Friam

the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Classic

List

Threaded

66 messages Options

1234

Vladimyr Burachynsky

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

If we agree to use Metaphor as a Fractured, Leaking Container for an Ur-Holy Idea, The Complex,

that is not even in the neighborhood of stalling. Fumbling in the dark, OK, but not Stalling.

Note I used Ur and not un, implying that this idea is very ancient.

Not only is this Group having a surplus of Glen’s but a surplus of disoriented Catholics.

So too, am I with the distinction that I was raised as a Ukrainian Greek Catholic with slightly

different procedures. Yet in full communion with Rome , but not Roman.

We are known to maintain a rather Orthodox stance , never having accepted total celibacy,

and other quirks.

Language seems unintentionally an overused tool of Control Freaks. I pursued my Doctorate

to intentionally defy those freaks in public service. And engineers that made stupid mistakes.

So how can I banish the scourge of scolding Nurses… Garlic maybe, it leaves no marks.

On another relevant point, parallax needs at least two eyes to work effectively. But mankind seems

to use his hands to Study in addition to ears and eyes.

Praxis and Parallax.

I recently entertained a Bishop with an enthusiasm for Science but incompatible training.

He was pleasant enough but tutoring is not something I am likely to resume. Soon I expect

to see the Grim Reaper and have to apologize for avoiding him all these years.

Vladimyr

perhaps the writing of computer code engages all faculties at once…

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: June-23-17 5:27 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Nick sez:

We have a word for tingo, don’t we? Its “to ”borrow””.

In my experience 'to "borrow" ', in our culture usually means to "take without permission" or more bluntly "to steal".   That extends to "borrowing without returning" and anecdotally we are familiar with those who seem to do this chronically, though I don't know of it ever driving anyone to pauperhood.   I suppose, in the right extended context, one could claim that "tingo" and " 'borrow' " (with quotes) are roughly sememes... but that is a LOT of context!

There are other words in Rapanui for "to steal" which seem to all have an implication of "stealing things of little value", "to pilfer".   I'm not sure that "tingo" is a euphamism for simply borrowing without returning, it might very well be a real cultural experience that doesn't occur (often?) in our culture?

I wonder if there is an analog in "borrow words" between languages... can one language "borrow" so many word from another that the target of the borrowing becomes impoverished?   Within small circles I suppose that one could make that claim for Pidgens/Creoles where the resulting language is so much richer than the word-donor language that it might be true in some figurative sense... or where the borrow words' meaning becomes more closely associated with the borrowing language than the mother tongue?

Curiouser and curiouser,
- Steve

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Vladimyr Burachynsky

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

To all the wandering lost colleagues in the congregation,

thank you all,

So after Tom and Dean’s contributions someone has to assemble a team to put this together

in text and images/

I only realized today that my stupid Flowers were connected to all this struggle.

I did suspect something long ago and kept at it.

My flowers now use 5 simple networks and each is a 28 x 162 Rectangular Matrix each containing a circular Self Avoiding Walks.

By connecting all five walks without crossing any path The Flower Emerges.

By warping any single SAW at specific locations with GrowthFactors,

It appears to grow. If I apply a displacement function to all SAW’s at once then it appears to move.

in truth the flower only utilizes a very small portion of each simple network.

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkyTZd31rUbkkh_ap

Thank you all, but now I am very tired…

Those infuriating layers may well be each some kind of container projections/boundaries out side of x,y, and z.

Perhaps this is all a child’s plaything…

vladimyr

Tom--

Fine, informative article. One cohesive view of the evolution of mathematical thought might be:

1. Geometry/ number theory.

2. Early algebra (symbolic thought)

3. Analysis (analytic geometry and calculus)

4. Topology.

5. Abstract algebra (previous century)

6. Algebraic topology( integrates concepts from many disciplines) Highly applicable to modern science, e.g. your reverenced article?

Thanks for the link. Dean Gerber

On Saturday, June 24, 2017 12:01 PM, Tom Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:

https://goo.gl/S5yRGF

============================================
Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h)
Society of Professional Journalists
Check out It's The People's Data

http://www.jtjohnson.com [hidden email]
============================================

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Nick Thompson
Sent: June-23-17 4:31 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Thank you, Frank. A really important point.

So bachelor implies unmarried, but unmarried does not imply bachelor. Your message also contained some additional correspondence which, for some reason, I have never seen. I have no quick answer to any of it. I still think that there is an important peril in explanations of the form “A is the explanation for A” but I am way less confident of my ability to identify pernicious extensions of that form. And it still seems significant to me that you complexitists have not identified and agreed upon a target for your explanatory efforts. (Please remind me, I if I am wrong about that). So, unless I have gone dozy, we have two outstanding questions:

1. When complexitists speak of complexity, to what phenomenon are they referring?

2. What are the conditions that predict the occurrence of such phenomena.

3. Does anybody on this list believe that it is fair to include parts of your answer to question #1 in your answer to question #2

One more thing. Back in the email midden several days ago, I said something to Glen that was inadvertently tactless and overtly stupid. Glen responded with kindness, generosity, and indefatigable focus on the main issues. This is to announce my gratitude to Glen for being … well … Glen. I am honored that you-guys let me sit on the edge of your pool and dangle my feet in it. That’s a metaphor.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 9:52 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Has anybody mentioned that there are lot of unmarried men that you usually wouldn't call bachelors? There are widowers, priests, and nineteen year-olds, for example. I learned the word because my father's brother was a thirty-five year old Major in the Air Force with no wife. He eventually got married and had children. Late bloomer?

Frank

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jun 22, 2017 11:34 PM, "gepr ⛧" <[hidden email]> wrote:

But the difference isn't merely rhetorical. If we take the setup seriously, that the unmarried patient really doesn't know the other names by which his condition is known, then there are all sorts of different side effects that might obtain. E.g. if the doctor tells him he's a bachelor, he might google that and discover bachelor parties. But if the doctor tells him he is "single", he might discover single's night at the local pub.

My point was not only the evocation of various ideas, but also the side effects of various (computational) paths.

On June 22, 2017 7:00:55 PM PDT, Eric Charles <[hidden email]> wrote:

>Glen said: "So, the loop of unmarried <=> bachelor has information in
>it,
>even if the only information is (as in your example), the guy learns
>that
>because the condition has another name, perhaps there are other ways of
>thinking about it ... other _circles_ to use."
>
>This reminds me that, in another context, Nick complained to me quite a
>bit
>about Peirce's asserting that that any concept was simply a collection
>of
>conceived "practical" consequences. He felt that the term "practical"
>was
>unnecessary, and lead to confusions. I think this is a good example of
>why
>Peirce used that term, and felt it necessary.
>
>Perice would point out that the practical consequences of being
>"unmarried"
>are identical to the practical consequences of being "a bachelor."
>Thus,
>though the spellings be different, there is only one idea at play there
>(in
>Peirce-land... if we are thinking clearly). This is the tautology that
>Nick
>is pointing at, and he isn't wrong.
>
>And yet, Glen is still clearly correct that using one term or the other
>may
>more readily invoke certain ideas in a listener. Those aren't practical
>differences in Peirce's sense- they are not differences in practice
>that
>would achieve if one tested the unique implications of one label or the
>other (as there are no contrasting unique implications). The value of
>having the multiple terms is rhetorical, not logical.
>
>What to do with such differences..............

