Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Nick - I'm not sure I've observed a "fingers in the ears shouting" here, but I do understand the point I think. I always read FriAM discussions as if the goal is exactly what you stated... to find a common language/model/metaphor to use to discuss. As Glen aptly put it, these threads often

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

The Hearsay system might serve. It was a speech understanding system developed at CMU in the 1970s. It could take sound and, if it were connected human speech, produce a written version. Raj Reddy constantly used the phrase "signal to symbol" to describe what we were working on in general. The

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Dear Vib, So, perhaps the question we should all be asking ourselves is “How far do we engage in a conversation in which we don’t really understand one another? And, when we find ourselves engaged in such a conversation what do we do? One option, of course, is for each us to put his

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Frank, These are exactly the sorts of considerations we have to bring to bear when we “cash out” a scientific metaphor. What DIFFERENCE does it make when we call something a layer. What EXACTLY is the experience that we are bringing to bear? How was Friday’s meeting of the M. C.

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

I agree with Steve that lamina is biased with the assumption of continuous flow. Discrete aggreagation like coral deposition or FACS based cell by cell deposition would not be evoked by the term lamina. As an aside, although (serial) diffusion limited aggregation is often used to model coral

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

and mollusk shell formation. Though they don't really interact, they are deposited kinda like spray paint. Coral deposition might also work well as a canonical example. On June 9, 2017 9:20:37 PM PDT, Frank Wimberly wrote: >"strata in geology have *some* precedent

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Frank and the Congregation, Shame on me for neglecting the obvious biological intermingling but stress redistribution is so mechanical and direction sensitive it never dawned on me. But what I did is more like weaving using nodes as intersection points without breaking the filaments.

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

"strata in geology have *some* precedent (shears and folds) for that, but I can't think of a biological example" Epidermis, dermis, hypodermis? They interact. Frank Wimberly Phone (505) 670-9918 On Jun 9, 2017 10:12 PM, "Steven A Smith" wrote: > Vlad - > > I find your

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Vlad - I find your use/choice/settling-upon "lamina/laminae" seems very motivated, though I can't articulate why. I suppose because it has some connotation related to concepts like "laminar flow" which is structurally similar to the vulgar (your implication not mine) "layer" which connotes

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Nicholas, I hear your plea and would come to your defense if we were closer. I have a small story that explains my attitude to layer from anAdvanced Composite Engineering view point. It took me probably 3 years to eradicate the word in my laboratory We were using various materials and

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Sorry. Slip of the "pen". Layers it is. 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 glen ? Sent:

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Ha! I don't know if this is fun or not. But you are making me giggle. So that's good. 8^) On 06/09/2017 11:54 AM, Nick Thompson wrote: > But wait a minute! Holding a side the mathematical meaning of model for a > minute, what is the difference between a model and a metaphor? I recently

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Glen, But wait a minute! Holding a side the mathematical meaning of model for a minute, what is the difference between a model and a metaphor? I assume you take your models seriously, right? I don't know what it means, "Just an analogy". Either your layers are onion-like or not, right?

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

On 06/09/2017 09:41 AM, Nick Thompson wrote: > It seems like onions develop from the inside out, right? Heh, I don't know. Nor do I care because my analogy is not intended to be anything more than an analogy. >8^D >The outside layer is just the first inside layer grown large. I think if one

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Hi, glen, Great! I am learning stuff. I am happy to learn more about onions. In fact, now wish I knew more. It seems like onions develop from the inside out, right? The outside layer is just the first inside layer grown large. I think if one examines the whole onion plant, one finds

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Because, as Steve rightly pointed out with that Joslyn paper, the point is the extent to which the system submits to ordering. A strict hierarchy (levels, like I think EricS drew) submits to a total order, whereas a brranching hierarchy (still levels) submits to a partial order. Graphs work,

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Heh, you're so rife with premature registration! You _leap_ to thinking about the strength of the onion analogy without seeming to listen to what I'm saying at all. 8^) That's OK. I'm used to it. But to be clear, my point was about _direction_, not the extent to which layers are coupled.

