Jon, I don't think anything can be prestatable in the adjacent possible, including what I call the "third space" and you guys call the phase space. As to the modal realism, maybe. We begin the journey starting with the "Actual."
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 11:55 AM Jon Zingale <jonzing...@gmail.com> wrote: > @Merle > Girls *are* usually more adjacent than men. > Personally, I would like to hear your voice > more often on this forum. > > @Lee > *You're *just* trying to get a rise out of Nick, right?* > My experience has been that throwing around the `J-word` will often get a > rise out of Nick. > Does `getting a rise out of` have type nudge? > > Does speaking of adjacent possibles require a specifiable space of > possibilities? > > More generally, by the mathematical unprestatability > > of the "phase space" (space of possibilities), >> no laws of motion can be formulated for evolution. > > -- No entailing laws, but enablement in the evolution of the biosphere >> <https://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.2069.pdf> > > > It would appear that in some contexts, describing adjacent possibility as > being > dependent upon a prescribed `phase space ` misses something. Perhaps it > is more > desirable to imagine that agents and worlds co-create, and that > possibilities emerge > locally in the process. > > To these ends, it seems reasonable to me that we can characterize adjacent > possibles as > a kind of *modal realism* a`la David Lewis. Sure, there are a number of > philosophical > objections to be made and Wikipedia will outline a good number of them for > interested parties. > Still, my remark was not meant to be meaningless. I do think that such > modeling is a potentially > useful technology. > > As Dan Piponi outlines, in an inspired moment of blogging, Evaluating > Cellular Automata is Comonadic > <http://blog.sigfpe.com/2006/12/evaluating-cellular-automata-is.html>. > Unlike classical conceptions of cellular automata, it appears likely that > generalizing to the level of > comonad may allow us to escape `pre-stating the phase space` and by it's > very nature the associated > co-bind operator develops locally. Sure my previous comment was pithy, but > not meant to troll. > > > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 10:00 AM <friam-requ...@redfish.com> wrote: > >> Send Friam mailing list submissions to >> friam@redfish.com >> >> 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 >> friam-requ...@redfish.com >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> friam-ow...@redfish.com >> >> 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 189, Issue 40 (lrudo...@meganet.net) >> 2. Re: Friam Digest, Vol 189, Issue 40 (lrudo...@meganet.net) >> 3. Re: Friam Digest, Vol 189, Issue 40 (Merle Lefkoff) >> 4. new studies confirm existence galaxies almost-no-dark-matter >> (glen) >> 5. Re: new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter (Gillian Densmore) >> 6. Re: new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter (David Eric Smith) >> 7. Re: Friam Digest, Vol 189, Issue 40 (Nick Thompson) >> 8. Re: >> 15555-10253-closing-a-gap-to-normal-hearing---white-paper.pdf >> (Nick Thompson) >> 9. Re: new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter (glen??) >> 10. Re: new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter (Eric Smith) >> 11. math-induced vs. math-described creativity (was Re: >> TheoremDep) (glen??) >> 12. Re: >> 15555-10253-closing-a-gap-to-normal-hearing---white-paper.pdf >> (Frank Wimberly) >> 13. Re: new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter (lrudo...@meganet.net) >> 14. Income Equality (Steven A Smith) >> 15. Re: new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter (Gillian Densmore) >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: lrudo...@meganet.net >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 15:04:14 -0400 (EDT) >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 189, Issue 40 >> > Adjacent possibles are neighborhoods in a comonad. >> >> You're just trying to get a rise out of Nick, right? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: lrudo...@meganet.net >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 15:13:00 -0400 (EDT) >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 189, Issue 40 >> > An equation that captures the theory of >> > the adjacent possible is available. >> >> I have recently been reminded that Quine, in "On What There Is", posed the >> question (presumably rhetorical and/or tendentious; my reminder came in >> the form of just the following sentence with attribution but no other >> context, and I haven't yet been moved to actually look up that context) >> "How many possible men are there in that doorway?" However many there >> are, I presume some are more adjacent than others. Perhaps Quine's >> question should be revived to be about possible girls-next-door. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Merle Lefkoff <merlelefk...@gmail.com> >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 13:23:42 -0600 >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 189, Issue 40 >> "girls" are usually more adjacent than men. >> >> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 1:13 PM <lrudo...