seem to be saying that 
some transforms present illusions and others present non-illusions (truth?).  I 
take the opposite position ... perhaps the post-modern position ... that all 
transforms present illusions (or all present truth).  The key is to know that 
you're seeing the image of a transform and cataloging that particular one 
(amongst its category of transforms that could have been used).  Then, whether 
your verification methods have failed you and the transform you're using is 
_not_ the one you think you're using, matters less -- and can be more readily 
debugged.

I.e. when we're looking at an ink blot, are we aware that the more prickly ones 
allow less ambiguity?

On 02/15/2017 06:20 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky wrote:
> I have been mulling over the thread about Representation versus Dynamicism  
> for a bit and the differences that language imposes whenever 
> cross-disciplines attempt to converse. Today I was struggling with some code 
> to create Voronoi Meshes nested within each other based on nested spheres. 
> All look well enough until I introduced a primitive solid, a Cube and tried 
> to make everything spin in space.
> 
> I needed to decide which entity or sets were coupled to which… So thinking of 
> FEM procedures I decided to make the Voronoi Sets occupy the Global 
> Coordinate Position and attach the Cube as a Local Coordinate   System. This 
> is rather arbitrary and can go either way. The problem appears somewhat akin 
> to our thread, but I am aware that these distinctions are contained within 
> the same Simulation and neither reflects a reality except by coincidence. To 
> cope with multiple coordinate systems one requires a pertinent transformation 
> matrix but if one is reckless the results are meaningless. The appearance of 
> coupled systems may be illusionary and mistaken as causative.
> 
> I thought today there was also a mention in Science Daily of fractals in 
> Rorsach tests the more fractals, the more imaginative the observer’s answer.
> 
> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170214162838.htm
> 
> It will take a few days but will try and make a video out of the apparent 
> incongruity of these objects. The Cube is lacking any distinctive edge 
> embellishments and troubles the mind as unreal somehow.
> 
> Language always hampers exchange of ideas.

--
☣ glen

===

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[glen ☣]

Rather than risk your thinking nobody wants to see it, I figured I'd chime in.  
I want to see the video of your cube surrounded by a voronoi tesselation.

The subject you raise comes up a lot in conversations with my clients.  The 
extent to which an actor's mechanism is local or global can be very important 
both functionally and technically.  Any spatial structure that is defined 
globally, then even if used only locally by an actor, presents a risk of 
inscription error (assuming one's conclusion).  But this often leads one down 
the road to ad infinitum problems with bottom-up modeling.  So, we have to 
compromise and allow at least some teleology.  The trick is to be disciplined 
or put in place checks and balances that help ensure acyclic reasoning.

And I agree that the illusions you mention are primarily associated with 
(inappropriate) reification through transforms.  You seem to be saying that 
some transforms present illusions and others present non-illusions (truth?).  I 
take the opposite position ... perhaps the post-modern position ... that all 
transforms present illusions (or all present truth).  The key is to know that 
you're seeing the image of a transform and cataloging that particular one 
(amongst its category of transforms that could have been used).  Then, whether 
your verification methods have failed you and the transform you're using is 
_not_ the one you think you're using, matters less -- and can be more readily 
debugged.

I.e. when we're looking at an ink blot, are we aware that the more prickly ones 
allow less ambiguity?

On 02/15/2017 06:20 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky wrote:
> I have been mulling over the thread about Representation versus Dynamicism  
> for a bit and the differences that language imposes whenever 
> cross-disciplines attempt to converse. Today I was struggling with some code 
> to create Voronoi Meshes nested within each other based on nested spheres. 
> All look well enough until I introduced a primitive solid, a Cube and tried 
> to make everything spin in space.
> 
> I needed to decide which entity or sets were coupled to which… So thinking of 
> FEM procedures I decided to make the Voronoi Sets occupy the Global 
> Coordinate Position and attach the Cube as a Local Coordinate   System. This 
> is rather arbitrary and can go either way. The problem appears somewhat akin 
> to our thread, but I am aware that these distinctions are contained within 
> the same Simulation and neither reflects a reality except by coincidence. To 
> cope with multiple coordinate systems one requires a pertinent transformation 
> matrix but if one is reckless the results are meaningless. The appearance of 
> coupled systems may be illusionary and mistaken as causative.
> 
> I thought today there was also a mention in Science Daily of fractals in 
> Rorsach tests the more fractals, the more imaginative the observer’s answer.
> 
> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170214162838.htm
> 
> It will take a few days but will try and make a video out of the apparent 
> incongruity of these objects. The Cube is lacking any distinctive edge 
> embellishments and troubles the mind as unreal somehow.
> 
> Language always hampers exchange of ideas.

-- 
☣ glen


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Carl Tollander]

In another realm, look at Japanese transverse flutes ("shinobue" or simply
"fue").   So-called modern flutes are tuned to a western scale so that you
can get people from different parts of the world to play songs to some
reference.   For example, I have a #8 "uta" flute that is tuned to C, and
#6 "uta" hat is tuned to B flat.   You can see this in the varied spacing,
shape and diameter of holes from the major flute makers.  However, due to
the geography of Japan (central mountain ranges as an island "spine", short
rivers, many deep and nearly parallel valleys) there are many individual
traditional musics that share less of a standard.  A #6 "hayashi" flute
from nearby valley festivals is an approximate size; the hole size and
spacing is handed down; there's not much of a common scale.   So while you
see some similarities in song between different valley communities, the
actual notes produced have a lot of variation.   These differences persist
to the present internet , tunnel and train-infested day.   One can go to a
shop in Asakusa in Tokyo  and see many barrels of  recently produced
hayashi flutes from different regions of every shape and size.   This
speaks I think to my notion of the importance of development and there is
probably some analog to birdsong.