--
⛧glen⛧

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

I love the music.

Frank

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jun 24, 2017 9:02 PM, "Vladimyr" <[hidden email]> wrote:

To all the wandering lost colleagues in the congregation,
thank you all,

So after Tom and Dean’s contributions someone has to assemble a team to put this together
in text and images/

I only realized today that my stupid Flowers were connected to all this struggle.
I did suspect something long ago and kept at it.
My flowers now use 5 simple networks and each is a 28 x 162 Rectangular Matrix each containing a circular Self Avoiding Walks.
By connecting all five walks without crossing any path The Flower Emerges.

By warping any single SAW at specific locations with GrowthFactors,
It appears to grow. If I apply a displacement function to all SAW’s at once then it appears to    move.
in truth the flower only utilizes a very small portion of each simple network.
https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkyTZd31rUbkkh_ap

Thank you all, but now I am very tired…
Those infuriating layers may well be each some kind of container projections/boundaries out side of x,y, and z.
Perhaps this is all a child’s plaything…
vladimyr

Tom--

Fine, informative article. One cohesive view of the evolution of mathematical thought might be:

1. Geometry/ number theory.

2. Early algebra (symbolic thought)

3. Analysis (analytic geometry and calculus)

4. Topology.

5. Abstract algebra (previous century)

6. Algebraic topology( integrates concepts from many disciplines) Highly applicable to modern science, e.g. your reverenced article?

Thanks for the link. Dean Gerber

On Saturday, June 24, 2017 12:01 PM, Tom Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:

https://goo.gl/S5yRGF

============================================
Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   --     Santa Fe, NM USA
<a href="tel:(505)%20577-6482" value="+15055776482" target="_blank">505.577.6482(c)               <a href="tel:(505)%20473-9646" value="+15054739646" target="_blank">505.473.9646(h)
Society of Professional Journalists
Check out It's The People's Data
http://www.jtjohnson.com    [hidden email]
============================================
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Nick Thompson
Sent: June-23-17 4:31 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Thank you, Frank. A really important point.

So bachelor implies unmarried, but unmarried does not imply bachelor. Your message also contained some additional correspondence which, for some reason, I have never seen. I have no quick answer to any of it. I still think that there is an important peril in explanations of the form “A is the explanation for A” but I am way less confident of my ability to identify pernicious extensions of that form. And it still seems significant to me that you complexitists have not identified and agreed upon a target for your explanatory efforts. (Please remind me, I if I am wrong about that). So, unless I have gone dozy, we have two outstanding questions:

1.       When complexitists speak of complexity, to what phenomenon are they referring?
2.       What are the conditions that predict the occurrence of such phenomena.
3.       Does anybody on this list believe that it is fair to include parts of your answer to question #1 in your answer to question #2

One more thing. Back in the email midden several days ago, I said something to Glen that was inadvertently tactless and overtly stupid. Glen responded with kindness, generosity, and indefatigable focus on the main issues. This is to announce my gratitude to Glen for being … well … Glen. I am honored that you-guys let me sit on the edge of your pool and dangle my feet in it. That’s a metaphor.

Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 9:52 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Has anybody mentioned that there are lot of unmarried men that you usually wouldn't call bachelors? There are widowers, priests, and nineteen year-olds, for example. I learned the word because my father's brother was a thirty-five year old Major in the Air Force with no wife. He eventually got married and had children. Late bloomer?

Frank
Frank Wimberly
Phone <a href="tel:(505)%20670-9918" value="+15056709918" target="_blank">(505) 670-9918

On Jun 22, 2017 11:34 PM, "gepr ⛧" <[hidden email]> wrote:
But the difference isn't merely rhetorical. If we take the setup seriously, that the unmarried patient really doesn't know the other names by which his condition is known, then there are all sorts of different side effects that might obtain. E.g. if the doctor tells him he's a bachelor, he might google that and discover bachelor parties. But if the doctor tells him he is "single", he might discover single's night at the local pub.

My point was not only the evocation of various ideas, but also the side effects of various (computational) paths.

On June 22, 2017 7:00:55 PM PDT, Eric Charles <[hidden email]> wrote:

>Glen said: "So, the loop of unmarried <=> bachelor has information in
>it,
>even if the only information is (as in your example), the guy learns
>that
>because the condition has another name, perhaps there are other ways of
>thinking about it ... other _circles_ to use."
>
>This reminds me that, in another context, Nick complained to me quite a
>bit
>about Peirce's asserting that that any concept was simply a collection
>of
>conceived "practical" consequences. He felt that the term "practical"
>was
>unnecessary, and lead to confusions. I think this is a good example of
>why
>Peirce used that term, and felt it necessary.
>
>Perice would point out that the practical consequences of being
>"unmarried"
>are identical to the practical consequences of being "a bachelor."
>Thus,
>though the spellings be different, there is only one idea at play there
>(in
>Peirce-land... if we are thinking clearly). This is the tautology that
>Nick
>is pointing at, and he isn't wrong.
>
>And yet, Glen is still clearly correct that using one term or the other
>may
>more readily invoke certain ideas in a listener. Those aren't practical
>differences in Peirce's sense- they are not differences in practice
>that
>would achieve if one tested the unique implications of one label or the
>other (as there are no contrasting unique implications). The value of
>having the multiple terms is rhetorical, not logical.
>
>What to do with such differences..............

--
⛧glen⛧

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Vladimyr Burachynsky

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

1. I am not sure, it seems often very different

2. Multiple Networks that are connected

3. I am feeling cagey, in my case definitely.

I think that even with broken large assemblies that have connections a pattern is visible but perhaps as Glen implied mis-registered.

Personally I seem to think that in my case it’s a system of connected Networks.

Too large to make sense of and much to dynamic to fix long enough to examine.

The Emergence of my simple flower is a drastic reduction of the whole. It is less than the

entire overhead but representative. If the flower approached the entire span of nodes

in each sub-graph I would probably quit looking, in exasperation. Any excuse for failure would be welcomed.

But I am trying today

To my simple mind this must be what traffic control experts wrestle with for national highway networks, where

some entities are fixed while others are moving not strictly where they should.

Steve made a remark about Node valence… it struck me that when I adopted a directed graph structure that certain

Nodes had higher valences since they connected to separate networks. Some nodes within the graph have low valence along the perimeters.

They make no effort at bridging.

So the Flower is representative of Nodes with high valence distributed along a Self Avoiding Walk that is circular or tubular.

The Flower does not exist in or within any of the primary Networks it is completely new and may be a network in itself as well

as an emergent structure.

I use quadrilateral surfaces in space like puzzle pieces to figure out what I am seeing, often I am wrong but better than nothing.

So huge parts of my Networks seem to do nothing and in some instances Nodes have Zero valence value. What is their role?