@meganet.net> wrote: >> >>> > An equation that captures the theory of >>> > the adjacent possible is available. >>> >>> I have recently been reminded that Quine, in "On What There Is", posed >>> the >>> question (presumably rhetorical and/or tendentious; my reminder came in >>> the form of just the following sentence with attribution but no other >>> context, and I haven't yet been moved to actually look up that context) >>> "How many possible men are there in that doorway?" However many there >>> are, I presume some are more adjacent than others. Perhaps Quine's >>> question should be revived to be about possible girls-next-door. >>> >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >>> >> >> >> -- >> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D. >> President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy >> emergentdiplomacy.org >> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA >> merlelefk...@gmail.com <merlelef...@gmail.com> >> mobile: (303) 859-5609 >> skype: merle.lelfkoff2 >> twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: glen <geprope...@gmail.com> >> To: friam@redfish.com >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 14:25:14 -0700 >> Subject: [FRIAM] new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter >> >> https://news.yale.edu/2019/03/29/new-studies-confirm-existence-galaxies-almost-no-dark-matter >> >> > The finding was highly significant because it showed that dark matter >> is not always associated with traditional matter on a galactic scale. It >> also ruled out several theories that said dark matter is not a substance >> but a manifestation of the laws of gravity on a cosmic scale. >> -- >> glen >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Gillian Densmore <gil.densm...@gmail.com> >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 17:24:41 -0600 >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter >> So it's possible that what we think of as dark matter could be more to do >> with a whole lot of magnets/lots and lots and lots of gravity energy and >> makes things go weird? >> Or weirder? >> >> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 3:25 PM glen <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> https://news.yale.edu/2019/03/29/new-studies-confirm-existence-galaxies-almost-no-dark-matter >>> >>> > The finding was highly significant because it showed that dark matter >>> is not always associated with traditional matter on a galactic scale. It >>> also ruled out several theories that said dark matter is not a substance >>> but a manifestation of the laws of gravity on a cosmic scale. >>> -- >>> glen >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >>> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: David Eric Smith <desm...@santafe.edu> >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 08:32:01 +0900 >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter >> Thank you for this Glen, >> >> This is a really great result, which I had not been following. >> >> Eric >> >> >> > On Apr 1, 2019, at 6:25 AM, glen <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> https://news.yale.edu/2019/03/29/new-studies-confirm-existence-galaxies-almost-no-dark-matter >> > >> >> The finding was highly significant because it showed that dark matter >> is not always associated with traditional matter on a galactic scale. It >> also ruled out several theories that said dark matter is not a substance >> but a manifestation of the laws of gravity on a cosmic scale. >> > -- >> > glen >> > >> > ============================================================ >> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> >> To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" < >> friam@redfish.com> >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 23:20:46 -0600 >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 189, Issue 40 >> >> While we are all flinging around jargon and links, am I so wrong to say >> that “nudges >> <https://www.amazon.com/Nudge-Improving-Decisions-Health-Happiness/dp/014311526X>” >> are a way of moving to the adjacent possible? >> >> >> >> Speakingof the non-adjacent impossible, I woke up the other morning with >> a fantasy of being in some sort large community meeting, and standing up >> and asking the question: >> >> >> >> *"Why **èexactly**ç is it that everybody shouldn't have the same annual >> income?"* >> >> >> >> >> >> 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 >> lrudo...