From: Case (Case@iSpots.com)
Date: Sun Aug 28 2005 - 17:36:51 BST
[Ian wrote]
I'm fascinated by Mandelbrot and other chaotic generators & attractors and
have several applets on my own desktop to play with - the fascination only
ever ends with the limits on graphic processing resolution on the domestic
PC.)
[Case replies]
When I first ran across this I used a 486 and an early version of FractInit.
I would leave the computer at work running over night then photograph the
screen. My how times have changed. For an example of reiterative processes
generating almost lifelike behavior, check out the Game of Life:
http://www.ibiblio.org/lifepatterns/ Notice how the initially DQ layout
resolves itself into stasis. Again we have extraordinarily simple equations
producing highly complex results.
[Ian wrote]
I too believe formal Chaos (as opposed to Good Ol Fashioned Chaos) and
Complexity have something to say about reality, and as such fit with
"Quality".
[Case replies]
Hopefully formal Chaos is just a good way to describe and think about GOFC.
Reality without complexity wouldn't amount to much would it. For example, I
recall reading somewhere about the Daisy World. Where earth as a chaotic
system oscillates (DQ) between static states (SQ). One state is the one we
see now and the other is the ice ages where the planet is covered snow
white. It is then up to the daisies to grow in clumps of nonwhite absorbing
the reflected heat and warming the planet for other life forms to flourish
and repopulate. That is: life acting as a static latch to preserve itself.
Objectively it doesn't matter if any state prevails. Subjectively I prefer
warmth and diversity. MoQwise the current state certainly widens my vacation
opportunities.
[Ian wrote}
1 is Static order
2 is GOF Chaos - the disorder of infinite entropy
3 is the coherent sweet spot where DQ exists.
[Case relies]
Not to be terribly picky but:
3 is the coherent sweet spot where harmony exists between DQ and SQ. In
these pictures the really interesting parts appear so organic that fractal
mathematic are used in special effect software to generate landscapes for
movies and computer games. That is to mathematically model "reality" into
virtual space.
[David M wrote]
My view is that scientists impose a language on
nature. An experiment sets up a question that is directed towards
nature, the expt is controlled and set off and the 'results' are analysed.
We have in advance determined the language, posed the question and
defined the possible answers. Such are the epistemological problems
ditto post-modernism. But nevertheless the scientist listens to nature,
listens for the answer that is given, sees which choice nature prefers,
which box she ticks. Of course we can have no idea of any language
preferences nature might have. But to do science we have to ask
questions and interpret the signs our dumb goddess provides. This
is an odd thing that the men in white coats do not like to mention.
SOM is a bit embarassed about it.
[Case replies]
The language of science and nature is Mathematics. There is know known
reason why this should be so but it does appear to be the case. Check out:
"The World Within the World" by John Barrow for an exhaustive and exhausting
elucidation. Pure mathematicians through out history have been surprised and
dismayed over and over again when their arcane projections have turned out
to have practical application. (see above)
[Ian wrote]
Slartibartfastian - I like it.
[Case replies]
I figured it was a bit obtuse but since so many of the group seem to be from
the UK, I figured someone might get it.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 29 2005 - 02:13:07 BST