All,

Re: cause before effect:  One night, just before midnight, I got three
email messages from a friend in NZ which my mailer dutifully carried at the
head of my list (most recent) for 24 hours.  

Re: evolutionary economics:  Has anyboyd read "Second Nature" by Haim Ofek.
Not evolutionary economics in the sense that Russell was speaking, no
doubt, but a heluva ride.  I wish somebody else would read it and tell me
what they think.  

Nick 

Nicholas Thompson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson


> [Original Message]
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Date: 7/27/2006 7:38:30 AM
> Subject: Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 51
>
> Send Friam mailing list submissions to
>       [email protected]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>       http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Friam digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 47 (Nicholas Thompson)
>    2. Re: Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 47 (Russell Standish)
>    3. Re: Is it economics or biology (Russell Standish)
>    4. Causality violations (Jochen Fromm)
>    5. We meet at 7 pm (Mike Oliker)
>    6. Re: Causality violations (Bill Eldridge)
>    7. Re: Causality violations (Jochen Fromm)
>    8. Re: Causality violations (Russell Standish)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 00:45:06 -0400
> From: "Nicholas Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 47
> To: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,   "The Friday Morning
>       Applied Complexity Coffee Group" <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> Russell, 
>
> One of the first things I intend to do when I have retired in January is
> read book with titles like yours, but until then, you will need to wave
> excerpts at me or something.  
>
> Do you know anything about the New Realism of the 1910's at Harvard.  A
> group of james students wrote a New Realist Manifesto which seems to have
> been based on the Scottish Realism.  Those students included Edward Holt,
> who spawned jj and ej gibson (of ecological psych fame) and E. C. Tolman,
> the inventor of cognitive behaviorism, and ultimately a traitor to the
> cause in my opinion. 
>
> The basic idea is that reality can be cut in various ways and different
> observers SEE different cuts.  All cuts are REAL properties of the object
> but also manifestations of the point of view of the observor.  To use
terms
> I am not real comfortable with, properties of things as seen by people are
> both "out there"  AND "in the head" of the observer. 
>
> Nick  
>
>
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Russell Standish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity
> Coffee Group <[email protected]>
> > Date: 7/27/2006 12:16:09 AM
> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 47
> >
> > Sort of like I say in my paper "The Importance of the Observer in
> > Science" you mean? Or in my book "Theory of Nothing".
> >
> > (Assuming I have correctly grokked your word "intensional").
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 10:40:24AM -0400, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
> > > Robert Holmes writes, 
> > > 
> > > "So if entropy is emergent and gravity is emergent and any other force
> > > mediated by a subatomic particle is emergent, just how useful is it to
> label
> > > something 'emergent' in this way? If the definition of emergence is so
> > > broad, how can we usefully use it?"
> > > 
> > > SOOOOOOOOOO, this seems to suggest that emergence is one of those
> > > properties which are not brick wallk properties of the world except in
> so
> > > far as they are seen from a particular point of view.  I.E,
intensional
> > > properties.  (sorry everybody).  .  But now, like Robert, I am
> beginning to
> > > wonder if all properties arent intensional.  I mean that was sort of
> > > Einstein's point, wasnt it?  I hate it when words I love and concepts
I
> > > live by suddenly crumble in my hands. 
> > > 
> > > Rushing, 
> > > 
> > > Nick 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Nicholas Thompson
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson
> > > 
> >
> > -- 
> > *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
> > is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
> > virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
> > email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
> > may safely ignore this attachment.
> >
> >
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
> > Mathematics                                        0425 253119 (")
> > UNSW SYDNEY 2052                     [EMAIL PROTECTED]             
> > Australia                               
> http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
> >             International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
> >
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 05:02:33 +1000
> From: Russell Standish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 47
> To: Nicholas Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>       <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 12:45:06AM -0400, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
> > Russell, 
> > 
> > One of the first things I intend to do when I have retired in January is
> > read book with titles like yours, but until then, you will need to wave
> > excerpts at me or something.  
>
> That's why the paper might be up your alley. Also Chapter 1 of my book
> is also available at
> http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks/ToN-chapter1.pdf and is a precis
> of the main argument in the book.
>
> > 
> > Do you know anything about the New Realism of the 1910's at Harvard.  A
> > group of james students wrote a New Realist Manifesto which seems to
have
> > been based on the Scottish Realism.  Those students included Edward
Holt,
> > who spawned jj and ej gibson (of ecological psych fame) and E. C.