@meganet.net >> Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 1:04 PM >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 189, Issue 40 >> >> >> >> > Adjacent possibles are neighborhoods in a comonad. >> >> >> >> You're just trying to get a rise out of Nick, right? >> >> >> >> >> >> ============================================================ >> >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe >> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> >> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> >> To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" < >> friam@redfish.com> >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 01:04:36 -0600 >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] >> 15555-10253-closing-a-gap-to-normal-hearing---white-paper.pdf >> >> I will have to look at these. They can’t parse words on first hearing, >> can they? Mike knows a little about this area and he has told me some, >> but I need to know more. What I think he has told me is that a relatively >> primitive input with relatively few leads gives a tremendous benefit, much >> more than one would expect from the complexity of the cochlea itself. >> >> >> >> Nicholas S. Thompson >> >> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology >> >> Clark University >> >> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ >> >> >> >> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Frank >> Wimberly >> *Sent:* Sunday, March 31, 2019 12:08 PM >> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < >> friam@redfish.com> >> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] >> 15555-10253-closing-a-gap-to-normal-hearing---white-paper.pdf >> >> >> >> Except for the young children. They some and laugh. >> >> ----------------------------------- >> Frank Wimberly >> >> My memoir: >> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly >> >> My scientific publications: >> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 >> >> Phone (505) 670-9918 >> >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019, 11:55 AM Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Nick, >> >> >> >> Have you read about cochlear implant surgery? When I worked at Eye and >> Ear Hospital of Pittsburgh, the lab I worked in was doing early research in >> the area. These are pieces of hardware that transform sound into >> electrical signals meaningful to the brain. >> >> >> >> Have you seen the videos of people who have been deaf since birth who get >> such a device. They inevitably sob when they hear sound for the first time. >> >> >> >> Frank >> >> ----------------------------------- >> Frank Wimberly >> >> My memoir: >> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly >> >> My scientific publications: >> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 >> >> Phone (505) 670-9918 >> >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019, 11:23 AM Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> >> wrote: >> >> Hi, Everybody, >> >> >> >> In the home congregation, we have had many interesting conversations >> about hearing in difficult environments, a conversation not only of intense >> interest to people interested in computer analysis and representation of >> sounds but also to a bunch of old guys shouting at each other in a crowded >> college dining area surrounded by hard surfaces. Recently, we have been >> trying to assemble our limited knowledge of the cochlea and to grasp the >> fact that it is not a bank of discrete resonators doing a Fourier >> Transform, but an innervated sliver of meat with liquid on both sides >> coiled up in a tiny snail shell. We are eager for any signs that a >> hearing aid company has started to reach beyond differential amplification >> by means of FFT to actually focusing on the cues that really matter for >> speech comprehension. >> >> >> >> Anyway, …. Anyway….. . I skimmed through the “white paper” below and >> thought that, even though it is “captive” research, it had some interesting >> features. Consequently, I thought I would pass it around to the list >> before I lost track of it. My friend Jon Zingale accuses me of crowd >> sourcing my reading and that is EXACTLY what I am doing. So, beware. >> >> >> >> >> https://wdh.azureedge.net/-/media/oticon-us/main/download-center/white-papers/15555-10253-closing-a-gap-to-normal-hearing---white-paper.pdf?la=en&rev=0FC7&hash=B7D7D58F75093770CA7E148F72520C1D6BE28CB1 >> >> If anybody on the list knows of somebody doing advanced research on how >> the cochlea passes sound on to the brain and how the brain analyses it, we >> would love to hear from that person. >> >> >> >> And has for you young folks who think this will never happen to you: >> have you noticed that your students and young associates and your >> daughter’s boyfriends MUMBLE. The moment you find yourself saying, “Curse >> these millennials, why don’t they speak up like normal people,” you should >> be taking an interest in hearing technology. >> >> >> >> Just sayin’ >> >> >> >> N >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: "glen∈ℂ" <geprope...@gmail.com> >> To: friam@redfish.com >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 01:55:55 -0700 >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter >> I'm not sure how magnetism plays into all this. But it is interesting >> that these are ultra diffuse galaxies. Maybe there is something wrong with >> how we extrapolate the rules in flat space to the rules in very bent space, >> where everything gets so weird. It seems (to me) that a regular galaxy >> would be more like a colloidal solution, with lots of little clumps of bent >> space (heavy things like brown dwarves[†] and such). Such a pock-marked, >> bristly, region of space must be more difficult to model than something >> relatively well-behaved like an ultra diffuse galaxy. Right? In the >> vicinity of "almost singularities" (very heavy objects), any measurement or >> calculation error will have more of