Tom and Dean jumped in a dropped that neurology paper like a shark in my canoe. But they knew what would happen and chuckled.

I am still chewing on the original paper.

So thanks guys, it will take weeks to eat this fish.

I got the pdf and should figure out how to share the text. The simplex concept should help answer how birds learn songs .

Can a group of neurons become a reference tutor to detect errors…

Vladimyr

Thank you, Frank. A really important point.

1. When complexitists speak of complexity, to what phenomenon are they referring?

2. What are the conditions that predict the occurrence of such phenomena.

3. Does anybody on this list believe that it is fair to include parts of your answer to question #1 in your answer to question #2

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

Frank

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jun 22, 2017 11:34 PM, "gepr ⛧" <[hidden email]> wrote:

But the difference isn't merely rhetorical. If we take the setup seriously, that the unmarried patient really doesn't know the other names by which his condition is known, then there are all sorts of different side effects that might obtain. E.g. if the doctor tells him he's a bachelor, he might google that and discover bachelor parties. But if the doctor tells him he is "single", he might discover single's night at the local pub.

My point was not only the evocation of various ideas, but also the side effects of various (computational) paths.

On June 22, 2017 7:00:55 PM PDT, Eric Charles <[hidden email]> wrote:

>Glen said: "So, the loop of unmarried <=> bachelor has information in
>it,
>even if the only information is (as in your example), the guy learns
>that
>because the condition has another name, perhaps there are other ways of
>thinking about it ... other _circles_ to use."
>
>This reminds me that, in another context, Nick complained to me quite a
>bit
>about Peirce's asserting that that any concept was simply a collection
>of
>conceived "practical" consequences. He felt that the term "practical"
>was
>unnecessary, and lead to confusions. I think this is a good example of
>why
>Peirce used that term, and felt it necessary.
>
>Perice would point out that the practical consequences of being
>"unmarried"
>are identical to the practical consequences of being "a bachelor."
>Thus,
>though the spellings be different, there is only one idea at play there
>(in
>Peirce-land... if we are thinking clearly). This is the tautology that
>Nick
>is pointing at, and he isn't wrong.
>
>And yet, Glen is still clearly correct that using one term or the other
>may
>more readily invoke certain ideas in a listener. Those aren't practical
>differences in Peirce's sense- they are not differences in practice
>that
>would achieve if one tested the unique implications of one label or the
>other (as there are no contrasting unique implications). The value of
>having the multiple terms is rhetorical, not logical.
>
>What to do with such differences..............

--
⛧glen⛧

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Vladimyr Burachynsky

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

Gentlemen,

This thread seems to have stalled out and just at a time when I have started to make some progress

toward answering Nick Thompson’s carefully crafted petition aimed at the Oracles of Delphi.

I have been on the look-out for anything that may prove helpful.

What I now have may seem as inscrutable as those ancient responses.

First Nick has so defined metaphor , that it seems only a literary concept. This may in itself be an accidental layer obscuring

the essential target of interest. The way we think creatively. It may be that many use literary elements for their

art, but in my peculiar case that is not true. Whether or not I am typical is unknown , perhaps not even important.

I recently re-discovered old worksheets of mine at solving a problem with mixed results. However there was a peculiar subroutine that

did work at projecting a Self Avoiding Walk in 3 space. At the time that I constructed this routine I had no idea what a self avoiding walk

actually was capable of doing or its relationship to anything remotely related to my own interests. In simple language this was a line growing

out in a path appearing quite random seeming to have no destination. Using some patience I waited and watched as it wiggled about resembling a worm writhing

on a sidewalk after a downpour. It eventually found it’s origin and formed a closed loop only to repeat exactly the same gyrations and return to the start position.

This may be a defect of my mind but I was mesmerized as when as a child I discovered a rattlesnake in the woods behind our summer house.

Nick’s questions appear to be searching for a structure to support his desire to Understand Complexity and write that down. A most worthy if not dangerous ambition.

Nick is familiar with words and even comfortable in their presence, while I find images and math more reassuring.

However, I may actually have on my desktop sufficient material to answer a substantial part of these ominous questions. Knowing that my cleverness

is untested in this arena I have been slow to jump into the melee. My own hesitancy comes from the fear that Complexity may be an artifact of mind as well

as reality and unravelling the knot will require more cleverness than my own. The Neurology Research suggests this is imminent.

Many of the arguments tossed back and forth in the congregation contain Circularity as one important article of contention. So too does the notion present itself in my

work on re-circulant matrices. I can’t escape this property so I must accommodate it somehow, usually in graphic animations. Glen’s arguments are often very astute even if

momentarily infuriating and he must be given much credit for herding the geese on the long walk to the market.

In 1992 I was given a copy of Artificial Life edited by C.G.Langton while still a student and was much impressed but preoccupied and very remote.

It is time for new effort , a quarter century has been long enough.

So Gentlemen where do we start …

I placed a video essay of sorts on my cloud site you are invited to comment , criticise but please no insincere flattery.

The point is to demonstrate some of the difficulties we can expect using New Media to convey ideas to a new audience.

It is my start and wholly inadequate, but that is as good a way as any to begin an adventure, my style is to start on the wrong foot,

then fix things later…

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkyVxZJic6mnolcr1

If possible text should be accompanied with video and presented as open material on the web.

I am sure that many of you can help guide/assemble such a work,

Well its not like building an building an Alaska Highway

vladimyr

Thank you, Frank. A really important point.

1. When complexitists speak of complexity, to what phenomenon are they referring?

2. What are the conditions that predict the occurrence of such phenomena.

3. Does anybody on this list believe that it is fair to include parts of your answer to question #1 in your answer to question #2

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

Frank

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jun 22, 2017 11:34 PM, "gepr ⛧" <[hidden email]> wrote:

But the difference isn't merely rhetorical. If we take the setup seriously, that the unmarried patient really doesn't know the other names by which his condition is known, then there are all sorts of different side effects that might obtain. E.g. if the doctor tells him he's a bachelor, he might google that and discover bachelor parties. But if the doctor tells him he is "single", he might discover single's night at the local pub.

My point was not only the evocation of various ideas, but also the side effects of various (computational) paths.

On June 22, 2017 7:00:55 PM PDT, Eric Charles <[hidden email]> wrote:

>Glen said: "So, the loop of unmarried <=> bachelor has information in
>it,
>even if the only information is (as in your example), the guy learns
>that
>because the condition has another name, perhaps there are other ways of
>thinking about it ... other _circles_ to use."
>
>This reminds me that, in another context, Nick complained to me quite a
>bit
>about Peirce's asserting that that any concept was simply a collection
>of
>conceived "practical" consequences. He felt that the term "practical"
>was
>unnecessary, and lead to confusions. I think this is a good example of
>why
>Peirce used that term, and felt it necessary.
>
>Perice would point out that the practical consequences of being
>"unmarried"
>are identical to the practical consequences of being "a bachelor."
>Thus,
>though the spellings be different, there is only one idea at play there
>(in
>Peirce-land... if we are thinking clearly). This is the tautology that
>Nick
>is pointing at, and he isn't wrong.
>
>And yet, Glen is still clearly correct that using one term or the other
>may
>more readily invoke certain ideas in a listener. Those aren't practical
>differences in Peirce's sense- they are not differences in practice
>that
>would achieve if one tested the unique implications of one label or the
>other (as there are no contrasting unique implications). The value of
>having the multiple terms is rhetorical, not logical.
>
>What to do with such differences..............