Tolman,
> > the inventor of cognitive behaviorism, and ultimately a traitor to the
> > cause in my opinion. 
> > 
> > The basic idea is that reality can be cut in various ways and different
> > observers SEE different cuts.  All cuts are REAL properties of the
object
> > but also manifestations of the point of view of the observor.  To use
terms
> > I am not real comfortable with, properties of things as seen by people
are
> > both "out there"  AND "in the head" of the observer. 
>
> No, I hadn't heard of them, but the basic reasoning you mention sounds
> familiar. 
>
> Cheers
>
> -- 
> *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
> is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
> virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
> email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
> may safely ignore this attachment.
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
> Mathematics                                  0425 253119 (")
> UNSW SYDNEY 2052                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]             
> Australia                               
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
>             International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 189 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url :
/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060727/d03570fb/attachment-0001.b
in 
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 05:28:26 +1000
> From: Russell Standish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Is it economics or biology
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>       <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Like anything in the mainstream press, tantalisingly short on
> detail. I argued back in 1996 that Economics needs to take on an
> evolutionary outlook in a paper that was ultimately published in
> 2000. Indeed, I used the same Mashallian quote mentioned in  the article:
>
> Standish, R.K. (2000) ``The Role of Innovation within Economics'', in
> Commerce, Complexity and Evolution, Barnett, W. et al (eds) (Cambridge
> University Press, New York), pp61-79. arXiv:nlin.AO/0007005
>
> The reason why evolutionary economics has not taken off that much is
> that not enough bright minds are focussed on the problem, and
> economics is not the same as biology - excessive use of analogy
> actually clouds understanding.
>
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 06:40:29PM -0600, Tom Johnson wrote:
> > Of interest to the list, I hope.
> > >From the current issue of The Economist:
> > The Cambrian age of
> >
economics<http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7189617
>
> > Evolutionary economics is surviving, but not thriving
> > 
> > http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7189617
> > 
> > -- tj
> > 
> > ==========================================
> > J. T. Johnson
> > Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> > www.analyticjournalism.com
> > 505.577.6482(c)                                 505.473.9646(h)
> > http://www.jtjohnson.com               [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > "You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
> > To change something, build a new model that makes the
> > existing model obsolete."
> >                                                   -- Buckminster Fuller
> > ==========================================
>
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
>
> -- 
> *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
> is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
> virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
> email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
> may safely ignore this attachment.
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
> Mathematics                                  0425 253119 (")
> UNSW SYDNEY 2052                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]             
> Australia                               
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
>             International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 10:37:01 +0200
> From: "Jochen Fromm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [FRIAM] Causality violations
> To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'"
>       <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain;     charset="us-ascii"
>
>
> That's strange, in my Mozilla Thunderbird (IMAP) e-Mail client 
> I can see the response from Russel before the original mail from
> Nick about "Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 47". Microsoft's Outlook 
> displays it in the correct order:
>
> Dates in Outlook
> Russel's Mail Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 9:09
> Nick's Mail Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 6:46
>
> Dates in Thunderbird
> Nick's Mail Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 6:45
> Russel's Mail Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 21:02
>
> Perhaps it has something to do with the time shift between
> USA and Australia. However, the message ordering in Thunderbird 
> shows clearly a violation of causality: the effect is visible 
> before the cause. Causality violations are one reason that makes 
> distributed and complex systems so hard to understand, see
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAS-Group/message/1149 
>
> -J.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 03:25:34 -0600
> From: "Mike Oliker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [FRIAM] We meet at 7 pm
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,      "ACG/Friam ABQ listserv"
>       <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> complexity group / chaos club 
>  
> meeting time: 7 pm Thursday July 27
> meeting place: Mike Oliker's (directions below)
> meeting topic: the article "Antichaos and Adaptation" by Stuart Kauffman.