an impact on the result. >> >> [†] I forgot to turn off the real-time spell checker on this new-to-me >> computer and, lo and behold, "dwarves" is not the plural of "dwarf"! WTF? >> https://grammarist.com/usage/dwarfs-dwarves/ tells me it's a neologism >> popularized by Tolkien. So, by using it, I'm wearing my Dork on my sleeve. >> >> On 3/31/19 4:24 PM, Gillian Densmore wrote: >> > So it's possible that what we think of as dark matter could be more to >> do >> > with a whole lot of magnets/lots and lots and lots of gravity energy and >> > makes things go weird? >> > Or weirder? >> > >> > On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 3:25 PM glen <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> >> https://news.yale.edu/2019/03/29/new-studies-confirm-existence-galaxies-almost-no-dark-matter >> >> >> >>> The finding was highly significant because it showed that dark matter >> is >> >> not always associated with traditional matter on a galactic scale. It >> also >> >> ruled out several theories that said dark matter is not a substance >> but a >> >> manifestation of the laws of gravity on a cosmic scale. >> >> -- >> >> glen >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Eric Smith <desm...@santafe.edu> >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 18:14:15 +0900 >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter >> Hi Glen and Gil, >> >> What you have below, Glen, is right I think. To begin with the summary, >> and put the TLDR afterward, it looks like these diffuse-galaxy results say >> that gravity stays a clean theory, and we need to identify the origin and >> nature of dark matter as a separate thing. While a hard problem, it is a >> problem that respects the structure of physics as we have been using it. >> Gravity is gravity, we can treat matter as “living on it” at all the >> energies where we have ever done physics, and we need to figure out how >> they unify, which we don’t really have a theory for at all, but which we >> have good reason to believe only comes into play at extremely high >> energies. >> >> The longer version: >> >> We know Einstein’s GR not only changes the picture of gravity from >> Newton’s, but for comparable predictions (locations and rates of orbits, >> their stability, etc.) it requires corrections from Newtonian gravity in >> the strong-field regime. The calculations become complicated and hard to >> do with pencil and paper, but this is okay, because once it is in its >> geometric language, the Einstein version is in a conceptual sense “cleaner” >> than the Newtonian version. >> >> The above view says that Newton becomes a better and better approximation >> to Einstein the weaker the field gets. On the whole, galaxy dynamics on >> the large scale is governed by very weak fields. So for the >> radius-dependence of orbital velocities to deviate far from the Newtonian >> prediction (as they do in most known galaxies) requires either ordinary >> gravitation with out-of-the-ordinary matter, or a _different_ deviation >> from Newton, which would exist in the weak-field limit, but only become >> visible on very large scales. Since Einstein -> Newton in the very weak >> field limit, the latter possibility would require a deviation from Einstein >> too. I am not sure that could be done conceptually “cleanly” in the same >> way GR is clean. >> >> So to find that the diffuse galaxies lacking dark matter go back to >> orbital predictions that converge to weak-field Einstein with no Dark >> Matter, which is also weak-field Newton with no DM, favors the >> interpretation that gravity really is just gravity, and that we have to >> figure out where some additional matter is coming from, just as the >> accelerating expansion tells us we have to figure out where some “Dark >> energy” is coming from. The cosmological constant is an important lynchpin >> because it is the only observation about the structure of the vacuum for >> which we really don’t have a “theory” at all. Anything else we can measure >> is handled well by standard model physics, though with still some >> unexplained parameters. >> >> In a way, this result is the one that could have been expected. There >> are now lots of images from gravitational lensing that show “clouds” of DM >> off-center from galaxies that we can see in the visible. This especially >> happens when galaxies collide. So DM was behaving like matter already, and >> it is not very surprising to see that maybe it could be all-but-stripped >> from a galaxy, leaving only a scattering of visible matter. It would not >> surprise me if at some point somebody can show that it was a long-ago >> collision that did this stripping, and much later the diffuse ball of stars >> re-settled to an ellipsoid. >> >> Keep in mind, in all of this, that the strong-field limit of GR is >> getting better and better constrained with the gravitational-wave >> detections, in addition to all the astrophysical stuff that it has >> successfully modeled for decades. So some muddying of GR that only shows >> up at weak fields would be strange. >> >> Finally, n.b. that my understanding of this doesn’t qualify as >> professional — I got off the train too soon. But I think everything I have >> said above is a correct