--
⛧glen⛧

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Vladimyr Burachynsky

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

To Nick Thompson,

I may have made an error when trying to reply with my Outlook email software not

so unusual in this heat and with my condition. I apologize for confusion.

I have been wrestling with your questions. Honestly.

I asked myself essentially the same some time ago so I seem to have struck off on my own.

Not my first time in the wilderness feeling naked.

The congregation ruckus has rekindled the fire under my arse. So here is my unholy

mixture of math and hidden philosophy

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkybexnPVUncB5kt8

you may have to wait for a moment to download . I would like to volunteer to help you

with your efforts but can no longer travel. Glen Ropella most assuredly plays a major role in asking

difficult questions which act as pivot points to redirect lines of inquiry. My own efforts are seemingly

at some distance but when forced to think philosophically. I see we have much in common, I have even

provided some evidence of layers or levels in another guise. Name as of yet unknown… You both appear to have been

correct in some ways.

The object I work with is convenient but in no way obligated/entitled to importance. I could just as easily work with

a section of a millipede or a wind turbine.

This thread should be maintained even though it seems to be rather dormant.

I am well aware that my offer also hides self interest but we can discuss that after this heat passes.

vladimyr

Thank you, Frank. A really important point.

1. When complexitists speak of complexity, to what phenomenon are they referring?

2. What are the conditions that predict the occurrence of such phenomena.

3. Does anybody on this list believe that it is fair to include parts of your answer to question #1 in your answer to question #2

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

Frank

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jun 22, 2017 11:34 PM, "gepr ⛧" <[hidden email]> wrote:

But the difference isn't merely rhetorical. If we take the setup seriously, that the unmarried patient really doesn't know the other names by which his condition is known, then there are all sorts of different side effects that might obtain. E.g. if the doctor tells him he's a bachelor, he might google that and discover bachelor parties. But if the doctor tells him he is "single", he might discover single's night at the local pub.

My point was not only the evocation of various ideas, but also the side effects of various (computational) paths.

On June 22, 2017 7:00:55 PM PDT, Eric Charles <[hidden email]> wrote:

>Glen said: "So, the loop of unmarried <=> bachelor has information in
>it,
>even if the only information is (as in your example), the guy learns
>that
>because the condition has another name, perhaps there are other ways of
>thinking about it ... other _circles_ to use."
>
>This reminds me that, in another context, Nick complained to me quite a
>bit
>about Peirce's asserting that that any concept was simply a collection
>of
>conceived "practical" consequences. He felt that the term "practical"
>was
>unnecessary, and lead to confusions. I think this is a good example of
>why
>Peirce used that term, and felt it necessary.
>
>Perice would point out that the practical consequences of being
>"unmarried"
>are identical to the practical consequences of being "a bachelor."
>Thus,
>though the spellings be different, there is only one idea at play there
>(in
>Peirce-land... if we are thinking clearly). This is the tautology that
>Nick
>is pointing at, and he isn't wrong.
>
>And yet, Glen is still clearly correct that using one term or the other
>may
>more readily invoke certain ideas in a listener. Those aren't practical
>differences in Peirce's sense- they are not differences in practice
>that
>would achieve if one tested the unique implications of one label or the
>other (as there are no contrasting unique implications). The value of
>having the multiple terms is rhetorical, not logical.
>
>What to do with such differences..............

--
⛧glen⛧

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

gepr

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

These are nice videos. Your requirement that we respond with video is difficult for me because I don't normally produce video... I could provide, say, an "in silico liver visualization". But the extra content would obscure any message, I think. But this video by other people is relevant to both emergence and the type of rhetorical circularity we've been talking about:

You Can't See This (MIND TRICKS)
https://youtu.be/0NPH_udOOek

Your videos show, I think, a typical sense of emergence that is often conflated with the perspective of the observer. They are essentially numerical solutions (numbers at the generator level) to perceptual/perspectival questions/predicates (patterns at some phenomenal level). Whether we have a coherent formulation of the phenomenon we're trying to generate (the flower) or not, a priori, is largely irrelevant. The pixels generate the wiggly lines generate the larger patterns, etc. Our inability to *predict* those larger patterns from the smaller patterns is a type of emergence ... but many might claim it's a weak form of emergence.

The video of the blind spot, illusions, and our tendency to see only what we expect to see, demonstrates (I think) a stronger (though not the strongest) form of emergence. Therein, our *expectations* of the phenomenon bias, eliminate, or create components of the phenomenon so that what obtains (the concepts in our heads/bodies after experiencing the phenomenon) has different properties that cannot be derived solely (objectively) from the generators. Our expectations give the experience properties the phenomenon doesn't have.

This sort of medium-strength emergence (or perhaps illusory emergence) depends fundamentally on the rhetorical circularity of expectation/anticipation. And I can't help but think your flowers-from-numbers narrative has a bit of it, too. But I don't think it has any "still yet stronger" emergence. For that to happen, we'd need to fully decouple the end result (the flower pattern) from its generators ... perhaps with a 3D printer or growing/breeding real flowers to meet the predicate(s) set by the videos of (perspectives on) the virtual flower[*]. Once the flowers are decoupled from their in silico analogs, then they can be participants in a larger system, where other members of that system can find/exploit unintended properties of the decoupled flowers, not immediately/obviously resident in the orginal numbers/matrices that constructed the in silico flowers.

I hope what I'm saying here is at least somewhat coherent.

[*] Another method of decoupling might be to parallelize the "world" in which the digital flowers grow/live and distribute it across multiple computers that allow interfering manipulation/interaction with other processors or meat space. I.e. approach a co-evolutionary set of populations that can find/exploit unintended properties of any given in silico flower (or closure of the flower). Also, I regard this discussion as largely apathetic to the metaphysical *stances* of [anti]reductionism. The key to my point lies in the extent to which scope, perspective, context, or membership in a collective allows a pluralism of "properties" or salient property sets for any given component.

On 07/17/2017 08:22 PM, Vladimyr wrote:

> To Nick Thompson,
>
>
>
> I may have made an error when trying to reply with my Outlook email software not
>
> so unusual in this heat and with my condition. I apologize for confusion.
>
> I have been wrestling with your questions. Honestly.
>
>
>
> I asked myself essentially the same some time ago so I seem to have struck off on my own.
>
> Not my first time in the wilderness feeling naked.
>
>
>
> The congregation ruckus has rekindled the fire under my arse. So here is my unholy
>
> mixture of math and hidden philosophy
>
> https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkybexnPVUncB5kt8
>
>
>
> you may have to wait for a moment to download . I would like to volunteer to help you
>
> with your efforts but can no longer travel. Glen Ropella most assuredly plays a major role in asking
>
> difficult questions which act as pivot points to redirect lines of inquiry. My own efforts are seemingly
>
> at some distance but when forced to think philosophically. I see we have much in common, I have even
>
> provided some evidence of layers or levels in another guise. Name as of yet unknown… You both appear to have been
>
> correct in some ways.
>
>
>
> The object I work with is convenient but in no way obligated/entitled to importance. I could just as easily work with
>
> a section of a millipede or a wind turbine.
>
> This thread should be maintained even though it seems to be rather dormant.
>
> I am well aware that my offer also hides self interest but we can discuss that after this heat passes.

