Posted by
Owen Densmore on
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Re-comm-was-Re-FW-Re-Emergence-Seminar-BritishEmergence-tp3654051p3696246.html
Very nice summary. One thing I've noticed in most of the modeling
I've done is that Game Theory matches social interactions best, while
Physics (constraints, physics, ...) matches physical interactions best.
Examples: Crowd dynamics is fairly easily done with a blend of simple
games (tit-for-tat, frustration, and so on) while modeling water
traffic on the Venice canals works best with GIS (constraints on a
graph, mass of the boats, etc).
So at least part of the difference between SoPS and Physical modeling
is in the formal domain that matches it best.
-- Owen
On Sep 22, 2009, at 2:04 PM, glen e. p. ropella wrote:
> Thus spake Russ Abbott circa 09-09-22 12:23 PM:
>> Would you tell me why that is important. Biology isn't physics. Is
>> the
>> fact that you don't consider it physics a criticism of biology?
>> Are you
>> saying biology should be physics? I'm missing the point.
>
> Wow. OK. Physics has one language for its hypothetical mechanisms
> and
> biology uses a totally different language. That's what I'm saying.
>
>> So what are you suggesting be done? Or am I still missing your point?
>
> You are totally missing my point. Economics is expressed in a
> language
> that is different from the language we use to express physics. The
> language of biology is also different from that of physics.
>
> I'm not suggesting anything be done. I'm defining complexity in
> response to Miles' conjecture that SoPS may be more complex than
> physical systems and in response to Jochen's suggestion that part of
> the
> reason for the apparent complexity of SoPS lies in the informality of
> the languages used to describe them.
>
> Here's a recap:
>
> Miles: Let SoPS be more complex than physical systems.
>
> Miles: .: Adequate explanation of SoPS requires more models than
> that of
> physical systems.
>
> Miles: .: More effort is required to explain SoPS than physical
> systems.
>
> Jochen: Perhaps SoPS are no more complex than physical systems, it's
> just that they haven't arrived at formalisms for them, yet.
>
> Me: SoPS are NOT necessarily more complex than physical systems, not
> (solely) due to informality, but because complexity is a result of
> circular causality and lexical mismatch.
>
> That's it. That's the end of it. That's all there is to it.
>
> --
> glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095,
http://agent-based-modeling.com>
>
> ============================================================
> 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