C


On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:19 AM, Carl Tollander <c...@plektyx.com> wrote:

> Well, there's order, duration, frequency and a bunch of other stuff.
> There is work from the signal analysis world, where people are concerned
> with fractal structure in signals as a means of compression, and tho its
> been years since I've done neural nets, I imagine heartbeats or nervous
> system signaling would qualify.
>
> As you remember, I am especially concerned with continuous
> developmental/learning aspects, rather than specific adult organisms at a
> specific time in some stable environment.  That said at my age I am of
> course biased.
>
> In my realm there is a figure-ground relationship at different scales
> between the developing traditions, the drummers, the individuals in the
> local group playing some arranged piece in the developing tradition, the
> drum itself (driven amplifier dynamics), drum design (much beyond
> membranophone descriptions and into wood types, metamaterials, turbulent
> flow, variance in the thickness and biology of skins and stretching
> processes, and such), the physics of the drum at the time it is played
> (humidity, temperature, what's happening in the drum next to it, how
> quickly it responds to that and the individual strike, the shape, mass,
> elasticity and internal qualities of the drumsticks, a large number of
> physiological qualities of the individual drummer and how each drummer
> works with focus, efficiency of motion and process,  the acoustic
> environment of the venue, the many ways in which the audience or a
> particular kind of audience responds and in which you can evoke or respond
> to those qualities.  So a complex drumbeat to me might not necessarily mean
> a sequence of beats, but rather a single beat in which all those qualities
> come together coherently (to me or anyone present now or in history) in a
> single hit.   Even if the state space of the aforementioned qualities is
> not precisely knowable just now.
>
> I don't imagine this is particularly different for any musician or that it
> necessarily qualifies as complex as you might mean it.   I'm certainly
> willing for that bar to be high.  As some say, you are the instrument, the
> voyage makes the captain, etc.
>
> Tying back to "temporal fracticality", the notion of temporal direction
> can maybe get factored out (a la Tralfamidorians) , ie many birds through
> their song are trying to get laid (temporal pun intended).   The eaglet is
> the father of the eagle, neh?. We make assumptions about how birds
> experience time.   There seems to be a "temporal emergent locality" that
> defines the horizons of temporal self-similarity (there's a lot of
> "emergent locality" stuff in the physics literature - not sure it applies
> here).
>
> C
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Nick Thompson <
> nickthomp...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Carl,
>>
>>
>>
>> Good to hear your “voice” again?
>>
>>
>>
>> I think you might be the person best positioned in my life to talk to me
>> about temporal fractality.  Are complex drumbeats fractal; and in what
>> degree?
>>
>>
>>
>> Am I over stretching the term?
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nicholas S. Thompson
>>
>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>>
>> Cl

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Carl Tollander]

Well, there's order, duration, frequency and a bunch of other stuff.
There is work from the signal analysis world, where people are concerned
with fractal structure in signals as a means of compression, and tho its
been years since I've done neural nets, I imagine heartbeats or nervous
system signaling would qualify.

As you remember, I am especially concerned with continuous
developmental/learning aspects, rather than specific adult organisms at a
specific time in some stable environment.  That said at my age I am of
course biased.

In my realm there is a figure-ground relationship at different scales
between the developing traditions, the drummers, the individuals in the
local group playing some arranged piece in the developing tradition, the
drum itself (driven amplifier dynamics), drum design (much beyond
membranophone descriptions and into wood types, metamaterials, turbulent
flow, variance in the thickness and biology of skins and stretching
processes, and such), the physics of the drum at the time it is played
(humidity, temperature, what's happening in the drum next to it, how
quickly it responds to that and the individual strike, the shape, mass,
elasticity and internal qualities of the drumsticks, a large number of
physiological qualities of the individual drummer and how each drummer
works with focus, efficiency of motion and process,  the acoustic
environment of the venue, the many ways in which the audience or a
particular kind of audience responds and in which you can evoke or respond
to those qualities.  So a complex drumbeat to me might not necessarily mean
a sequence of beats, but rather a single beat in which all those qualities
come together coherently (to me or anyone present now or in history) in a
single hit.   Even if the state space of the aforementioned qualities is
not precisely knowable just now.

I don't imagine this is particularly different for any musician or that it
necessarily qualifies as complex as you might mean it.   I'm certainly
willing for that bar to be high.  As some say, you are the instrument, the
voyage makes the captain, etc.

Tying back to "temporal fracticality", the notion of temporal direction can
maybe get factored out (a la Tralfamidorians) , ie many birds through their
song are trying to get laid (temporal pun intended).   The eaglet is the
father of the eagle, neh?. We make assumptions about how birds experience
time.   There seems to be a "temporal emergent locality" that defines the
horizons of temporal self-similarity (there's a lot of "emergent locality"
stuff in the physics literature - not sure it applies here).

