I abolutely agree. Also, I think it's a plus that the people on this list have a diverse background. After all, complexity science is interdisciplinarity par excellence. So, whatever results from this collaboration could very well be a good foundation for further work.
Regards, Günther Jochen Fromm wrote: > Certainly. The topic complex systems is wide. > Yet if we focus on what "the sciences of complexity" > have achieved and accomplished in the last 20 years - > the SFI exists for more than 20 years, see for example > http://www.santafe.edu/research/publications/bulletin/fall2004v19n2.pdf > the list becomes much smaller, the topic becomes > easier to handle and it is easier to come to an > agreement. > > To collect the ideas in a MediaWiki is a good idea. > Maybe it would be recommendable to start with a coarse > table of contents (I. "What has complexity science > achieved so far?", II. "What is the state of the art and > the cutting edge of research?", and III. "What major > challenges and unsolved problems lie ahead?"). > > -J. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: magd maged > Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 8:19 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 55 > > I think the topic of complex systems is too wide to be > included in one book unless it mentions the subtopics > briefly. Moreover the wide background of peole > interested in complex systems will make it extremely > difficult to agree on one book. > > > > > > ============================================================ > 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 > > ============================================================ 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