account. >> >> All best, >> >> Eric >> >> >> > On Apr 1, 2019, at 5:55 PM, glen∈ℂ <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > I'm not sure how magnetism plays into all this. But it is interesting >> that these are ultra diffuse galaxies. Maybe there is something wrong with >> how we extrapolate the rules in flat space to the rules in very bent space, >> where everything gets so weird. It seems (to me) that a regular galaxy >> would be more like a colloidal solution, with lots of little clumps of bent >> space (heavy things like brown dwarves[†] and such). Such a pock-marked, >> bristly, region of space must be more difficult to model than something >> relatively well-behaved like an ultra diffuse galaxy. Right? In the >> vicinity of "almost singularities" (very heavy objects), any measurement or >> calculation error will have more of an impact on the result. >> > >> > [†] I forgot to turn off the real-time spell checker on this new-to-me >> computer and, lo and behold, "dwarves" is not the plural of "dwarf"! WTF? >> https://grammarist.com/usage/dwarfs-dwarves/ tells me it's a neologism >> popularized by Tolkien. So, by using it, I'm wearing my Dork on my sleeve. >> > >> > On 3/31/19 4:24 PM, Gillian Densmore wrote: >> >> So it's possible that what we think of as dark matter could be more to >> do >> >> with a whole lot of magnets/lots and lots and lots of gravity energy >> and >> >> makes things go weird? >> >> Or weirder? >> >> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 3:25 PM glen <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> >> https://news.yale.edu/2019/03/29/new-studies-confirm-existence-galaxies-almost-no-dark-matter >> >>> >> >>>> The finding was highly significant because it showed that dark >> matter is >> >>> not always associated with traditional matter on a galactic scale. It >> also >> >>> ruled out several theories that said dark matter is not a substance >> but a >> >>> manifestation of the laws of gravity on a cosmic scale. >> >>> -- >> >>> glen >> > >> > ============================================================ >> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: "glen∈ℂ" <geprope...@gmail.com> >> To: friam@redfish.com >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 03:03:25 -0700 >> Subject: [FRIAM] math-induced vs. math-described creativity (was Re: >> TheoremDep) >> There's a lot to respond to, as always. But, also as always, I'm most >> attracted to potential conflict. 8^) And I'm going to be offensive and >> claim to know you better than you know yourself. >8^D >> >> I'd argue that your personal creativity as a kid wasn't based in math, >> but based in something more concrete like your physiology and brain >> wiring. The math simply turned out to facilitate whatever twitch you'd >> already manifested. I'll try to use my go-to anecdote to make my point >> clearer. As a kid, my dad consistently accused me of "making excuses" in >> stead of "providing reasons". He saw some non-ambiguity in the (social) >> world that I never saw (still don't see to this day). Had he been more >> *logically* inclined, he might have been able to make the distinction clear >> to me. After I learned some of the concepts from control theory, I began >> to realize he (as a former drill sergeant and practicing Catholic) >> understood personal responsibility as a very interactive, dynamically >> controlled, always on the lookout, theistic, process. I tend to be a bit >> more essentialist and look for critical paths, shaving off the parts of the >> system that may have less (or negligible) impact on the particular outcome >> of interest/conflict. >> >> This intolerance for ambiguity, in me, manifested VERY early. From my >> incompetent understanding of pop-psy like "All I really Need to Know, I >> Learned in Kindergarten", my guess is math facilitated your innate >> creativity as opposed to *founding/basing* your creativity. >> >> But my claim that math would be less successful describing creativity in >> children than it is in, say, estimating the mass of ultra diffuse galaxies, >> has more to do with the ambiguity (distinct from uncertainty) in how we >> understand children. I suspect you would temporarily abide the claim that >> a nerd kid who spends all her time playing video games can be just as >> creative as a more artsy kid who spends her time making up songs on a >> keyboard. If we were talking about *adults*, it would be trivial to parse >> out, disambiguate, how one can be just as creative as another. But because >> our understanding of development is so impoverished, it can be difficult to >> *model* how a child meshes with (relaxes into) the control surface of a >> keyboard versus that of a game console. >> >> It's not really because "creativity" is ill-defined. It's because >> "children" is ill-defined. Creativity can (and has been) disambiguated in >> various (inconsistent[†]) ways by various researchers. We've seen less >> success disambiguating children. >> >> [†] And, contrary to popular belief, math allows for inconsistency. >> >> On 3/29/19 3:01 PM, Steven A Smith wrote: >> > I would claim that more than a little of my own personal creativity was >> > based IN mathematics as a child/adolescent. It was the