NSF calls out self-organization as a major funding initiative

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

NSF calls out self-organization as a major funding initiative

Phil Henshaw-2

I could hardly have said it better.   If people want to progress with
understanding the complexity of natural systems, though, it is necessary to
understand that any given state of any natural system is a product of an
evolutionary process with a beginning, middle and an ending that fits the
deceptively simple but marvelously useful 'bump on a curve' model.    To
frame one's understanding  in terms of a system's continual evolving
development from beginning to end provides a great many advantages.  It's an
excellent 'listening device' for structural reorganization in real things, a
completely valid map for ordering our data on the process, a great signal
generator to alert you when your model is missing something and decisions
need to be made.

The damn trouble, of course, is that we're still attached to the successful
experience of science in describing nature as if it was following our
equations... and that when you study natural systems (meaning individual
real things) you find something much more like the opposite!    Rules are
still handy for us to connect before and after without needing to speculate
on what happens in-between, but in the situations where what happens
in-between matters, we need a new explanatory method.   Mine is to refer to
the things themselves rather than to a substitute based on my own very
limited view.    It may seem an odd approach, or be unobvious how it becomes
a versatile and reliable tool, but at least you can probably see how it's a
completely detailed specification for things that are far too complex to
describe, i.e. 'go look'.    My short paper for IEEE in June is shaping up
to be a discussion of how to switch back and forth between the two paradigms
of explanation to get the advantages of both.

I'm delighted some interest in individual systems finally seems to be
developing, but also note that this and the other new ways of understanding
the complex behavior of our world are coming up at the time when our
civilization is rapidly making its world unmanageably complex.   We are
definitely playing catch-up.    

One hump we have to get over is the tendency of people to feel that it
brings their motives into doubt to ask whether multiplying our solutions
could also be multiplying the problems.   Being self-critical has always
been rare I suppose.    This particular kind of avoidance is a perennial
bind I find in talking with people at all levels in all professions, and my
own solution for how to not be overwhelmed by doubt seems impossible to
apply.   For myself I just drop my guard and look at *everything*.    Other
people will have to invent their own I suppose.

--
Phil Henshaw             ????.?? ? `?.????
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> From:
>
http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=108364&org=NSF&from=news
>
> "Natural systems, for example, provide stunning examples of effective
> communication, complex computation, efficient signaling, adaptive
> self-organization, and multimodal sensing using small but complex chemical
and
> physical networks. Studies of such biophysical systems will engage
physical and
> computer scientists, engineers, biologists and social scientists. All will
> demand creative approaches in the ultimate convergence of the physical,
bio-,

> nano-, info-, neuro-, and cognitive sciences."
>
> -Steve
>
> --- -. .   ..-. .. ... ....   - .-- ---   ..-. .. ... ....
> Stephen.Guerin at Redfish.com
> www.Redfish.com
> 624 Agua Fria Street, Santa Fe, NM 87501
> mobile: (505)577-5828
> office: Santa Fe, NM (505)995-0206 / London, UK +44 (0) 20 7993 4769
>
>
> ============================================================
> 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
>
>
>
>