> The article is 
>                          available online at
> www.covchap.com/articles/antichaos.htm
>  
> DIRECTIONS TO MIKE OLIKER'S HOUSE
> 8700 Canyon Run Rd. NE, ABQ, NM 87111
> (505) 821-3407
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ComplexityABQ/post?postID=Eh2Oqly5y1Z8x3inOsN
> lqVIUuRDhqb0SWkjD5ORx1Ij4QirlIwdAaD-Z-o7wLXud1R2GzXbAU1EaHo0Wk4n1_N0> 
> I-25 to San Mateo going East.
> Left onto Academy, also going East.
> Go past Wyoming and Wal-Mart's and turn just after St. Joseph Health Stop
> onto Moon.
> Take Moon one block south to Canyon Run.  I'm at #8700 2.5 blocks up on
the
> right, with a black mailbox
>  
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060727/8d3344f8/attachment-0001.h
tml 
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 12:00:52 +0200
> From: Bill Eldridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Causality violations
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>       <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
> I think it's simply that Russel has his computer date wrong (one day
early),
> and while Outlook uses the local arrival time, Thunderbird uses the remote
> sender's time.
>
> Of course it's pretty absurd that in 2006 we still don't have computers on
> networks naturally synchronized time-wise by default. At a minimum to
within
> a second or two.
>
> Jochen Fromm wrote:
> > That's strange, in my Mozilla Thunderbird (IMAP) e-Mail client 
> > I can see the response from Russel before the original mail from
> > Nick about "Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 47". Microsoft's Outlook 
> > displays it in the correct order:
> >
> > Dates in Outlook
> > Russel's Mail Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 9:09
> > Nick's Mail Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 6:46
> >
> > Dates in Thunderbird
> > Nick's Mail Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 6:45
> > Russel's Mail Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 21:02
> >
> > Perhaps it has something to do with the time shift between
> > USA and Australia. However, the message ordering in Thunderbird 
> > shows clearly a violation of causality: the effect is visible 
> > before the cause. Causality violations are one reason that makes 
> > distributed and complex systems so hard to understand, see
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAS-Group/message/1149 
> >
> > -J.
> >
> >
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
> >
> >
> >   
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:11:17 +0200
> From: "Jochen Fromm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Causality violations
> To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'"
>       <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain;     charset="us-ascii"
>
>
> Yes, you are right. If I sort after the remote sender's time, Outlook
> shows the wrong message order, too.
>
> -J.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
> Of Bill Eldridge
> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 12:01 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Causality violations
>
> I think it's simply that Russel has his computer date wrong (one day
early),
> and while Outlook uses the local arrival time, Thunderbird uses the remote
> sender's time.
>
> Of course it's pretty absurd that in 2006 we still don't have computers on
> networks naturally synchronized time-wise by default. At a minimum to
within
> a second or two.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 21:38:06 +1000
> From: Russell Standish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Causality violations
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>       <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I do autosyncronise my computers clock with NTP. Where it all goes
> pear shaped is that I send mail from Linux running on VMWare running
> on top of Windows. Everytime windows hibernates, VMWare's clock gets
> screwed up.
>
> I have a menu item that connects to NTP and syncronise's Linux's
> clock, but that requires me to remember to run it, and it doesn't
> always work - even when I am online...
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 01:11:17PM +0200, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> > 
> > Yes, you are right. If I sort after the remote sender's time, Outlook
> > shows the wrong message order, too.
> > 
> > -J.
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
> > Of Bill Eldridge
> > Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 12:01 PM
> > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Causality violations
> > 
> > I think it's simply that Russel has his computer date wrong (one day
early),
> > and while Outlook uses the local arrival time, Thunderbird uses the
remote
> > sender's time.
> > 
> > Of course it's pretty absurd that in 2006 we still don't have computers
on
> > networks naturally synchronized time-wise by default. At a minimum to
within
> > a second or two.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
>
> -- 
> *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
> is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
> virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
> email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
> may safely ignore this attachment.
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
> Mathematics                                  0425 253119 (")
> UNSW SYDNEY 2052                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]             
> Australia                               
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
>             International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Friam mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>
>
> End of Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 51
> *************************************



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to