abstract >> > language of math that allowed me to see (and manipulate?) patterns >> > across more disparate domains than "natural language" allowed. It >> > wasn't the lack of ambiguity (because my clumsy application >> > re-indroduced ambiguity) in Math that drew me, but the ease and >> > expressiveness of abstraction. >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 06:17:59 -0600 >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] >> 15555-10253-closing-a-gap-to-normal-hearing---white-paper.pdf >> I think some people can understand speech pretty quickly but I don't >> know. The babies probably learn to do so as well as their age peers but I >> don't know that either. Mike probably knows. >> >> Frank >> >> ----------------------------------- >> Frank Wimberly >> >> My memoir: >> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly >> >> My scientific publications: >> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 >> >> Phone (505) 670-9918 >> >> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 1:04 AM Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> >> wrote: >> >>> I will have to look at these. They can’t parse words on first hearing, >>> can they? Mike knows a little about this area and he has told me some, >>> but I need to know more. What I think he has told me is that a relatively >>> primitive input with relatively few leads gives a tremendous benefit, much >>> more than one would expect from the complexity of the cochlea itself. >>> >>> >>> >>> Nicholas S. Thompson >>> >>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology >>> >>> Clark University >>> >>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Frank >>> Wimberly >>> *Sent:* Sunday, March 31, 2019 12:08 PM >>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < >>> friam@redfish.com> >>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] >>> 15555-10253-closing-a-gap-to-normal-hearing---white-paper.pdf >>> >>> >>> >>> Except for the young children. They some and laugh. >>> >>> ----------------------------------- >>> Frank Wimberly >>> >>> My memoir: >>> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly >>> >>> My scientific publications: >>> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 >>> >>> Phone (505) 670-9918 >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019, 11:55 AM Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Nick, >>> >>> >>> >>> Have you read about cochlear implant surgery? When I worked at Eye and >>> Ear Hospital of Pittsburgh, the lab I worked in was doing early research in >>> the area. These are pieces of hardware that transform sound into >>> electrical signals meaningful to the brain. >>> >>> >>> >>> Have you seen the videos of people who have been deaf since birth who >>> get such a device. They inevitably sob when they hear sound for the first >>> time. >>> >>> >>> >>> Frank >>> >>> ----------------------------------- >>> Frank Wimberly >>> >>> My memoir: >>> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly >>> >>> My scientific publications: >>> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 >>> >>> Phone (505) 670-9918 >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019, 11:23 AM Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, Everybody, >>> >>> >>> >>> In the home congregation, we have had many interesting conversations >>> about hearing in difficult environments, a conversation not only of intense >>> interest to people interested in computer analysis and representation of >>> sounds but also to a bunch of old guys shouting at each other in a crowded >>> college dining area surrounded by hard surfaces. Recently, we have been >>> trying to assemble our limited knowledge of the cochlea and to grasp the >>> fact that it is not a bank of discrete resonators doing a Fourier >>> Transform, but an innervated sliver of meat with liquid on both sides >>> coiled up in a tiny snail shell. We are eager for any signs that a >>> hearing aid company has started to reach beyond differential amplification >>> by means of FFT to actually focusing on the cues that really matter for >>> speech comprehension. >>> >>> >>> >>> Anyway, …. Anyway….. . I skimmed through the “white paper” below and >>> thought that, even though it is “captive” research, it had some interesting >>> features. Consequently, I thought I would pass it around to the list >>> before I lost track of it. My friend Jon Zingale accuses me of crowd >>> sourcing my reading and that is EXACTLY what I am doing. So, beware. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://wdh.azureedge.net/-/media/oticon-us/main/download-center/white-papers/15555-10253-closing-a-gap-to-normal-hearing---white-paper.pdf?la=en&rev=0FC7&hash=B7D7D58F75093770CA7E148F72520C1D6BE28CB1 >>> >>> If anybody on the list knows of somebody doing advanced research on how >>> the cochlea passes sound on to the brain and how the brain analyses it, we >>> would love to hear from that person. >>> >>> >>> >>> And has for you young folks who think this will never happen to you: >>> have you noticed that your students and young associates and your >>> daughter’s boyfriends MUMBLE. The moment you find yourself saying, “Curse >>> these millennials, why don’t they speak up like normal people,” you should >>> be taking an interest in hearing technology. >>> >>> >>> >>> Just sayin’ >>> >>> >>> >>> N >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >>> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: lrudo...