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Vladimyr Burachynsky

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Glen,

I re-read your response and can only find a single paltry non- issue, 3D printing may only capture a single frame or object, of little use.

The rest of the body of the reply seems to agree with my own ideas in more elegant terms. I intentionally left openings in the code that should allow
independent operators even AI to attempt to generate some structures to prove that very few shapes are recognizable. The port to engineering FEM analysis still
functions, so even if unrecognizable shapes are generated , the structural analysis is still possible, but probably not aesthetics. That may mean little since one piece of software is evaluating another based on
mathematical properties.

There is no need to think I made video, a requisite, it is easier for me than typing since I wrestle with MS paralysis and tremors.

If you partition emergence into categories such as weak or strong, then is there ever a cut-off point where, it is or is not.

If ideas are the true emergent phenomena and these do require repeated circular neural networks to fix or manifest then strength may mean
something closer to resistance to deformation or breakage.

If you have any more suggestions on removing myself from the process please advise. Perhaps directly so as not to clutter the forum.
I will soon attempt to use random number generators. But expect little of consequence.
I am thinking of putting spheres at each node and applying spin, angular momentum to see the effects. But will have to wait out my current physical
inconvenience.

I hope Nick found something useful on his quest.
Vladimyr

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: July-18-17 5:28 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

These are nice videos. Your requirement that we respond with video is difficult for me because I don't normally produce video... I could provide, say, an "in silico liver visualization". But the extra content would obscure any message, I think. But this video by other people is relevant to both emergence and the type of rhetorical circularity we've been talking about:

You Can't See This (MIND TRICKS)
https://youtu.be/0NPH_udOOek

Your videos show, I think, a typical sense of emergence that is often conflated with the perspective of the observer. They are essentially numerical solutions (numbers at the generator level) to perceptual/perspectival questions/predicates (patterns at some phenomenal level). Whether we have a coherent formulation of the phenomenon we're trying to generate (the flower) or not, a priori, is largely irrelevant. The pixels generate the wiggly lines generate the larger patterns, etc. Our inability to *predict* those larger patterns from the smaller patterns is a type of emergence ... but many might claim it's a weak form of emergence.

The video of the blind spot, illusions, and our tendency to see only what we expect to see, demonstrates (I think) a stronger (though not the strongest) form of emergence. Therein, our *expectations* of the phenomenon bias, eliminate, or create components of the phenomenon so that what obtains (the concepts in our heads/bodies after experiencing the phenomenon) has different properties that cannot be derived solely (objectively) from the generators. Our expectations give the experience properties the phenomenon doesn't have.

This sort of medium-strength emergence (or perhaps illusory emergence) depends fundamentally on the rhetorical circularity of expectation/anticipation. And I can't help but think your flowers-from-numbers narrative has a bit of it, too. But I don't think it has any "still yet stronger" emergence. For that to happen, we'd need to fully decouple the end result (the flower pattern) from its generators ... perhaps with a 3D printer or growing/breeding real flowers to meet the predicate(s) set by the videos of (perspectives on) the virtual flower[*]. Once the flowers are decoupled from their in silico analogs, then they can be participants in a larger system, where other members of that system can find/exploit unintended properties of the decoupled flowers, not immediately/obviously resident in the orginal numbers/matrices that constructed the in silico flowers.

I hope what I'm saying here is at least somewhat coherent.

[*] Another method of decoupling might be to parallelize the "world" in which the digital flowers grow/live and distribute it across multiple computers that allow interfering manipulation/interaction with other processors or meat space. I.e. approach a co-evolutionary set of populations that can find/exploit unintended properties of any given in silico flower (or closure of the flower). Also, I regard this discussion as largely apathetic to the metaphysical *stances* of [anti]reductionism. The key to my point lies in the extent to which scope, perspective, context, or membership in a collective allows a pluralism of "properties" or salient property sets for any given component.

On 07/17/2017 08:22 PM, Vladimyr wrote:

> To Nick Thompson,
>
>
>
> I may have made an error when trying to reply with my Outlook email
> software not
>
> so unusual in this heat and with my condition. I apologize for confusion.
>
> I have been wrestling with your questions. Honestly.
>
>
>
> I asked myself essentially the same some time ago so I seem to have struck off on my own.
>
> Not my first time in the wilderness feeling naked.
>
>
>
> The congregation ruckus has rekindled the fire under my arse. So here
> is my unholy
>
> mixture of math and hidden philosophy
>
> https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkybexnPVUncB5kt8
>
>
>
> you may have to wait for a moment to download . I would like to
> volunteer to help you
>
> with your efforts but can no longer travel. Glen Ropella most
> assuredly plays a major role in asking
>
> difficult questions which act as pivot points to redirect lines of
> inquiry. My own efforts are seemingly
>
> at some distance but when forced to think philosophically. I see we
> have much in common, I have even
>
> provided some evidence of layers or levels in another guise. Name as
> of yet unknown… You both appear to have been
>
> correct in some ways.
>
>
>
> The object I work with is convenient but in no way obligated/entitled
> to importance. I could just as easily work with
>
> a section of a millipede or a wind turbine.
>
> This thread should be maintained even though it seems to be rather dormant.
>
> I am well aware that my offer also hides self interest but we can discuss that after this heat passes.

--
☣ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

gepr

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

If the forum expresses irritation, then we can take it offline. Otherwise, I will treat them like I like to be treated ... voyeurism can be a good thing. 8^)

Rather than (or in addition to) using pseudo-random number generators, do something like:

1) https://api.random.org/guidelines,
2) use other numbers, like the number of hits you get when you google something (e.g. a source code function),
3) invoke a script engine and allow me to place some scripted functions on a website that you import and execute,
4) pass along some subset of the functions you're using, perhaps in pseudo-code, so that we can modify or suggest different ones that you then incorporate.

Of these (3) is the most interesting to me. But even (4) would be cool.

On 07/18/2017 05:19 PM, Vladimyr wrote:
> I intentionally left openings in the code that should allow independent operators even AI to attempt to generate some structures to prove that very few shapes are recognizable.
> [...]
> If you have any more suggestions on removing myself from the process please advise. Perhaps directly so as not to clutter the forum.
> I will soon attempt to use random number generators.
> [...]

--
☣ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Vladimyr Burachynsky

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Glen,

I already use AutoHotKey Script to run Code in Maple Math and Dump .txt vertex data embedded in Processing 3 code (some Java offshoot)
The autoHotKey assembles the hundreds of images and 3D objects into ordered sets and then runs MovieMaker to produce video .wmv, which you have seen already.

