While we're waiting for Nick, I'll go ahead and share one of my favorite examples of forced induction:
http://www.coolthings.com/hot-rod-hauler/ --Doug On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Douglas Roberts <d...@parrot-farm.net>wrote: > BTW, I'm especially partial to* forced induction*, so I'm hoping you pick > that one, Nick. > > --Doug > > > On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Douglas Roberts <d...@parrot-farm.net>wrote: > >> I'll be happy, perhaps even thrilled to share my thoughts on induction, >> Nick. First, however, we need to narrow the question down to be a bit more >> specific. The word *induction* has many applications and connotations. >> Here are a few: >> >> In *biology and chemistry*: >> >> - Inductive effect <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_effect> is >> the redistribution of electron density through molecular sigma bonds >> - >> - Induction period <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_period> - >> the time interval between the initial cause and the appearance of the >> first >> measurable effect >> - >> - Regulation of gene >> expression<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_gene_expression>, >> a process in which a molecule (e.g. a drug) induces (i.e. initiates or >> enhances) or inhibits the expression of an enzyme >> - >> - Induction (birth) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_(birth)>, >> induction of childbirth >> - >> - Asymmetric induction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_induction> >> is >> the formation of one specific stereoisomer in the presence of a nearby >> chiral center >> - >> - Inductive reasoning >> aptitude<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning_aptitude>, >> an aptitude or personality characteristic >> - >> - Morphogenesis <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphogenesis> >> - >> - Regulation of gene >> expression<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_gene_expression> >> - >> - Cellular >> differentiation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_differentiation> >> - >> - Enzyme induction and >> inhibition<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzyme_induction_and_inhibition> >> - >> >> In *mathematics*: >> >> - Mathematical >> induction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_induction>, >> a method of proof in the field of mathematics >> - Strong induction <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_induction>, >> or Complete induction, a variant of mathematical induction >> - Transfinite >> induction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfinite_induction>, >> a kind of mathematical induction >> - Epsilon-induction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon-induction>, >> a kind of transfinite induction >> - Structural induction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_induction>, >> a generalization of mathematical induction >> - Statistical >> induction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_inference>, >> also known as statistical inference. >> - induced >> representation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_representation>, >> in representation theory: an operation for obtaining a representation of >> an >> object from one of its subobjects. >> - Parabolic >> induction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabolic_induction>: >> a method of constructing group representations of a reductive >> group<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductive_group> from >> representations of its parabolic >> subgroups<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parabolic_subgroup> >> . >> >> In *philosophy*, *logic*, and *computer science*: >> >> - Inductive reasoning<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning>, >> a form of reasoning often confused with scientific reasoning >> - Backward induction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backward_induction> >> in >> game theory and economics >> - Concept learning <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_learning> is >> the induction of a concept (category) from observations >> >> In *physics*: >> >> - Electromagnetic >> induction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_induction> in >> physics and engineering >> - Induction heating<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_heating>, >> the process of heating an electrically conducting object >> - Induction cooker <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_cooker>, >> which uses induction heating for cooking. >> - Electrostatic >> induction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatic_induction> in >> physics >> - Forced induction <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_induction>, >> with combustion engines, is the use of a gas compressor added to the air >> intake >> >> >> So, you could perhaps pick which application of *induction* you are >> interested in, and I will be, as I said, just tickled pink to expound on it. >> >> --Doug >> >> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Nicholas Thompson < >> nickthomp...@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> I, too, can make an argument for the validity of induction; However, >>> that's >>> not the point. >>> >>> I wanted to hear Doug;s >>> >>> Nick >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On >>> Behalf >>> Of Russell Standish >>> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 11:22 PM >>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group >>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Just as a bye-the-way >>> >>> When we put it in a computer, it works. My email spam filter >>> (spamassassin) uses a machine induction technique called Bayesian >>> networks. >>> It is remarkably effective at keeping spam out, and learning, in the >>> process, what I consider to be spam. >>> >>> In order to persuade me that induction is invalid, you would need to >>> explain >>> why the above is not an example of induction. I have read David Deutsch's >>> books where takes a swinging hammer to induction. I found these to be >>> less >>> than convincing. Moreover, the examples he gives of induction (and of >>> induction failing) seem very similar to the spamassasin example above >>> (which >>> also fails, from time-to-time, as the occasional spam gets through). I >>> have >>> been on the lists Fabric of Reality and Beginning of Infinity, until I >>> got >>> kicked off for the suspected crime of being a Bayesian epistemologist, >>> where >>> such discussions have taken place, with the anti-induction crowd >>> providing >>> little substance other than to suggest read tomes and tomes of Popper, >>> which >>> I'm unlikely to do without a compelling reason. Surely, if induction is >>> so >>> incoherent, it can be demolished effectively in 100 words or less. >>> >>> BTW - I do agree with Deutsch that conjecture and refutation is a >>> superior >>> way of gaining knowledge, than what I would call induction. But it seems >>> that to say induction doesn't exist or doesn't work is going too far. >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:42:15PM -0600, Nicholas Thompson wrote: >>> > So, Doug, explain to me how you come to believe in the