C


On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

> Hi, Carl,
>
>
>
> Good to hear your “voice” again?
>
>
>
> I think you might be the person best positioned in my life to talk to me
> about temporal fractality.  Are complex drumbeats fractal; and in what
> degree?
>
>
>
> Am I over stretching the term?
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Carl
> Tollander
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 16, 2017 10:49 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam@redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs
>
>
>
> Many birds do tend to migrate, so wondering what "stable environment"
> means here.
>
>
>
> Also thinking there is at play the developmental  environment (extended
> time of egg-to-bird-of-the-now) of the bird, as well as the outer
> moment-of-the-song environment.   How does one talk about developmental
> self-similarity?(we have L-systems for simulated plant growth and so
> on).As I recall from back in the day, self-similarity has limiting
> scale horizons, where particular dimensions of growth or development
> dominate to support the self-similarity.
>
>
>
> C
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Steven A Smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote:
>
> Nick -
>
> This is one of your (wonderfully, and I mean that seriously) naive
> questions, and the naive answer is yes, they are surely coupled.   I'm very
> interested in "soundscapes"  so am often very aware of both the complex
> passive structure of most soundscapes (especially landscape vs urbanscape)
> and the active (birdsongs, garbage trucks, wind in the willows, sirens,
> ice-floes, domestic disturbances) elements.
>
> You are likely to have a better idea than I do about whether bird's songs
> are likely to be *formulated* in a more or less complex manner when in a
&

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Nick Thompson]

Hi, Carl, 

 

Good to hear your “voice” again? 

 

I think you might be the person best positioned in my life to talk to me about 
temporal fractality.  Are complex drumbeats fractal; and in what degree? 

 

Am I over stretching the term? 

 

Nick 

 

 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

 <http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/> 
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Carl Tollander
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 10:49 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Many birds do tend to migrate, so wondering what "stable environment" means 
here.

 

Also thinking there is at play the developmental  environment (extended time of 
egg-to-bird-of-the-now) of the bird, as well as the outer moment-of-the-song 
environment.   How does one talk about developmental self-similarity?(we 
have L-systems for simulated plant growth and so on).As I recall from back 
in the day, self-similarity has limiting scale horizons, where particular 
dimensions of growth or development dominate to support the self-similarity.

 

C

 

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Steven A Smith <sasm...@swcp.com 
<mailto:sasm...@swcp.com> > wrote:

Nick -

This is one of your (wonderfully, and I mean that seriously) naive questions, 
and the naive answer is yes, they are surely coupled.   I'm very interested in 
"soundscapes"  so am often very aware of both the complex passive structure of 
most soundscapes (especially landscape vs urbanscape) and the active 
(birdsongs, garbage trucks, wind in the willows, sirens, ice-floes, domestic 
disturbances) elements.

You are likely to have a better idea than I do about whether bird's songs are 
likely to be *formulated* in a more or less complex manner when in a complex 
"landscape".   I would guess yes to this.I would guess that the three most 
relevant scales are roughly the scale of the bird's body, it's food-source, and 
it's natural predators.   How well can it hide, how well can it's food hide, 
and how well does it's predator hide.   I"m sure this is an overly simplified 
model.

I think rather than fractal (literally), the more relevant concept is "with 
structure at many scales".   

IN any case, welcome to Alberto!  My own daughter happens to be a researcher in 
Flaviviruses, traditionally West Nile and Dingue, but now is drawn into the 
Zika thing...   I look forward to hearing more from you Alberto!

 - Steve

 

On 2/15/17 3:57 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

Hell, List, 

 

I would like to introduce to you Alberto Alaniz (who describes himself in the 
communication below).  I “met” him on Research Gate when he downloaded a paper 
of mine on the structural organization of bird song.  I noticed that he was 
writing from a Landscape Department, and I thought, “A landscape person who is 
interested in birdsong! He must be interested in fractals!”  And I was right.  
So please welcome him.  Steve please note? 

 

The idea of his that I particularly want to hear you discuss is his notion that 
fractality (is that a word?) in one domain can effect, affect, impose? 
fractality in another.  So is there a relationship between the fractality which 
my research revealed in the organization of bird song and the fractality of the 
landscapes on which bird behavior is deployed.  

 

I particularly wonder what Kim  Sorvig and Jenny Quillen and ProfDave think 
about this, but also wonder if others on the list could put an oar in. 

 

Thanks, 

 

Nick 

 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

 <http://home.earthlink.net/%7Enickthompson/naturaldesigns/> 
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Alberto Jose Alaniz [mailto:alberto.ala...@ug.uchile.cl] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:21 PM
To: nthomp...@clarku.edu <mailto:nthomp...@clarku.edu> 
Subject: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Dear Nick

 

I apreciate so much your invitation, so i really intrested in participate of 
your discussion group. I am a young researcher finishing my MS, and this types 
of oportunities look very good for my, specially if i can interact with other 
scientics. About your question, of course you can share my oppinion, now if you 
want i can writte a compleate opinion in extenso, and i will send to you 
tomorrow in the afternon.

 

My field of study is the ecologial modelling and the conservation biology, the 
last year i published my firsts papers in Biological conservation and 
International Journal of Epidemiology, the first one about ecosystem 
conservation and the secondth is a global model of exposure risk to Zika virus. 
Currently im working in ecosystems and in as

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Carl Tollander]

Many birds do tend to migrate, so wondering what "stable environment" means
here.

Also thinking there is at play the developmental  environment (extended
time of egg-to-bird-of-the-now) of the bird, as well as the outer
moment-of-the-song environment.   How does one talk about developmental
self-similarity?(we have L-systems for simulated plant growth and so
on).As I recall from back in the day, self-similarity has limiting
scale horizons, where particular dimensions of growth or development
dominate to support the self-similarity.