It was my intention to convert the functional routines from Maple directly into Processing and share that code widely.
But few people other than web artists use Processing and it does not seem able to run on a web site. I guess this is a general problem or short coming.

Processing graphics are fast and surprisingly good, better than I am used to elsewhere.
I will try and write the Processing version of the Maple guts and get it out but it may take sometime and others will have to install
the Processing engine which is free but sort of clunky to set up.

There are a number of issues that all this cross talk introduces such as while Processing does crank out 3D object files readily accepted by 3D printers.
But it handles colors strangely and seems unable to mix these objects with solid primitives during object creation. A task probably better suited to CAD packages.

If this is done you will probably by amazed at all the useless junk that pours out at the far end. Like my undergrads trying to build a toboggan out of concrete.

One issue I see is that the more removed the operator the less incentive he will have to connect his actions to the distant outcome.
There was a profound moment in my memory when you and Nick , I think, dabbled with misinterpretation vs premature registration...
I noticed that from the video I had a choice to imagine a squiggly line, a worm, a leaf or a set of leaves with a flower if I waited a bit longer. I thought of the process
as a series of unfolding Emergence events passing by very quickly and soon forgotten when the last was accepted.

Perhaps we jump through Metaphoric fiery rings till we think we understand.
Thank-you again for the suggestions.
I worry a bit about keeping this process as easy and transparent as possible, avoiding Python or Anaconda's.
inSilico Ecology as an idea has startling possibilities. Energy flow will make that possible I think. But just where do I start...Hmmm

vladimyr

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: July-19-17 11:17 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

If the forum expresses irritation, then we can take it offline. Otherwise, I will treat them like I like to be treated ... voyeurism can be a good thing. 8^)

Rather than (or in addition to) using pseudo-random number generators, do something like:

1) https://api.random.org/guidelines,
2) use other numbers, like the number of hits you get when you google something (e.g. a source code function),
3) invoke a script engine and allow me to place some scripted functions on a website that you import and execute,
4) pass along some subset of the functions you're using, perhaps in pseudo-code, so that we can modify or suggest different ones that you then incorporate.

Of these (3) is the most interesting to me. But even (4) would be cool.

On 07/18/2017 05:19 PM, Vladimyr wrote:
> I intentionally left openings in the code that should allow independent operators even AI to attempt to generate some structures to prove that very few shapes are recognizable.
> [...]
> If you have any more suggestions on removing myself from the process please advise. Perhaps directly so as not to clutter the forum.
> I will soon attempt to use random number generators.
> [...]

--
☣ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

gepr

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Regarding the toolchain:

I can't help but wonder how difficult it would be to switch from Maple to Sage? If it's anything like how it used to be to use Matlab code in Octave, then it's non-trivial. But if it *were* relatively straightforward, then it might be easier to "distribute" participation. Ophidiophobia notwithstanding.

Also, although perhaps small in terms of communities, Processing does have other users like the Arduino people. And just playing with it for Jon Zingale's example of Takens' theorem[†], it didn't seem that difficult to get working. So, my guess is that it would be much more accessible than the Maple. Not being able to mix complex with primitive objects is an odd problem, though.

[†] http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/2017-February/075670.html

Regarding disenfranchisement under distribution:

This is the *heart* of systems theory, in my opinion. The actions of the overwhelming majority of single operators are well removed from the distant outcome. If the distribution is biased, then the hubs have more influence, obviously. But that's the joy of systemic thinking, I think. Being able to correlate (at least in a delusional/motivated way, if not for real) one's tiny actions to a larger effect. Deep down, perhaps some of us are individualists and some of us are teamsters. But opening up your very private toolchain/method to the (annoying) participation of others should, I think, incentivize you ... like in Core Wars if you're competitive ... or in SETI if you're a teamster.

On 07/19/2017 03:02 PM, Vladimyr wrote:

> I already use AutoHotKey Script to run Code in Maple Math and Dump .txt vertex data embedded in Processing 3 code (some Java offshoot)
> The autoHotKey assembles the hundreds of images and 3D objects into ordered sets and then runs MovieMaker to produce video .wmv, which you have seen already.
>
> It was my intention to convert the functional routines from Maple directly into Processing and share that code widely.
> But few people other than web artists use Processing and it does not seem able to run on a web site. I guess this is a general problem or short coming.
>
> Processing graphics are fast and surprisingly good, better than I am used to elsewhere.
> I will try and write the Processing version of the Maple guts and get it out but it may take sometime and others will have to install
> the Processing engine which is free but sort of clunky to set up.
>
> There are a number of issues that all this cross talk introduces such as while Processing does crank out 3D object files readily accepted by 3D printers.
> But it handles colors strangely and seems unable to mix these objects with solid primitives during object creation. A task probably better suited to CAD packages.
>
> If this is done you will probably by amazed at all the useless junk that pours out at the far end. Like my undergrads trying to build a toboggan out of concrete.
>
> One issue I see is that the more removed the operator the less incentive he will have to connect his actions to the distant outcome.
> There was a profound moment in my memory when you and Nick , I think, dabbled with misinterpretation vs premature registration...
> I noticed that from the video I had a choice to imagine a squiggly line, a worm, a leaf or a set of leaves with a flower if I waited a bit longer. I thought of the process
> as a series of unfolding Emergence events passing by very quickly and soon forgotten when the last was accepted.
>
> Perhaps we jump through Metaphoric fiery rings till we think we understand.
> Thank-you again for the suggestions.
> I worry a bit about keeping this process as easy and transparent as possible, avoiding Python or Anaconda's.
> inSilico Ecology as an idea has startling possibilities. Energy flow will make that possible I think. But just where do I start...Hmmm

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Vladimyr Burachynsky

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Glen,
I have never heard of SAGE or OCTAVE other than as a plant and a musical term. herpetophobia=Ophidiophobia ? I hope that was your intention...

Maple was used by Mathematica? for the core of its symbolic computations But being pro-Canadian never switched over. We used to get Maple to convert itself to Fortran code
so there are routes available There was lately a flurry of interest from the Processing user groups in SuperEllipses recently . But they don't seem to have done much with multiple objects
with strange surfaces. The way Maple uses libraries seems to have been adopted by Processing which is very awkward and just handling any one library is trickier than need be.
At least these libraries can now be used by Python as well. Crossing domains I guess.

There may well be enough open Source code now to cobble together something like a math engine of sorts. Arduino looks very attractive and powerful enough to run robotics, but I can no longer
use my hands and gave up trying with the Rasberry Pi sitting on my desk. I'll stick to poking. I never quite found a mission for it.

I think before MatLab , I was using and ancient C++ , Zortech Compiler that featured M++ matrix libraries, very handy but all that has vanished and absorbed by Microsoft and made purposely
difficult. Funny you use the word "Tool chain" while the graphics people use "Pipe Line". I adapt slowly and reluctantly in all honesty.

