[Fis] The Constructal Law

[Joseph Brenner]

Dear Pedro,

I would be very interested, and I believe other FISers also, in your views 
of the seriousness of the constructal law as a fundamental law of nature, as 
claimed. I thought that for flow to occur it is sufficient to have some kind 
of energy gradient which must operate in a context of any other forces 
present. In the case of rain drops, these will include surface tension and 
so on.


I think a comparison is called for with Gerhard Luhn's Causal-Compositional 
Concept of Information which also talks about the emergence of new 'laws', 
or lawful behavior, in the universe. His approach is grounded in the 2nd Law 
of Thermodynamics, as is Bejan's, but the Pauli Exclusion Principle is 
suggested as the driver toward complex systems. Bejan's concepts seem to me 
more ad hoc, but I am curious to know how they strike others.


Best regards,

Joseph

- Original Message - 
From: "Pedro C. Marijuan" 

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 5:27 PM
Subject: [Fis] The Two Systems



Dear FIS colleages,

Thanks for the opinions received. Let us keep thinking about the issue. On 
the one side, the fis list was explicitly conceived to be a helping 
mechanism for "slow thinking" during the 90's. The Second Rule was 
incorporated quite a few years ago, to put an end to nasty bubbles and 
unceasing exchanges on trifling matters. It was not only a matter of too 
many messages, but also that very influential parties left the list due to 
those excesses (eg, Michael Arbib, Otto Rossler, Eduard Punset).
It is interesting that Daniel Kahneman speaks about two  thinking systems: 
System 1: Fast, automatic, frequent, emotional, stereotypic, subconscious. 
System 2: Slow, effortful, infrequent, logical, calculating, conscious...
Trying to implement the two thinking systems in the same list will 
inevitably conduce (given the medium) to the preponderance of the former. 
Mixed schemes will be confusing and will not work. Besides, increasing the 
number of weekly messages to 3 or 4 will imply that 50 % or 100 % more 
messages will be received. Not good at all.
Solution? Raquel and I are working (slowly, too slowly ) to migrate from 
current FIS web pages at the University of Zaragoza to Sciforum (courtesy 
from Shu-Kun Lin). It is also possible that we recuperate ALL exchanges 
during last 17 years--lost during the ignominious server crash a few 
months ago, it would become just anecdote. At Sciforum we will be able to 
incorporate complementary spaces where fast and furious exchanges might be 
maintained (for those frequent-post addicts), perhaps useful to accompany 
the main, quiet discussion---or maybe the viceversa, the slow thinking 
serving as a complement!


Well, at the time being, let us continue abiding by the Second Rule, and 
let us wait for the changes...  we should also prepare for the Vienna 
encounter. By the way, a very interesting meeting refers to Adrian Bejan's 
work on the "energy flow" that I mentioned days ago: the 9th Constructal 
Law conference will be held in Parma on 18-19 May 2015, see:


http://www.clc2015.eu/

best regards to all---Pedro


Stanley N Salthe wrote:

I agree with Jerry

STAN

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 2:00 PM, pedro marijuan > wrote:



BlackBerry de movistar, allí donde estés está tu oficin@

-Original Message-
From: Jerry LR Chandler mailto:jerry_lr_chand...@me.com>>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 10:37:32
To: Pedro C. Marijuanmailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>>
Subject: FIS, Weekly posting frequency.

Pedro:

Just a small suggestion about the rules for posting to the FIS
list serve.

Personally, I find the current constraint of two posts per week is
so restrictive that it makes a conversation very difficult.  It
necessitates long delays, during which time, one looses interest
in the topic.  (We are flooded by a plethora of new ideas!)

I feel that the value of the list would be enhanced by permitting
three or even four posts per week.

I would suggest that you consult with other members about this issue.

You may post this message to the list serve if you wish.

Cheers

Jerry


On Nov 3, 2014, at 5:09 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote:

> Dear Marcin and colleagues,
>
> Many thanks for the sympathy and for the suggestion. I think
your proposal is quite in the spirit of the fis initiative.
Maintaining the academic code of conduct should be the First Rule
of the list. The Second Rule, as is well known, says that only two
messages per week are allowed. And the Third Rule, should be about
clean posting. I mean, in order to placate the susceptibility of
the server filters the messages should be addressed only to fis,
exclusively, (a few other addresses might appear in the "cc", but
the lesser the better), and not dragging old messages at the
bottom is strongly recommended... Additionally, we have a fis
steering committe

[Fis] The Two Systems

[Pedro C. Marijuan]

Dear FIS colleages,

Thanks for the opinions received. Let us keep thinking about the issue. 
On the one side, the fis list was explicitly conceived to be a helping 
mechanism for "slow thinking" during the 90's. The Second Rule was 
incorporated quite a few years ago, to put an end to nasty bubbles and 
unceasing exchanges on trifling matters. It was not only a matter of too 
many messages, but also that very influential parties left the list due 
to those excesses (eg, Michael Arbib, Otto Rossler, Eduard Punset).
It is interesting that Daniel Kahneman speaks about two  thinking 
systems: System 1: Fast, automatic, frequent, emotional, stereotypic, 
subconscious. System 2: Slow, effortful, infrequent, logical, 
calculating, conscious...
Trying to implement the two thinking systems in the same list will 
inevitably conduce (given the medium) to the preponderance of the 
former. Mixed schemes will be confusing and will not work. Besides, 
increasing the number of weekly messages to 3 or 4 will imply that 50 % 
or 100 % more messages will be received. Not good at all.
Solution? Raquel and I are working (slowly, too slowly ) to migrate from 
current FIS web pages at the University of Zaragoza to Sciforum 
(courtesy from Shu-Kun Lin). It is also possible that we recuperate ALL 
exchanges during last 17 years--lost during the ignominious server crash 
a few months ago, it would become just anecdote. At Sciforum we will be 
able to incorporate complementary spaces where fast and furious 
exchanges might be maintained (for those frequent-post addicts), perhaps 
useful to accompany the main, quiet discussion---or maybe the viceversa, 
the slow thinking serving as a complement!


Well, at the time being, let us continue abiding by the Second Rule, and 
let us wait for the changes...  we should also prepare for the Vienna 
encounter. By the way, a very interesting meeting refers to Adrian 
Bejan's work on the "energy flow" that I mentioned days ago: the 9th 
Constructal Law conference will be held in Parma on 18-19 May 2015, see:


http://www.clc2015.eu/

best regards to all---Pedro


Stanley N Salthe wrote:

I agree with Jerry

STAN

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 2:00 PM, pedro marijuan 
mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>> wrote:



BlackBerry de movistar, allí donde estés está tu oficin@

-Original Message-
From: Jerry LR Chandler mailto:jerry_lr_chand...@me.com>>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 10:37:32
To: Pedro C. Marijuanmailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>>
Subject: FIS, Weekly posting frequency.

Pedro:

Just a small suggestion about the rules for posting to the FIS
list serve.

Personally, I find the current constraint of two posts per week is
so restrictive that it makes a conversation very difficult.  It
necessitates long delays, during which time, one looses interest
in the topic.  (We are flooded by a plethora of new ideas!)

I feel that the value of the list would be enhanced by permitting
three or even four posts per week.

I would suggest that you consult with other members about this issue.

You may post this message to the list serve if you wish.

Cheers

Jerry


On Nov 3, 2014, at 5:09 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote:

> Dear Marcin and colleagues,
>
> Many thanks for the sympathy and for the suggestion. I think
your proposal is quite in the spirit of the fis initiative.
Maintaining the academic code of conduct should be the First Rule
of the list. The Second Rule, as is well known, says that only two
messages per week are allowed. And the Third Rule, should be about
clean posting. I mean, in order to placate the susceptibility of
the server filters the messages should be addressed only to fis,
exclusively, (a few other addresses might appear in the "cc", but
the lesser the better), and not dragging old messages at the
bottom is strongly recommended... Additionally, we have a fis
steering committee (integrated by Yixin, Krassimir, Shu-Kun, and
myself) that can arbitrate in contentious cases where the First
Rule should apply.
>
> Let us forget the present incident; always clarifying that FIS
list is completely open to criticisms, first on fis itself, and
also addressed to any other school or doctrine, either
contemporary or from the past... knowing the opinion of
"contrarians" is as much important as knowing the opinions of the
followers. INFORMATION HAS ENORMOUSLY CHANGED OUR
SCIENTIFIC-ECONOMIC-CULTURAL-SOCIAL WORLD AND WE NEED RADICALLY
DIFFERENT IDEAS. By the way, there is an important work on "social
physics" (but arguing from the information flow point of view) by
Alex Pentland that in my opinion establishes the very foundations
of "SOCIAL INFORMATION SCIENCE"--it is a pity, and possibly  an
error (?), that this author has placed his exciting research under
the banner of physics.
>
> best wishes ---Pedro