C

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Steven A Smith  wrote:

> Nick -
>
> This is one of your (wonderfully, and I mean that seriously) naive
> questions, and the naive answer is yes, they are surely coupled.   I'm very
> interested in "soundscapes"  so am often very aware of both the complex
> passive structure of most soundscapes (especially landscape vs urbanscape)
> and the active (birdsongs, garbage trucks, wind in the willows, sirens,
> ice-floes, domestic disturbances) elements.
>
> You are likely to have a better idea than I do about whether bird's songs
> are likely to be *formulated* in a more or less complex manner when in a
> complex "landscape".   I would guess yes to this.I would guess that the
> three most relevant scales are roughly the scale of the bird's body, it's
> food-source, and it's natural predators.   How well can it hide, how well
> can it's food hide, and how well does it's predator hide.   I"m sure this
> is an overly simplified model.
>
> I think rather than fractal (literally), the more relevant concept is
> "with structure at many scales".
>
> IN any case, welcome to Alberto!  My own daughter happens to be a
> researcher in Flaviviruses, traditionally West Nile and Dingue, but now is
> drawn into the Zika thing...   I look forward to hearing more from you
> Alberto!
>
>  - Steve
>
> On 2/15/17 3:57 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
>
> Hell, List,
>
>
>
> I would like to introduce to you Alberto Alaniz (who describes himself in
> the communication below).  I “met” him on Research Gate when he downloaded
> a paper of mine on the structural organization of bird song.  I noticed
> that he was writing from a Landscape Department, and I thought, “A
> landscape person who is interested in birdsong! He must be interested in
> fractals!”  And I was right.  So please welcome him.  Steve please note?
>
>
>
> The idea of his that I particularly want to hear you discuss is his notion
> that fractality (is that a word?) in one domain can effect, affect, impose?
> fractality in another.  So is there a relationship between the fractality
> which my research revealed in the organization of bird song and the
> fractality of the landscapes on which bird behavior is deployed.
>
>
>
> I particularly wonder what Kim  Sorvig and Jenny Quillen and ProfDave
> think about this, but also wonder if others on the list could put an oar
> in.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Alberto Jose Alaniz [mailto:alberto.ala...@ug.uchile.cl
> ]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:21 PM
> *To:* nthomp...@clarku.edu
> *Subject:* Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs
>
>
>
> Dear Nick
>
>
>
> I apreciate so much your invitation, so i really intrested in participate
> of your discussion group. I am a young researcher finishing my MS, and this
> types of oportunities look very good for my, specially if i can interact
> with other scientics. About your question, of course you can share my
> oppinion, now if you want i can writte a compleate opinion in extenso, and
> i will send to you tomorrow in the afternon.
>
>
>
> My field of study is the ecologial modelling and the conservation biology,
> the last year i published my firsts papers in Biological conservation and
> International Journal of Epidemiology, the first one about ecosystem
> conservation and the secondth is a global model of exposure risk to Zika
> virus. Currently im working in ecosystems and in assessment of habitat loss
> in forest specialist species (with Kathryn Sieving from University of
> Florida).
>
>
>
> *Alberto  Alaniz Baeza*
>
> Lic. en Geografía, Geógrafo & Magíster (c) Áreas Silvestres y Conservación
>
> Becario, Laboratorio de Ecología de Ambientes Fragmentados
>
> Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas Animales, U. de Chile
>
> Investigador, Laboratorio de Ecología de Ecosistemas
>
> Departamento de Recursos Naturales Renovables, U. de Chile
>
> Académico, Centro de Formación Técnica del Medio Ambiente IDMA
>
> +56996097443 <+56%209%209609%207443>
>
> https://albertoalaniz.wordpress.com/
>
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe 

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Nick Thompson]

David, 

 

Thanks for pitching in.  

 

I have some hazy data concerning bobolink song that might relate to your 
hypothesis.  We did two studies of bobolink song in relatively stable and 
relatively disrupted habitats.  At least that is what we thought was the 
relevant variable.  In the more stable environment, the song was hierarchically 
organized into strings of several songs that were widely shared between 
neighbors in the same field.  Not fractal, exactly, but definitely, 
multi-level.  In the more disrupted field, the songs were essentially random 
with no repeated long elements shared between neighbors.  

 

That’s all I got!

 

Nick 

 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

  
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Prof David West [mailto:profw...@fastmail.fm] 
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 10:54 AM
To: Nick Thompson ; Friam ; Kim 
Sorvig 
Cc: friam-ow...@redfish.com; alberto.ala...@ug.uchile.cl; Jenny Quillien 

Subject: Re: FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Nick,

 

As asked (effect, affect impose?), my answer would be no. A partial test of the 
answer would be to see if the songs of birds living, even for multiple 
generations, in arguably non-fractal environments, e.g. mid-town Manhattan, 
lost their fractal nature. This test would not rule out the possibility that 
the 'evolution' of songs was isomorphic to the evolution of bird morphology AND 
isomorphic to an evolving fractal environment.

 

A different way to approach the question might be to ask if "fractality" is 
somehow a substrate upon which living things rely in order to be recognized as 
"alive." Two things lead me to ask the question in this manner. First, fractal 
geometry is used to generate digital landscapes and digital life forms, e.g. 
trees, with results that are far more "lifelike" than attempts based on other 
graphical systems — Ed Angel should enlighten us here because it is his area of 
expertise, not mine.

