Grant, Russ, Glen,
Ok. I think I got it. Paradoxically, it has to do with emergence. You would think I would have seen it right away. Thanks for your help. More later when the swirl dies down.
N
From: Grant Holland [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 4:52 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Cc: [hidden email]; Nicholas Thompson; glen e. p. ropella
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] entropy and uncertainty, REDUX
Nick,
Maybe let me explain how I use these two "dimensions" together in my "Organic Complex Systems" theory:
I am interested in 1) the Organization (structure) of organic systems, and 2) how that organization changes/evolves.
So, yes, Organization is "what is there" as you say. But, also "how that organization changes" is also "what is there".
But, furthermore, my theory is also very interested in something else about "organizational change" beyond just "how it changes". I am profoundly interested also in how "random" versus how "deterministic" that change can be. I am interested in this because I suspect that, in living systems, the randomness versus determinism thing is all over the map. Living system dynamics sometimes behaves randomly and sometimes behaves deterministically, and mostly "somewhere in between". At least it looks so to me.
Therefore, when it comes to #2) above - how the organization of living systems changes, I am also profoundly interested in characterizing the "predictability/unpredictability" aspects of that change, as well as the mechanism of "how" that change occurs. I need to represent how that "degree of unpredictability of change of organization" can itself change from time to time in biology. Shannon's entropy is the perfect model for this.
To recap, the organization of living systems can change: from disorganized to disorganized, from disorganized to organized, from organized to disorganized, and from organized to organized. (All four of these are actually continua.) But - and this is the point - all 4 of those types of changes can either be predictable or unpredictable.
(Yes, in biology, it sometimes occurs that a disorganized situation transitions to an organized situation with a high degree of probability. That's what make biology different from thermodynamics, and makes biology appear to contradict the second law sometimes.)
Consequently, you can see that I need a mathematics that lets Organization/Disorganization vary independently from Predictability/Unpredictability sometimes. Shannon entropy has a part to play in that - but thermodynamic entropy does not, because I am not doing Physics.
Grant
Nicholas Thompson wrote:
But you agree that good prediction requires there to be structure or a process that provides the frame work in which a prediction can be made.
Minimally, I think we assume that what we see is a feature of what is there. Not all careful observational techniques reveal the same aspect.
n
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Russ Abbott
Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 3:45 PM
To: Grant Holland
Cc: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] entropy and uncertainty, REDUX
That seems to me to be a different point--and one that Glen made about entropy a while ago. Scientific realists assume that what one sees is what there is, more or less, that structure in any dimension is presumed to be part of the universe, and that as observers we just see what is. (I know that's oversimplified, but that's the basic idea.) Predictability is different in that it's a matter of predicting something unknown when the prediction is made.
-- Russ
On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Grant Holland <[hidden email]> wrote:
t