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Glen writes: "But at least you can vary the direction without changing layers. More complicated layering would be something like doping a silicon chip or spray painting a complicated surface ... or perhaps sand blasting something, where you turn it within the directional gradient." Why does

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Hi, Glen, Missed this the first time. Late, here, so I will just say a little. According to the scientific metaphor game I understand, we would now start to cash out the onion metaphor. Does the relation between the layers in an onion REALLY capture what you are after. I would guess not,

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Glen - I admit to being over my depth, at least in attention, if not in ability to parse out your dense text, and more to the point, the entire thread(s) which gives me more sympathy with Nick who would like a tool to help organize, neaten up, trim, etc. these very complex ( in the more

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

You seem to be asking for people other than me to respond. But I doubt anyone will try to explain a troll like me. >8^) I don't have any idea what you mean by "a kind of hen". So, I'll let that go. Stratum is a good word, but like level, it implies a direction, namely up-down ("something

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Ha! I was going to respond to the playground bullying tactic of double dog dares with a request for some clinical trial data. But, to be honest, I'm biased toward Thomas Szasz' perspective and would probably never read Kohut's book, anyway. 8^) On 06/08/2017 06:18 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote: >

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Clarification: the book is 45 years old and is available online as a PDF file. It's hard to read without a lot of background in the field. Psychiatric residents who used to read it often felt they had the disorder even if they didn't. I apologize for the snarky suggestion that you read it.

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Russ, Thanks for continuing to press on this. Before Roger C., went to Sea in Boston Harbor, he gave me a wonderful History of Chemistry, which I valiantly read from cover to cover. Of course, I understood very little of it, but I brought it with me to the Mosquito Infested Swamp,

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Glen, If you want to see how NPD is amenable to type 2 treatment see "Analysis of the Self" by Kohut. I dare you. Frank Frank Wimberly Phone (505) 670-9918 On Jun 7, 2017 9:51 PM, "Nick Thompson" wrote: > Dear All, > > > > Here is Glen's thoughtful post of

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Dear All, Here is Glen's thoughtful post of January 20, reborn. To be honest, I don’t understand it. Not a bit. I am hoping that perhaps one or more of the rest of you can help me get it. Let’s start with one baby step. What is meant by LAYER in this text? The possible meanings open to

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Seems backwards to me. Another example is atomic weight as characterizing elements. (I'm afraid I don't remember the details of the story.) Before we understood isotopes scientists were confused that different samples of what seemed like the same element had different weights. If an element type

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Russ, You have a knack for lining things up for me: i.e., putting them in ways that maximize my ability to make the distinctions I want to make. You wrote: Nick, it's my understanding that "species" is not well defined in biology. Yet we tend to use the term and don't get ourselves in

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Notwithstanding the trolls, lurking trolls, and meta-trolls, let me address the issue. My sense is that the term "complex system" was used to refer to systems that seemed to have properties that were not common in other (physics-based) systems. I don't think the term was ever intended to

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

I guess there’s stuff to pick apart there, but a troll would make me feel compelled to do so from a place of poor footing. How is Russ’ post an instance of that?Or is this a meta troll? From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2017

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

+1 Having been called a "troll" for most of my adult life, I'd love to hear why Owen lobs the insult. On 06/07/2017 01:54 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: > Owen, > > > > I don’t understand this comment. Who’s a troll? Are you trolling, here? Is > this irony? I don’t follow. > > [...] >

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Owen, I don’t understand this comment. Who’s a troll? Are you trolling, here? Is this irony? I don’t follow. Nick Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Russ Rote, When you say "This is a great test," I'm not sure what the "this" is. Would you mind saying what it is again. I meant that your definition of complexity, with it’s clear appeal to explanatory concepts, the same concepts that one might appeal to to EXPLAIN complexity, is a

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Troll On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Russ Abbott wrote: > Nick, > > When you say "This is a great test," I'm not sure what the "this" is. > Would you mind saying what it is again. > > In partial answer to your question about what's left to explain, let me > quote a list

Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Nick, When you say "This is a great test," I'm not sure what the "this" is. Would you mind saying what it is again. In partial answer to your question about what's left to explain, let me quote a list of bullet points I recently wrote when writing about urban systems. - Urban systems are

[FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Hi, Russ, Something Glen said suggests to me that my concerns about circularity are detracking this thread from its Higher Purpose. I have therefore started a new thread. Thanks for providing this definition. It really helps to mark my concern. I would argue that what you are