 

Second, you have hear me talk of Christopher Alexander and his search for the 
Nature of Order. He posits fifteen properties (e.g. centers, boundaries, 
alternating repetition, contrast, deep interlock and ambiguity, etc.) that, he 
says, are fundamental and essential to the creation of built environments that 
have "liveness." It has always seemed to me that the compositions created using 
these fifteen properties would also be, in some manner, fractal.

 

Jenny might have ideas as to the second reason, but she is in Amsterdam for six 
weeks preparatory to a move there in the fall and might not see the question on 
the list. I have asked Richard Gabriel for an answer in his role as another 
expert on Alexander.

 

davew

 

 

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017, at 03:57 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

Hell, List,

 

I would like to introduce to you Alberto Alaniz (who describes himself in the 
communication below).  I “met” him on Research Gate when he downloaded a paper 
of mine on the structural organization of bird song.  I noticed that he was 
writing from a Landscape Department, and I thought, “A landscape person who is 
interested in birdsong! He must be interested in fractals!”  And I was right.  
So please welcome him.  Steve please note?

 

The idea of his that I particularly want to hear you discuss is his notion that 
fractality (is that a word?) in one domain can effect, affect, impose? 
fractality in another.  So is there a relationship between the fractality which 
my research revealed in the organization of bird song and the fractality of the 
landscapes on which bird behavior is deployed. 

 

I particularly wonder what Kim  Sorvig and Jenny Quillen and ProfDave think 
about this, but also wonder if others on the list could put an oar in.

 

Thanks,

 

Nick

 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

  
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Alberto Jose Alaniz [mailto:alberto.ala...@ug.uchile.cl] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:21 PM
To: nthomp...@clarku.edu  
Subject: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Dear Nick

 

I apreciate so much your invitation, so i really intrested in participate of 
your discussion group. I am a young researcher finishing my MS, and this types 
of oportunities look very good for my, specially if i can interact with other 
scientics. About your question, of course you can share my oppinion, now if you 
want i can writte a compleate opinion in extenso, and i will send to you 
tomorrow in the afternon.

 

My field of study is the ecologial modelling and the conservation biology, the 
last year i published my firsts papers in Biological conservation and 

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Prof David West]

Nick,



The second point I made, i.e. about Alexander, Richard Gabriel confirmed
that Alexander did cite Mandelbrot and fractal geometry as
"confirmation" of his ideas about liveness arising from  proper
composition using the fifteen properties. Also cited the work of Nikos
Salingaros as a rich resource on this topic.


dmw





On Wed, Feb 15, 2017, at 09:17 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

> Steve,



>  



> Birdsongs can be **temporally** fractal.  If curious, see
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239787151_A_system_for_describing_bird_song_units
> .
> Please let me know if you can’t get at this, and I will post it
> another way.
>  



> By temporally fractal, I mean, for instance,
> ABABABCDCDCDABABABCDCDCDABABABCDCDCDABABABCDCDCD
>  



> Is that stretching the meaning of fractal beyond the bounds of
> propriety?
>  



> “Naïve” may not be the best word for what I am up to, here.



>  



> Nick



>  



> Nicholas S. Thompson



> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology



> Clark University



> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/



>  



> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Steven
> A Smith *Sent:* Wednesday, February 15, 2017 6:06 PM *To:* The Friday
> Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> *Subject:*
> Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs
>  



> Nick -



> This is one of your (wonderfully, and I mean that seriously) naive
> questions, and the naive answer is yes, they are surely coupled.   I'm
> very interested in "soundscapes"  so am often very aware of both the
> complex passive structure of most soundscapes (especially landscape vs
> urbanscape) and the active (birdsongs, garbage trucks, wind in the
> willows, sirens, ice-floes, domestic disturbances) elements.
> You are likely to have a better idea than I do about whether bird's
> songs are likely to be *formulated* in a more or less complex manner
> when in a complex "landscape".   I would guess yes to this.I would
> guess that the three most relevant scales are roughly the scale of the
> bird's body, it's food-source, and it's natural predators.   How well
> can it hide, how well can it's food hide, and how well does it's
> predator hide.   I"m sure this is an overly simplified model.
> I think rather than fractal (literally), the more relevant concept is
> "with structure at many scales".
> IN any case, welcome to Alberto!  My own daughter happens to be a
> researcher in Flaviviruses, traditionally West Nile and Dingue, but
> now is drawn into the Zika thing...   I look forward to hearing more
> from you Alberto!
>  - Steve



>  



> On 2/15/17 3:57 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:



>> Hell, List,



>>  



>> I would like to introduce to you Alberto Alaniz (who describes
>> himself in the communication below).  I “met” him on Research Gate
>> when he downloaded a paper of mine on the structural organization of
>> bird song.  I noticed that he was writing from a Landscape
>> Department, and I thought, “A landscape person who is interested in
>> birdsong! He must be interested in fractals!”  And I was right.  So
>> please welcome him.  Steve please note?
>>  



>> The idea of his that I particularly want to hear you discuss is his
>> notion that fractality (is that a word?) in one domain can effect,
>> affect, impose? fractality in another.  So is there a relationship
>> between the fractality which my research revealed in the organization
>> of bird song and the fractality of the landscapes on which bird
>> behavior is deployed.
>>  



>> I particularly wonder what Kim  Sorvig and Jenny Quillen and ProfDave
>> think about this, but also wonder if others on the list could put an
>> oar in.
>>  



>> Thanks,



>>  



>> Nick



>>  



>>  



>> Nicholas S. Thompson



>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology



>> Clark University



>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/[1]



