Login  Register

Re: A question for the emergentists among you

Posted by Owen Densmore on Oct 11, 2009; 12:24am
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/A-question-for-the-emergentists-among-you-tp3799888p3801686.html

I'll buy that: the particular model space may not have to be a single  
one.  And our readings hopefully will lead to the good ones.

A model does, however, have to satisfy Timothy Cowers's notion of  
abstraction: that after the intuition drives you to an abstraction,  
you can cut the cord to to the intuition and live entirely within the  
abstraction.

The 10^-1 example: what in the hell does it mean to multiply something  
by itself -1 times!  The abstraction simply says that exponents are  
added during multiplication and subtracted during division.  That lets  
us also make sense of 10^0 = 1, which drives non-math folks mad!

And the abstraction does also have to be constructive: i.e. one can  
use the abstractions to create new entities within the abstraction.

TC's example of a 5-space cube being simply lists of 5 numbers.  His  
example of a unit 5-cube was great: (0 1 0 0 1) as an example vertex.  
That counting the number of possible 5-tuples of this sort (2^5=32)  
tells you the number of nodes the 5-cube has.  And so on for the edges  
(all tuples differing by a single digit).

This all biases me toward computational abstractions.  Besides, its  
way fun to write programs!

BTW: Gowers Mathematics: A Very Short Introduction has gotten great  
reviews on Amazon.  And, sigh, has made me have much more respect for  
philosophy (blush!).  If Russell and Wittgenstein helped Tim to arrive  
at a Fields medal and deliver the Millennium keynote, it can't be all  
bad.

Hey, maybe our next seminar should use Gowers's two books, both the  
small and the large (Princeton Companion to Mathematics)!  When the  
PCM gets to its second printing (thus reducing the errata  
considerably), I definitely will buy it.  And there is a digital  
version, making it easier to work with in a seminar.

     -- Owen


On Oct 10, 2009, at 5:40 PM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:

> Great!
>
> We seem to agree that models are important.  You are keener on  
> mathematical
> models ... that is models that are accompanied by a mathematical
> formalization ... I am keener than you about models like "natural
> selection"., where the model space is some phenomenon one feels one
> understands better than the phenomenon under examination, but in both
> cases, the procedure is the same ... commit your self to a domain that
> represents the phenomenon of interest, work within that domain, and  
> then
> return to the phenomenon to see where you have gotten.
>
> I think we need to think hard about the process by which the model  
> comes
> about in the first place ... the eureka moment, or as popper called  
> it, The
> Bold Conjecture."  Clearly some models are crap and others are very  
> useful.
>
>
> What I think we are doing now is assembling the equipment to  
> generate a
> good model as a opposed to a crappy one..
>
> Nick


============================================================
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