Have you been keeping track of the "Topological Materials" news. They have some weird discoveries that should make for great changes. I guess I will have to supply code
for many other topological surfaces with abundant holes. Never expected this outcome,,, Warped Networks sounds like it belongs on a Tee Shirt.

Strange idea that networks can be stitched together to create something larger as a plaything...
Vladimyr

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: July-20-17 11:10 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Regarding the toolchain:

I can't help but wonder how difficult it would be to switch from Maple to Sage? If it's anything like how it used to be to use Matlab code in Octave, then it's non-trivial. But if it *were* relatively straightforward, then it might be easier to "distribute" participation. Ophidiophobia notwithstanding.

Also, although perhaps small in terms of communities, Processing does have other users like the Arduino people. And just playing with it for Jon Zingale's example of Takens' theorem[†], it didn't seem that difficult to get working. So, my guess is that it would be much more accessible than the Maple. Not being able to mix complex with primitive objects is an odd problem, though.

[†] http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/2017-February/075670.html

Regarding disenfranchisement under distribution:

This is the *heart* of systems theory, in my opinion. The actions of the overwhelming majority of single operators are well removed from the distant outcome. If the distribution is biased, then the hubs have more influence, obviously. But that's the joy of systemic thinking, I think. Being able to correlate (at least in a delusional/motivated way, if not for real) one's tiny actions to a larger effect. Deep down, perhaps some of us are individualists and some of us are teamsters. But opening up your very private toolchain/method to the (annoying) participation of others should, I think, incentivize you ... like in Core Wars if you're competitive ... or in SETI if you're a teamster.

On 07/19/2017 03:02 PM, Vladimyr wrote:

> I already use AutoHotKey Script to run Code in Maple Math and Dump
> .txt vertex data embedded in Processing 3 code (some Java offshoot) The autoHotKey assembles the hundreds of images and 3D objects into ordered sets and then runs MovieMaker to produce video .wmv, which you have seen already.
>
> It was my intention to convert the functional routines from Maple directly into Processing and share that code widely.
> But few people other than web artists use Processing and it does not seem able to run on a web site. I guess this is a general problem or short coming.
>
> Processing graphics are fast and surprisingly good, better than I am used to elsewhere.
> I will try and write the Processing version of the Maple guts and get
> it out but it may take sometime and others will have to install the Processing engine which is free but sort of clunky to set up.
>
> There are a number of issues that all this cross talk introduces such as while Processing does crank out 3D object files readily accepted by 3D printers.
> But it handles colors strangely and seems unable to mix these objects with solid primitives during object creation. A task probably better suited to CAD packages.
>
> If this is done you will probably by amazed at all the useless junk that pours out at the far end. Like my undergrads trying to build a toboggan out of concrete.
>
> One issue I see is that the more removed the operator the less incentive he will have to connect his actions to the distant outcome.
> There was a profound moment in my memory when you and Nick , I think, dabbled with misinterpretation vs premature registration...
> I noticed that from the video I had a choice to imagine a squiggly
> line, a worm, a leaf or a set of leaves with a flower if I waited a bit longer. I thought of the process as a series of unfolding Emergence events passing by very quickly and soon forgotten when the last was accepted.
>
> Perhaps we jump through Metaphoric fiery rings till we think we understand.
> Thank-you again for the suggestions.
> I worry a bit about keeping this process as easy and transparent as possible, avoiding Python or Anaconda's.
> inSilico Ecology as an idea has startling possibilities. Energy flow
> will make that possible I think. But just where do I start...Hmmm

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

In reply to this post by Vladimyr Burachynsky

There have been no entries in the competition to find a metaphor in this book:

https://www.amazon.com/New-Mexico-Legacy-Frank-Wimberly/dp/1548003360

By the way, the title doesn't count.

Frank

Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505

[hidden email] [hidden email]
Phone: (505) 995-8715 Cell: (505) 670-9918

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Vladimyr
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 4:02 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Glen,

I already use AutoHotKey Script to run Code in Maple Math and Dump .txt vertex data embedded in Processing 3 code (some Java offshoot) The autoHotKey assembles the hundreds of images and 3D objects into ordered sets and then runs MovieMaker to produce video .wmv, which you have seen already.

It was my intention to convert the functional routines from Maple directly into Processing and share that code widely.
But few people other than web artists use Processing and it does not seem able to run on a web site. I guess this is a general problem or short coming.

Processing graphics are fast and surprisingly good, better than I am used to elsewhere.
I will try and write the Processing version of the Maple guts and get it out but it may take sometime and others will have to install the Processing engine which is free but sort of clunky to set up.

There are a number of issues that all this cross talk introduces such as while Processing does crank out 3D object files readily accepted by 3D printers.
But it handles colors strangely and seems unable to mix these objects with solid primitives during object creation. A task probably better suited to CAD packages.

If this is done you will probably by amazed at all the useless junk that pours out at the far end. Like my undergrads trying to build a toboggan out of concrete.

One issue I see is that the more removed the operator the less incentive he will have to connect his actions to the distant outcome.
There was a profound moment in my memory when you and Nick , I think, dabbled with misinterpretation vs premature registration...
I noticed that from the video I had a choice to imagine a squiggly line, a worm, a leaf or a set of leaves with a flower if I waited a bit longer. I thought of the process as a series of unfolding Emergence events passing by very quickly and soon forgotten when the last was accepted.

Perhaps we jump through Metaphoric fiery rings till we think we understand.
Thank-you again for the suggestions.
I worry a bit about keeping this process as easy and transparent as possible, avoiding Python or Anaconda's.
inSilico Ecology as an idea has startling possibilities. Energy flow will make that possible I think. But just where do I start...Hmmm

vladimyr

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: July-19-17 11:17 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

If the forum expresses irritation, then we can take it offline. Otherwise, I will treat them like I like to be treated ... voyeurism can be a good thing. 8^)

Rather than (or in addition to) using pseudo-random number generators, do something like:

1) https://api.random.org/guidelines,
2) use other numbers, like the number of hits you get when you google something (e.g. a source code function),
3) invoke a script engine and allow me to place some scripted functions on a website that you import and execute,
4) pass along some subset of the functions you're using, perhaps in pseudo-code, so that we can modify or suggest different ones that you then incorporate.

Of these (3) is the most interesting to me. But even (4) would be cool.

On 07/18/2017 05:19 PM, Vladimyr wrote:
> I intentionally left openings in the code that should allow independent operators even AI to attempt to generate some structures to prove that very few shapes are recognizable.
> [...]
> If you have any more suggestions on removing myself from the process please advise. Perhaps directly so as not to clutter the forum.
> I will soon attempt to use random number generators.
> [...]

--
☣ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Steve Smith

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

I just ordered my copy yesterday.

It IS conceivable that you avoided all use of literary metaphor.

In this very sentence I used at least 2 conceptual metaphors.