>>  



>> *From:* Alberto Jose Alaniz [mailto:alberto.ala...@ug.uchile.cl]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:21 PM *To:*
>> nthomp...@clarku.edu *Subject:* Fractal discussion Landscape-
>> bird songs
>>  



>> Dear Nick



>>  



>> I apreciate so much your invitation, so i really intrested in
>> participate of your discussion group. I am a young researcher
>> finishing my MS, and this types of oportunities look very good for
>> my, specially if i can interact with other scientics. About your
>> question, of course you can share my oppinion, now if yo

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[glen ☣]

This idea reminded me of the recent article:

Seeing shapes in seemingly random spatial patterns: Fractal analysis of 
Rorschach inkblots
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171289


On 02/16/2017 09:53 AM, Prof David West wrote:
> A different way to approach the question might be to ask if "fractality" is 
> somehow a substrate upon which living things rely in order to be recognized 
> as "alive." Two things lead me to ask the question in this manner. First, 
> fractal geometry is used to generate digital landscapes and digital life 
> forms, e.g. trees, with results that are far more "lifelike" than attempts 
> based on other graphical systems — Ed Angel should enlighten us here because 
> it is his area of expertise, not mine.

-- 
☣ glen


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Prof David West]

Nick,



As asked (effect, affect impose?), my answer would be no. A partial test
of the answer would be to see if the songs of birds living, even for
multiple generations, in arguably non-fractal environments, e.g. mid-
town Manhattan, lost their fractal nature. This test would not rule out
the possibility that the 'evolution' of songs was isomorphic to the
evolution of bird morphology AND isomorphic to an evolving fractal
environment.


A different way to approach the question might be to ask if "fractality"
is somehow a substrate upon which living things rely in order to be
recognized as "alive." Two things lead me to ask the question in this
manner. First, fractal geometry is used to generate digital landscapes
and digital life forms, e.g. trees, with results that are far more
"lifelike" than attempts based on other graphical systems — Ed Angel
should enlighten us here because it is his area of expertise, not mine.


Second, you have hear me talk of Christopher Alexander and his search
for the Nature of Order. He posits fifteen properties (e.g. centers,
boundaries, alternating repetition, contrast, deep interlock and
ambiguity, etc.) that, he says, are fundamental and essential to the
creation of built environments that have "liveness." It has always
seemed to me that the compositions created using these fifteen
properties would also be, in some manner, fractal.


Jenny might have ideas as to the second reason, but she is in Amsterdam
for six weeks preparatory to a move there in the fall and might not see
the question on the list. I have asked Richard Gabriel for an answer in
his role as another expert on Alexander.


davew





On Wed, Feb 15, 2017, at 03:57 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

> Hell, List,



>  



> I would like to introduce to you Alberto Alaniz (who describes himself
> in the communication below).  I “met” him on Research Gate when he
> downloaded a paper of mine on the structural organization of bird
> song.  I noticed that he was writing from a Landscape Department, and
> I thought, “A landscape person who is interested in birdsong! He must
> be interested in fractals!”  And I was right.  So please welcome him.
> Steve please note?
>  



> The idea of his that I particularly want to hear you discuss is his
> notion that fractality (is that a word?) in one domain can effect,
> affect, impose? fractality in another.  So is there a relationship
> between the fractality which my research revealed in the organization
> of bird song and the fractality of the landscapes on which bird
> behavior is deployed.
>  



> I particularly wonder what Kim  Sorvig and Jenny Quillen and
> ProfDave think about this, but also wonder if others on the list
> could put an oar in.
>  



> Thanks,



>  



> Nick



>  



>  



> Nicholas S. Thompson



> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology



> Clark University



> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/



>  



> *From:* Alberto Jose Alaniz [mailto:alberto.ala...@ug.uchile.cl]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:21 PM *To:*
> nthomp...@clarku.edu *Subject:* Fractal discussion Landscape-
> bird songs
>  



> Dear Nick



>  



> I apreciate so much your invitation, so i really intrested in
> participate of your discussion group. I am a young researcher
> finishing my MS, and this types of oportunities look very good for my,
> specially if i can interact with other scientics. About your question,
> of course you can share my oppinion, now if you want i can writte a
> compleate opinion in extenso, and i will send to you tomorrow in the
> afternon.
>  



> My field of study is the ecologial modelling and the conservation
> biology, the last year i published my firsts papers in Biological
> conservation and International Journal of Epidemiology, the first one
> about ecosystem conservation and the secondth is a global model of
> exposure risk to Zika virus. Currently im working in ecosystems and in
> assessment of habitat loss in forest specialist species (with Kathryn
> Sieving from University of Florida).
>  



> *Alberto  Alaniz Baeza*



> Lic. en Geografía, Geógrafo & Magíster (c) Áreas Silvestres y
> Conservación
> Becario, Laboratorio de Ecología de Ambientes Fragmentados



> Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas Animales, U. de Chile



> Investigador, Laboratorio de Ecología de Ecosistemas



> Departamento de Recursos Naturales Renovables, U. de Chile



> Académico, Centro de Formación Técnica del Medio Ambiente IDMA



> +56996097443



> https://albertoalaniz.wordpress.com/





FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Nick Thompson]

Steve,

 

Birdsongs can be temporally fractal.  If curious, see
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239787151_A_system_for_describing_b
ird_song_units .  

Please let me know if you can’t get at this, and I will post it another way.