@meganet.net >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 11:14:21 -0400 (EDT) >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter >> > https://grammarist.com/usage/dwarfs-dwarves/ tells me it's a neologism >> >> or, perhaps, a neoarchaeologism? >> >> > popularized by Tolkien. >> >> The OED's only record of it (in a usage citation for "dwarf, n.") is "1818 >> W. Taylor in Monthly Mag. 46 26 The history of Laurin, king of the >> dwarves." >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Steven A Smith <sasm...@swcp.com> >> To: friam@redfish.com >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 09:17:42 -0600 >> Subject: [FRIAM] Income Equality >> >> >> On 3/31/19 11:20 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: >> >> >> Speakingof the non-adjacent impossible, I woke up the other morning with >> a fantasy of being in some sort large community meeting, and standing up >> and asking the question: >> >> >> >> *"Why **èexactly**ç is it that everybody shouldn't have the same annual >> income?"* >> >> Try it and you will get a very quick and probably series of blunt answers. >> >> I've had my version of that fantasy and the next step in it is to find >> the person in the room with the lowest income (the shabby homeless person >> lurking in the back is a good start) (or just arbitrarily pick some one >> standing next to you) and offer to "average incomes" with them. >> Repeat. Not everyone will participate, maybe only those with "similar" >> incomes will share, but the exercise would be useful, even with Monopoly >> Money. >> >> Ultimately this can become a "sorting exercise". It would be much >> easier to "share" what you have with someone just a little less well off >> than you. As a bottom up exercise, (least wealthy shares with next >> least, repeat) it might work well until you hit the big disparity gaps... >> The billionaires won't want to share with the millionaires nor they with >> the upper-middle-class but there might be a trickle-up effect that relieved >> a LOT in the meantime. Just sayin'. >> >> I am in the midst (literally today) of a complex of "pay it forward" >> exercises with friends, organizations and acquaintances who either are, or >> support folks living in or near homelessness. A little bit of $$, Time, >> Attention goes a *LONG* way with these folks. I'm not averaging my income >> with them, but in the spirit of religious tithing, I probably do give order >> 10% of my income and time to these kinds of exercises and *I* believe that >> provides a several X leverage factor for what I do give. It can be >> tedious, it can feel risky, it can be disappointing sometimes, but it feels >> a lot more connected than writing a check to one of the big charities. I >> AM a fan of some of those (many not), so don't want to dissuade that kind >> of giving, just encourage more personal, local, engaged "sharing". >> >> -Socialist Steve >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Gillian Densmore <gil.densm...@gmail.com> >> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com >> > >> Cc: >> Bcc: >> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 09:58:10 -0600 >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] new studies confirm existence galaxies >> almost-no-dark-matter >> Ok you my good sir make this make sense. Sorry for the confusion about my >> magnetics anology btw. I find this kind of stuff fascinating. >> >> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 3:14 AM Eric Smith <desm...@santafe.edu> wrote: >> >>> Hi Glen and Gil, >>> >>> What you have below, Glen, is right I think. To begin with the summary, >>> and put the TLDR afterward, it looks like these diffuse-galaxy results say >>> that gravity stays a clean theory, and we need to identify the origin and >>> nature of dark matter as a separate thing. While a hard problem, it is a >>> problem that respects the structure of physics as we have been using it. >>> Gravity is gravity, we can treat matter as “living on it” at all the >>> energies where we have ever done physics, and we need to figure out how >>> they unify, which we don’t really have a theory for at all, but which we >>> have good reason to believe only comes into play at extremely high >>> energies. >>> >>> The longer version: >>> >>> We know Einstein’s GR not only changes the picture of gravity from >>> Newton’s, but for comparable predictions (locations and rates of orbits, >>> their stability, etc.) it requires corrections from Newtonian gravity in >>> the strong-field regime. The calculations become complicated and hard to >>> do with pencil and paper, but this is okay, because once it is in its >>> geometric language, the Einstein version is in a conceptual sense “cleaner” >>> than the Newtonian version. >>> >>> The above view says that Newton becomes a better and better >>> approximation to Einstein the weaker the field gets. On the whole, galaxy >>> dynamics on the large scale is governed by very weak fields. So for the >>> radius-dependence of orbital velocities to deviate far from the Newtonian >>> prediction (as they do in most known galaxies) requires either ordinary >>> gravitation with out-of-the-ordinary matter, or a _different_ deviation >>> from Newton, which would exist in the weak-field limit, but only become >>> visible on very large scales. Since Einstein -> Newton in the very weak >>> field limit, the latter possibility would require a deviation from Einstein >>> too. I am not sure that could be done conceptually “cleanly” in the same >>> way GR is clean. >>> >>> So to find that the diffuse galaxies lacking dark matter go back to >>> orbital predictions that converge to weak-field Einstein with no Dark >>> Matter, which is also weak-field Newton with no DM, favors the >>> interpretation that gravity really is just gravity, and that we have to >>> figure out where some additional matter is coming from, just as the >>> accelerating expansion tells us we have to figure out where some “Dark >>> energy” is coming from. The cosmological constant is an important lynchpin >>> because it is the only observation about the structure of the vacuum for >>> which we really don’t have a “theory” at all. Anything else we can measure >>> is handled well by standard model physics, though with still some >>> unexplained parameters. >>> >>> In a way, this result is the one that could have been expected. There >>> are now lots of images from gravitational lensing that show “clouds” of DM >>> off-center from galaxies that we can see in the visible. This especially >>> happens when galaxies collide. So DM was behaving like matter already, and >>> it is not very surprising to see that maybe it could be all-but-stripped >>> from a galaxy, leaving only a scattering of visible matter. It would not >>> surprise me if at some point somebody can show that it was a long-ago >>> collision that did this stripping, and much later the diffuse ball of stars >>> re-settled to an ellipsoid. >>> >>> Keep in mind, in all of this, that the strong-field limit of GR is >>> getting better and better constrained with the gravitational-wave >>> detections, in addition to all the astrophysical stuff that it has >>> successfully modeled for decades. So some muddying of GR that only shows >>> up at weak fields would be strange. >>> >>> Finally, n.b. that my understanding of this doesn’t qualify as >>> professional — I got off the train too soon. But I think everything I have >>> said above is a correct account. >>> >>> All best, >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> >>> > On Apr 1, 2019, at 5:55 PM, glen∈ℂ <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > I'm not sure how magnetism plays into all this. But it is interesting >>> that these are ultra diffuse galaxies. Maybe there is something wrong with >>> how we extrapolate the rules in flat space to the rules in very bent space, >>> where everything gets so weird. It seems (to me) that a regular galaxy >>> would be more like a colloidal solution, with lots of little clumps of bent >>> space (heavy things like brown dwarves[†] and such). Such a pock-marked, >>> bristly, region of space must be more difficult to model than something >>> relatively well-behaved like an ultra diffuse galaxy. Right? In the >>> vicinity of "almost singularities" (very heavy objects), any measurement or >>> calculation error will have more of an impact on the result. >>> > >>> > [†] I forgot to turn off the real-time spell checker on this new-to-me >>> computer and, lo and behold, "dwarves" is not the plural of "dwarf"! WTF? >>> https://grammarist.com/usage/dwarfs-dwarves/ tells me it's a neologism >>> popularized by Tolkien. So, by using it, I'm wearing my Dork on my sleeve. >>> > >>> > On 3/31/19 4:24 PM, Gillian Densmore wrote: >>> >> So it's possible that what we think of as dark matter could be more >>> to do >>> >> with a whole lot of magnets/lots and lots and lots of gravity energy >>> and >>> >> makes things go weird? >>> >> Or weirder? >>> >> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 3:25 PM glen <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://news.yale.edu/2019/03/29/new-studies-confirm-existence-galaxies-almost-no-dark-matter >>> >>> >>> >>>> The finding was highly significant because it showed that dark >>> matter is >>> >>> not always associated with traditional matter on a galactic scale. >>> It also >>> >>> ruled out several theories that said dark matter is not a substance >>> but a >>> >>> manifestation of the laws of gravity on a cosmic scale. >>> >>> -- >>> >>> glen >>> > >>> > ============================================================ >>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >>> >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC> >>> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Friam mailing list >> Friam@redfish.com >> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove > -- Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D. President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy emergentdiplomacy.org Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA merlelefk...@gmail.com <merlelef...@gmail.com> mobile: (303) 859-5609 skype: merle.lelfkoff2 twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