validity of >>> > induction? >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On >>> > Behalf Of Douglas Roberts >>> > Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 2:43 PM >>> > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group >>> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Just as a bye-the-way >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > So, for reference: a 2X intelligence delta that we have all probably >>> > experienced, perhaps without knowing it, would be from talking with a >>> > person who had an IQ of 70, followed by engaging with a person having >>> a140 >>> IQ. >>> > >>> > I will ignore quibbles about the accuracy of IQ as an intelligence >>> > measure for the purpose of this discussion. >>> > >>> > I suspect the less intelligent person truely believes the religious >>> > dogma he's been taught. No ambiguity: true belief. >>> > >>> > I've observed that the more intelligent people put part of their >>> > intellect to sleep when it comes to religion. They call this process >>> > "taking it as an article of faith" when one of the irrational elements >>> > of their religion is brought into the spotlight. >>> > >>> > So the question that I would have, were we all to suddenly evolve 2X >>> > intelligence is: to what extent would we collectively be willing to >>> > suspend our intelligent thought processes in order to continue to >>> > believe religious bullshit? >>> > >>> > Working from my phone today... >>> > >>> > -Doug >>> > >>> > Sent from Android. >>> > >>> > On Mar 23, 2012 1:58 PM, "Robert J. Cordingley" >>> > <rob...@cirrillian.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > For starters what would you consider to be good and bad - assuming you >>> > are still a human being, with human interests at least? It's a >>> > problem because I haven't premised whether you have infinite knowledge >>> > to go with the infinite intelligence 'cos the two together is/are >>> > looking like an omni-something being etc. >>> > >>> > Ok, so let's assume humans evolve collectively to be 2x or 10x more >>> > intelligent than now. How would society change? Would anyone vote >>> > for Republicans? or Democrats? Would we even have a voting system? >>> > Would the jails be empty? >>> > >>> > Thanks >>> > Robert C >>> > >>> > On 3/23/12 1:23 PM, Douglas Roberts wrote: >>> > >>> > Good question about infinite intelligence. Try to even frame a >>> > reference for answering that one. >>> > >>> > Sent from Android. >>> > >>> > On Mar 23, 2012 12:14 PM, "Robert J. Cordingley" >>> > <rob...@cirrillian.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > I'm told many find comfort in the teachings of <insert your spiritual >>> > leader >>> > here>. I thought it odd/insightful that Joseph Cambell >>> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_campbell> found the same core >>> > message in the world's major religious teachings. I can believe moral >>> > atheists share the same core teachings. Then there are those from all >>> > persuasions that hijack a religion for their own purposes: political >>> > or financial power >>> > - they can all burn in hell! :) But hey if it works even as a social >>> > phenomenon, i.e. allows one to enjoy life and live longer and die in >>> > peace, can we knock it? >>> > >>> > Otherwise I must congratulate Father Doug in becoming a man of the >>> > cloth at the CotFSM <http://www.venganza.org/> and following in a >>> > long line of inspired spiritual teachers. I liked the bit about ' we >>> > are anti-crazy nonsense done in the name of religion.' (see the About >>> page). Noodle on. >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > Robert C >>> > PS What would you believe if you had infinite intelligence? R >>> > >>> > On 3/22/12 11:31 PM, Russ Abbott wrote: >>> > >>> > Doug, I don't want to pick on you, but your certificate strikes me as >>> > indirect bullying. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > I'm as atheistic as they come, but I know a number of people who (for >>> > reasons that I don't understand) take religion quite seriously. They >>> > are intelligent, pleasant people, not the sort to rub their beliefs in >>> > anyone's face. Most are politically left of center. One has a bumper >>> > sticker that reads "A proud member of the religious left". >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Why pick on them? I'm sure you don't intend to. I'm sure you are >>> > making fun of the Rick Santorums of the world. It's just that by >>> > casting as wide a net as the Flying Spaghetti Monster does, it also >>> > makes fun of everyone with religious feelings. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > The answer someone like Sam Harris would give is that what they say is >>> > either false or without any shred of objective support. But the people >>> > I'm thinking of don't go around proclaiming their beliefs as The >>> > Truth. They go about their business simply wanting to experience the >>> > world through a different lens. The fact that I don't understand it -- >>> > and I don't; I'm completely mystified by their way of thinking about >>> > certain things -- doesn't give me the right to ridicule it. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Sorry for the rant. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- Russ >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Douglas Roberts >>> > <d...@parrot-farm.net> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > Don't want my FRIAM friends and acquaintances to be the last to know: >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > If you feel like getting married, I can now conduct the ceremony. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > "With this rigatoni, I thee wed, etc." >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -Father Doug >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Doug Roberts >>> > drobe...@rti.org >>> > d...@parrot-farm.net >>> > >>> > http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins >>> > >>> > >>> > 505-455-7333 - Office >>> > 505-670-8195 - Cell >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > ============================================================ >>> > 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 >>> > >>> > >>> > ============================================================ >>> > 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 >>> > >>> > >>> > ============================================================ >>> > 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 >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) >>> Principal, High Performance Coders >>> Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au >>> University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> > > > -- > Doug Roberts > drobe...@rti.org > d...@parrot-farm.net > http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins > <http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins> > 505-455-7333 - Office > 505-670-8195 - Cell > > -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins <http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins> 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell
============================================================ 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