 

By temporally fractal, I mean, for instance,
ABABABCDCDCDABABABCDCDCDABABABCDCDCDABABABCDCDCD

 

Is that stretching the meaning of fractal beyond the bounds of propriety?  

 

“Naïve” may not be the best word for what I am up to, here. 

 

Nick

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

 <http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/>
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 6:06 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Nick -

This is one of your (wonderfully, and I mean that seriously) naive
questions, and the naive answer is yes, they are surely coupled.   I'm very
interested in "soundscapes"  so am often very aware of both the complex
passive structure of most soundscapes (especially landscape vs urbanscape)
and the active (birdsongs, garbage trucks, wind in the willows, sirens,
ice-floes, domestic disturbances) elements.

You are likely to have a better idea than I do about whether bird's songs
are likely to be *formulated* in a more or less complex manner when in a
complex "landscape".   I would guess yes to this.I would guess that the
three most relevant scales are roughly the scale of the bird's body, it's
food-source, and it's natural predators.   How well can it hide, how well
can it's food hide, and how well does it's predator hide.   I"m sure this is
an overly simplified model.

I think rather than fractal (literally), the more relevant concept is "with
structure at many scales".   

IN any case, welcome to Alberto!  My own daughter happens to be a researcher
in Flaviviruses, traditionally West Nile and Dingue, but now is drawn into
the Zika thing...   I look forward to hearing more from you Alberto!

 - Steve

 

On 2/15/17 3:57 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

Hell, List, 

 

I would like to introduce to you Alberto Alaniz (who describes himself in
the communication below).  I “met” him on Research Gate when he downloaded a
paper of mine on the structural organization of bird song.  I noticed that
he was writing from a Landscape Department, and I thought, “A landscape
person who is interested in birdsong! He must be interested in fractals!”
And I was right.  So please welcome him.  Steve please note? 

 

The idea of his that I particularly want to hear you discuss is his notion
that fractality (is that a word?) in one domain can effect, affect, impose?
fractality in another.  So is there a relationship between the fractality
which my research revealed in the organization of bird song and the
fractality of the landscapes on which bird behavior is deployed.  

 

I particularly wonder what Kim  Sorvig and Jenny Quillen and ProfDave think
about this, but also wonder if others on the list could put an oar in. 

 

Thanks, 

 

Nick 

 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

 <http://home.earthlink.net/%7Enickthompson/naturaldesigns/>
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Alberto Jose Alaniz [mailto:alberto.ala...@ug.uchile.cl] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:21 PM
To: nthomp...@clarku.edu <mailto:nthomp...@clarku.edu> 
Subject: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Dear Nick

 

I apreciate so much your invitation, so i really intrested in participate of
your discussion group. I am a young researcher finishing my MS, and this
types of oportunities look very good for my, specially if i can interact
with other scientics. About your question, of course you can share my
oppinion, now if you want i can writte a compleate opinion in extenso, and i
will send to you tomorrow in the afternon.

 

My field of study is the ecologial modelling and the conservation biology,
the last year i published my firsts papers in Biological conservation and
International Journal of Epidemiology, the first one about ecosystem
conservation and the secondth is a global model of exposure risk to Zika
virus. Currently im working in ecosystems and in assessment of habitat loss
in forest specialist species (with Kathryn Sieving from University of
Florida).

 

Alberto  Alaniz Baeza

Lic. en Geografía, Geógrafo & Magíster (c) Áreas Silvestres y Conservación

Becario, Laboratorio de Ecología de Ambientes Fragmentados

Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas Animales, U. de Chile

Investigador, Laboratorio de Ecología de Ecosistemas

Departamento de Recursos Naturales Renovables, U. de Chile

Académico, Centro de Formación Técnica del Medio A

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

Nick or Glen,

 

I have been mulling over the thread about Representation versus Dynamicism  for 
a bit and the differences

that language imposes whenever cross-disciplines attempt to converse. Today I 
was struggling with some code

to create Voronoi Meshes nested within each other based on nested spheres. All 
look well enough until I introduced a 

primitive solid, a Cube and tried to make everything spin in space. 

 

I needed to decide which entity or sets were coupled to which… So thinking of 
FEM procedures I decided to make 

the Voronoi Sets occupy the Global Coordinate Position and attach the Cube as a 
Local Coordinate   System. This is

rather arbitrary and can go either way. The problem appears somewhat akin to 
our thread, but I am aware that these distinctions 

are contained within the same Simulation and neither reflects a reality except 
by coincidence. To cope with multiple coordinate systems one requires 

a pertinent transformation matrix but if one is reckless the results are 
meaningless. The appearance of coupled systems may be illusionary and mistaken

as causative.

 

I thought today there was also a mention in Science Daily of fractals in 
Rorsach tests the more fractals, the more imaginative the observer’s answer.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170214162838.htm

 

It will take a few days but will try and make a video out of the apparent 
incongruity of these objects. The Cube is lacking any distinctive edge 
embellishments and

troubles the mind as unreal somehow.

Language always hampers exchange of ideas.

vib

 

 

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Nick Thompson
Sent: February-15-17 4:58 PM
To: Friam; 'Kim Sorvig'
Cc: alberto.ala...@ug.uchile.cl; friam-ow...@redfish.com; David West
Subject: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Hell, List, 

 

I would like to introduce to you Alberto Alaniz (who describes himself in the 
communication below).  I “met” him on Research Gate when he downloaded a paper 
of mine on the structural organization of bird song.  I noticed that he was 
writing from a Landscape Department, and I thought, “A landscape person who is 
interested in birdsong! He must be interested in fractals!”  And I was right.  
So please welcome him.  Steve please note? 

