clark (clark@netsites.net)
Tue, 20 Jan 1998 03:46:16 +0100
----------
> From: Hugo Fjelsted Alroe <alroe@vip.cybercity.dk>
> To: Multiple recipients of <lilasqd@mail.hkg.com>
> Subject: LS Re: Principles - Update
> Date: Monday, January 19, 1998 9:35 AM
>
> Ken, you wrote:
> >Hugo,
> > If you are not familiar with it, a book by James Gleick, 'Chaos
> >(Deterministic Disorder)', will make your point for your nicely.
> > In the words of Gleick, "Chaos shows how a purposeless flow of energy
can
> >wash life and consciousness into the world."
>
> Thanks for the reference Ken, I believe I read it a while back. I do not
> put the same weight on chaos as you seem to do, exactly because it is a
> deterministic phenomenon. But then again, perhaps chaos is another link
> between 'determinism' and 'indeterminism' than the one I have in mind, -
I
> will have to revisit the issue.
>
>
> > If I understand your position correctly you are saying that Dynamic
> >Quality is bounded by the Static Patterns of Value because Dynamic
Quality
> >is dependent on those SPOVs for its preconditioning and thus is not
> >entirely a free agent. I think I also agree with Doug that there is no
> >upper limit on either static quality (SPOVs) or Dynamic Quality.
>
> Yes, I agree with you that Doug's view and my view above are not
uncompatible.
>
> > I looked at one of your early (to me) posts to Martin I believe, and I
> >agree with you that given the starting point of the universe our
presence
> >here is almost, or is, a foregone conclusion.
>
> Well, I am not sure I would put it that strong, but the drift towards
> complexity is definitely just as natural as (and more basic than) the
> thermodynamic drift towards homogeneity.
>
> Regards
>
> Hugo
>
>
> --
> post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com
> unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com
> homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
>
>
Hugo,
From a quick reading of your reply (I may not understand):
I look upon "Chaos" as an avenue to inject indeterminism into a
deterministic universe. To my mind it makes a deterministic view of the
universe defensible because it gives us a measure of indeterminism in an
overall deterministic situation. We can have our cake and eat it too.
A condensed extract from ending of the book:
Chaos. Deterministic non-linear systems. For some people Chaos was the
end of the reductionist program in science. For them the overriding
message was that simple processes in nature could produce magnificent
edifices of complexity without randomness. In non-linearity and feedback
lay all of the necessary tools for encoding and then unfolding structures
as rich as the human brain. They believed that simple deterministic
systems could breed complexity; that systems too complex for traditional
mathematics could yet obey simple laws. Chaos shows how a purposeless flow
of energy can wash life and consciousness into the world. The laws of
pattern formation are universal and the tiniest scales prove crucial.
Creation takes place at the edges where growth occurs, and because the laws
of growth are purely deterministic they maintain a near perfect symmetry. A
snowflake is a record of the history of all of the changing weather
conditions it has experienced.
Evolution is Chaos with feedback. Dissipation is an agent of order. God
does play dice with the universe, but they are loaded dice.
Diana,
If you think it would add anything to the discussion I have about a five
page extract of the book which I can send for posting in the forum. Ken
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:38 CEST