Technium (fyi)

[Gregory Soo]

The Technium: Speculations on the Future of Science

by Kevin Kelly, March 03 2006 http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/

...I offer the following as possible near-term advances in the evolution of
the scientific method:

Compiled Negative Results ? Negative results are saved, shared, compiled and
analyzed, instead of being dumped. Positive results may increase their
credibility when linked to negative results.

Triple Blind Experiments ? In a double blind experiment neither researcher
nor subject are aware of the controls, but both are aware of the experiment.
In a triple blind experiment all participants are blind to the controls and
to the very fact of the experiment itself.

Combinatorial Sweep Exploration ? Much of the unknown can be explored by
systematically creating random varieties of it at a large scale.

Evolutionary Search ? A combinatorial exploration can be taken even further.

Multiple Hypothesis Matrix ? Instead of proposing a series of single
hypothesis, in which each hypothesis is falsified and discarded until one
theory finally passes and is verified, a matrix of many hypothesis scenarios
are proposed and managed simultaneously.

Pattern Augmentation ? Pattern-seeking software which recognizes a pattern
in noisy results. In large bodies of information with many variables,
algorithmic discovery of patterns will become necessary and common.

Adaptive Real Time Experiments ? Results evaluated, and large-scale
experiments modified in real time. What we have now is primarily batch-mode
science.

AI Proofs ? Artificial intelligence will derive and check the logic of an
experiment. Ever more sophisticated and complicated science experiments
become ever more difficult to judge. Artificial expert systems will at first
evaluate the scientific logic of a paper to ensure the architecture of the
argument is valid. It will also ensure it publishes the required types of
data. This ?proof review? will augment the peer-review of editors and
reviewers.

Wiki-Science ? The average number of authors per paper continues to rise.
With massive collaborations, the numbers will boom.

Defined Benefit Funding ? Ordinarily science is funded by the experiment
(results not guaranteed) or by the investigator (nothing guaranteed). The
use of prize money for particular scientific achievements will play greater
roles. A goal is defined, funding secured for the first to reach it, and the
contest opened to all.

Zillionics ? Ubiquitous always-on sensors in bodies and environment will
transform medical, environmental, and space sciences. Unrelenting rivers of
sensory data will flow day and night from zillions of sources. The exploding
number of new, cheap, wireless, and novel sensing tools will require new
types of programs to distill, index and archive this ocean of data, as well
as to find meaningful signals in it. The field of ?zillionics? -- dealing
with zillions of data flows -- will be essential in health, natural
sciences, and astronomy.

Deep Simulations ? As our knowledge of complex systems advances, we can
construct more complex simulations of them. Both the success and failures of
these simulations will help us to acquire more knowledge of the systems.
Developing a robust simulation will become a fundamental part of science in
every field.

Hyper-analysis Mapping ? Just as meta-analysis gathered diverse experiments
on one subject and integrated their (sometimes contradictory) results into a
large meta-view, hyper-analysis creates an extremely large-scale view by
pulling together meta-analysis.

Return of the Subjective ? Science came into its own when it managed to
refuse the subjective and embrace the objective. The repeatability of an
experiment by another, perhaps less enthusiastic, observer was instrumental
in keeping science rational. But as science plunges into the outer limits of
scale ? at the largest and smallest ends ? and confronts the weirdness of
the fundamental principles of matter/energy/information such as that
inherent in quantum effects, it may not be able to ignore the role of
observer. Existence seems to be a paradox of self-causality, and any science
exploring the origins of existence will eventually have to embrace the
subjective, without become irrational. The tools for managing paradox are
still undeveloped.

Kevin Kelly will give a public talk on this very subject on Friday, March
10, in San Francisco, at the Cowell Theater, Fort Mason, 7pm, admission
free.

[Robert Holmes-2]

I'll just take a shot at two of the fish in this barrel:

On 3/7/06, Gregory Soo <gregory at soo.com> wrote:
>
> The Technium: Speculations on the Future of Science
>
> by Kevin Kelly, March 03 2006 http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/



Combinatorial Sweep Exploration ? Much of the unknown can be explored by
> systematically creating random varieties of it at a large scale.


We'll need some *really* fast computers. Let's say my ABM has 100 parameters
(not an unusually large number) and lets say I'm only going to look at two
values for each parameter. A combinatorial sweep would comprise 2^100 runs.
Is this a big number? Well, consider that the universe is about 2^98
picoseconds old. So if I had a computer that could make 10^12 simulation
runs per second and I'd had it running since the Big Bang, I'd be about a
quarter of the way through my sweep by now.


> Evolutionary Search ? A combinatorial exploration can be taken even
> further.


A search strategy even more exhaustive than an exhaustive evaluation of all
combinations? Hmmmm.....

Triple Blind Experiments ? In a double blind experiment neither researcher
> nor subject are aware of the controls, but both are aware of the
> experiment.
> In a triple blind experiment all participants are blind to the controls
> and
> to the very fact of the experiment itself.
>

(OK, three of the fish). Non-consensual experimentation on human subjects is
unethical (ask the victims of Milgram's obedience experiments).

Robert
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060307/888cbb3f/attachment.htm