 

The idea of his that I particularly want to hear you discuss is his notion that 
fractality (is that a word?) in one domain can effect, affect, impose? 
fractality in another.  So is there a relationship between the fractality which 
my research revealed in the organization of bird song and the fractality of the 
landscapes on which bird behavior is deployed.  

 

I particularly wonder what Kim  Sorvig and Jenny Quillen and ProfDave think 
about this, but also wonder if others on the list could put an oar in. 

 

Thanks, 

 

Nick 

 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

  
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Alberto Jose Alaniz [mailto:alberto.ala...@ug.uchile.cl] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:21 PM
To: nthomp...@clarku.edu
Subject: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

 

Dear Nick

 

I apreciate so much your invitation, so i really intrested in participate of 
your discussion group. I am a young researcher finishing my MS, and this types 
of oportunities look very good for my, specially if i can interact with other 
scientics. About your question, of course you can share my oppinion, now if you 
want i can writte a compleate opinion in extenso, and i will send to you 
tomorrow in the afternon.

 

My field of study is the ecologial modelling and the conservation biology, the 
last year i published my firsts papers in Biological conservation and 
International Journal of Epidemiology, the first one about ecosystem 
conservation and the secondth is a global model of exposure risk to Zika virus. 
Currently im working in ecosystems and in assessment of habitat loss in forest 
specialist species (with Kathryn Sieving from University of Florida).

 

Alberto  Alaniz Baeza

Lic. en Geografía, Geógrafo & Magíster (c) Áreas Silvestres y Conservación

Becario, Laboratorio de Ecología de Ambientes Fragmentados

Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas Animales, U. de Chile

Investigador, Laboratorio de Ecología de Ecosistemas

Departamento de Recursos Naturales Renovables, U. de Chile

Académico, Centro de Formación Técnica del Medio Ambiente IDMA

+56996097443

https://albertoalaniz.wordpress.com/


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

[Steven A Smith]

Nick -

This is one of your (wonderfully, and I mean that seriously) naive 
questions, and the naive answer is yes, they are surely coupled.   I'm 
very interested in "soundscapes"  so am often very aware of both the 
complex passive structure of most soundscapes (especially landscape vs 
urbanscape) and the active (birdsongs, garbage trucks, wind in the 
willows, sirens, ice-floes, domestic disturbances) elements.


You are likely to have a better idea than I do about whether bird's 
songs are likely to be *formulated* in a more or less complex manner 
when in a complex "landscape".   I would guess yes to this.I would 
guess that the three most relevant scales are roughly the scale of the 
bird's body, it's food-source, and it's natural predators.   How well 
can it hide, how well can it's food hide, and how well does it's 
predator hide.   I"m sure this is an overly simplified model.


I think rather than fractal (literally), the more relevant concept is 
"with structure at many scales".


IN any case, welcome to Alberto!  My own daughter happens to be a 
researcher in Flaviviruses, traditionally West Nile and Dingue, but now 
is drawn into the Zika thing...   I look forward to hearing more from 
you Alberto!


 - Steve


On 2/15/17 3:57 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:


Hell, List,

I would like to introduce to you Alberto Alaniz (who describes himself 
in the communication below).  I “met” him on Research Gate when he 
downloaded a paper of mine on the structural organization of bird 
song.  I noticed that he was writing from a Landscape Department, and 
I thought, “A landscape person who is interested in birdsong! He must 
be interested in fractals!”  And I was right.  So please welcome him.  
Steve please note?


The idea of his that I particularly want to hear you discuss is his 
notion that fractality (is that a word?) in one domain can effect, 
affect, impose? fractality in another.  So is there a relationship 
between the fractality which my research revealed in the organization 
of bird song and the fractality of the landscapes on which bird 
behavior is deployed.


I particularly wonder what Kim  Sorvig and Jenny Quillen and ProfDave 
think about this, but also wonder if others on the list could put an 
oar in.


Thanks,

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ 



*From:*Alberto Jose Alaniz [mailto:alberto.ala...@ug.uchile.cl]
*Sent:* Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:21 PM
*To:* nthomp...@clarku.edu
*Subject:* Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs

Dear Nick

I apreciate so much your invitation, so i really intrested in 
participate of your discussion group. I am a young researcher 
finishing my MS, and this types of oportunities look very good for my, 
specially if i can interact with other scientics. About your question, 
of course you can share my oppinion, now if you want i can writte a 
compleate opinion in extenso, and i will send to you tomorrow in the 
afternon.


My field of study is the ecologial modelling and the conservation 
biology, the last year i published my firsts papers in Biological 
conservation and International Journal of Epidemiology, the first one 
about ecosystem conservation and the secondth is a global model of 
exposure risk to Zika virus. Currently im working in ecosystems and in 
assessment of habitat loss in forest specialist species (with Kathryn 
Sieving from University of Florida).


*Alberto  Alaniz Baeza*

Lic. en Geografía, Geógrafo & Magíster (c) Áreas Silvestres y Conservación

Becario, Laboratorio de Ecología de Ambientes Fragmentados

Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas Animales, U. de Chile

Investigador, Laboratorio de Ecología de Ecosistemas

Departamento de Recursos Naturales Renovables, U. de Chile

Académico, Centro de Formación Técnica del Medio Ambiente IDMA

+56996097443

https://albertoalaniz.wordpress.com/




FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove