Replying to Pedro, who said:
>Those hierarchical schemes that with a few categories cover realms and
>realms of knowledge have an undeniable allure --but are they useful?
S: This depends upon the meaning of "useful". As my work is in
Natural Philosophy, they are useful there in the sense of
Dear colleagues,
Maybe I should postpone these comments and have a careful reading of Bob's
paper, John's list of bionfo articles, and the many well-crafted arguments
exchanged these days---but as usual one is overwhelmed...
On the discussion track about complexity info limits (followed by Jo
Replying to LOET, who said:
>Dear colleagues,I agree with most of what is said, but it does not
>apply to social systems because these -- and to a lesser extent also
>psychological ones -- operate differently from the hierarchical
>formations that are generated "naturally". That is why
What is more, even atoms and molecules directly participate in inductive
processes. When two hydrogen atoms form a hydrogen molecule in an empirical
arena, no computation for getting a hydrogen molecule can stop insofar as
one sticks to the axiomatic formalism preserving the hydrogen atom
From: "Koichiro Matsuno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Folks,
John Collier's distinction between "restrict and enable" in the form of
constraints reminds me once again of the remarks on boundary conditions
made by Michael Polanyi back in the sixties. This time, it came through
Goedel's incompl
Dear colleagues,
On the complexity limits of human societies, my impression is that in the
social application of our brain capabilities (evolved to confront a very
big "natural group" --it is interesting to check psychologist Robin Dunbar,
or neurobiologist Robert Allman, on how brain size esc
5 pp.; US$ 18.95
The Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society; The Challenge
of Scientometrics
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:fis-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Collier
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 5:18 PM
To: Jerry LR Chandler; fis@listas.unizar.es
Subject: Re: [Fis] Re: f
ometrics
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Collier
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 5:18 PM
To: Jerry LR Chandler; fis@listas.unizar.es
Subject: Re: [Fis] Re: fis Digest, Vol 501, Issue 5
Hi folks,
I'll take a few minutes from my moving and d
This is my reply to Jerry (acknowledging that John's reply to Jerry below
says it as well as -- probably better than -- I can), who said:
>Stan's comment deserves to be attended to.
>
>> "The many complexities facing us as society can be parsed as follows,
>>using a
>> specification hierarcy:
>>
Hi folks,
I'll take a few minutes from my moving and dealing with academic
emergencies at UKZN to make a comment here.
Jerry brings up a point that keeps arising in the literature one
constraints and information. Recall that Shannon said that they are the
same thing. That is a clue.
Loet and I de
To: Igor / Ted / Stan
First, Igor.
I found your perspective here to be 180 degrees off from mine!
On Feb 5, 2007, at 6:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reply to Steven and Ted
By "genetic constraints" I assume you simply mean that we have
certain capacities and are not omnipotent. Is not c
11 matches
Mail list logo