Nick might only acknowledge literary metaphors?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2017, at 9:42 PM, "Frank Wimberly" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> There have been no entries in the competition to find a metaphor in this book:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/New-Mexico-Legacy-Frank-Wimberly/dp/1548003360
>
> By the way, the title doesn't count.
>
> Frank
>
>
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> [hidden email] [hidden email]
> Phone: (505) 995-8715 Cell: (505) 670-9918
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Vladimyr
> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 4:02 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
> Glen,
>
> I already use AutoHotKey Script to run Code in Maple Math and Dump .txt vertex data embedded in Processing 3 code (some Java offshoot) The autoHotKey assembles the hundreds of images and 3D objects into ordered sets and then runs MovieMaker to produce video .wmv, which you have seen already.
>
> It was my intention to convert the functional routines from Maple directly into Processing and share that code widely.
> But few people other than web artists use Processing and it does not seem able to run on a web site. I guess this is a general problem or short coming.
>
> Processing graphics are fast and surprisingly good, better than I am used to elsewhere.
> I will try and write the Processing version of the Maple guts and get it out but it may take sometime and others will have to install the Processing engine which is free but sort of clunky to set up.
>
> There are a number of issues that all this cross talk introduces such as while Processing does crank out 3D object files readily accepted by 3D printers.
> But it handles colors strangely and seems unable to mix these objects with solid primitives during object creation. A task probably better suited to CAD packages.
>
> If this is done you will probably by amazed at all the useless junk that pours out at the far end. Like my undergrads trying to build a toboggan out of concrete.
>
> One issue I see is that the more removed the operator the less incentive he will have to connect his actions to the distant outcome.
> There was a profound moment in my memory when you and Nick , I think, dabbled with misinterpretation vs premature registration...
> I noticed that from the video I had a choice to imagine a squiggly line, a worm, a leaf or a set of leaves with a flower if I waited a bit longer. I thought of the process as a series of unfolding Emergence events passing by very quickly and soon forgotten when the last was accepted.
>
> Perhaps we jump through Metaphoric fiery rings till we think we understand.
> Thank-you again for the suggestions.
> I worry a bit about keeping this process as easy and transparent as possible, avoiding Python or Anaconda's.
> inSilico Ecology as an idea has startling possibilities. Energy flow will make that possible I think. But just where do I start...Hmmm
>
> vladimyr
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
> Sent: July-19-17 11:17 AM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
>
> If the forum expresses irritation, then we can take it offline. Otherwise, I will treat them like I like to be treated ... voyeurism can be a good thing. 8^)
>
> Rather than (or in addition to) using pseudo-random number generators, do something like:
>
> 1) https://api.random.org/guidelines,
> 2) use other numbers, like the number of hits you get when you google something (e.g. a source code function),
> 3) invoke a script engine and allow me to place some scripted functions on a website that you import and execute,
> 4) pass along some subset of the functions you're using, perhaps in pseudo-code, so that we can modify or suggest different ones that you then incorporate.
>
> Of these (3) is the most interesting to me. But even (4) would be cool.
>
>> On 07/18/2017 05:19 PM, Vladimyr wrote:
>> I intentionally left openings in the code that should allow independent operators even AI to attempt to generate some structures to prove that very few shapes are recognizable.
>> [...]
>> If you have any more suggestions on removing myself from the process please advise. Perhaps directly so as not to clutter the forum.
>> I will soon attempt to use random number generators.
>> [...]
>
> --
> ☣ glen
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

Curt McNamara

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

With all due respect -- I have looked through these missives and this prose in vain for any deep examination of metaphor.

For background: the natural systems working group of INCOSE is studying metaphor as a fundamental skill for designers and engineers interested in transferring biological "solutions" to the world of design. One thing we have taken away: to transfer something via metaphor requires that the (system) attributes "drop away" and that the (systemic) relations are what is transferred between the domains.

We put a few papers in this folder:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/j4sdk4jflrxsv45/AADEcCHI9dO4n3AtqrYutuy6a?dl=0

The work of Dedre Gentner seems fundamental to us.

Curt

On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear Friammers,

I understand that some members of the Mother Church are getting together soon for a discussion on the role of Metaphor in Scientific Thought. Hard for me to imagine a meeting that I would regret missing more than this one. I hope that some of you will post some of your deliberations under this thread so that those of us in the Friam diaspora can have some of the value of them.

FWLIW, The attached PDF is from a book manuscript, pieces of which have been kicking around for more than 40 years, which Eric Charles has been trying unsuccessfully to get me to pull together into something publishable. If any of you is curious, the text will help you to understand the things I said in the recent complexity discussion and their relation to the “levels” discussion and the metaphor discussion that follows. The specific discussion on metaphor is late in the pdf, so that if that is what interests you, you can safely skip to the first section on models. For me, a model is just a scientific metaphor. Full stop.

If anybody had comments to share, we, of course, would be deeply grateful.

There are more chapters.

Nick

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

In reply to this post by Steve Smith

Thanks, Steve. The metaphor allusion was a not very humorous way to make the pointer to my little book allegedly relevant. As Nick pointed out, the title itself is a metaphor. The dictionary definition of "legacy" mentions money or other posessions which are left in a bequest. There are some phrases in the text which are unambiguously metaphors.

I would be very interested in feedback about the book. Not because I expect to improve it but just because... Nick says that his father, a publisher, always said, "You should only become a writer if you can't do anything else".

I think he was talking about earning prospects.

It's interesting that the Android mail editor won't let me punctuate the quote correctly.

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jul 24, 2017 8:36 PM, "Steve" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I just ordered my copy yesterday.

It IS conceivable that you avoided all use of literary metaphor.

In this very sentence I used at least 2 conceptual metaphors.

Nick might only acknowledge literary metaphors?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2017, at 9:42 PM, "Frank Wimberly" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> There have been no entries in the competition to find a metaphor in this book:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/New-Mexico-Legacy-Frank-Wimberly/dp/1548003360
>
> By the way, the title doesn't count.
>
> Frank
>
>
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> [hidden email] [hidden email]
> Phone: <a href="tel:%28505%29%20995-8715" value="+15059958715">(505) 995-8715 Cell: <a href="tel:%28505%29%20670-9918" value="+15056709918">(505) 670-9918
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Vladimyr
> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 4:02 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
> Glen,
>
> I already use AutoHotKey Script to run Code in Maple Math and Dump .txt vertex data embedded in Processing 3 code (some Java offshoot) The autoHotKey assembles the hundreds of images and 3D objects into ordered sets and then runs MovieMaker to produce video .wmv, which you have seen already.
>
> It was my intention to convert the functional routines from Maple directly into Processing and share that code widely.
> But few people other than web artists use Processing and it does not seem able to run on a web site. I guess this is a general problem or short coming.
>
> Processing graphics are fast and surprisingly good, better than I am used to elsewhere.
> I will try and write the Processing version of the Maple guts and get it out but it may take sometime and others will have to install the Processing engine which is free but sort of clunky to set up.
>
> There are a number of issues that all this cross talk introduces such as while Processing does crank out 3D object files readily accepted by 3D printers.
> But it handles colors strangely and seems unable to mix these objects with solid primitives during object creation. A task probably better suited to CAD packages.
>
> If this is done you will probably by amazed at all the useless junk that pours out at the far end. Like my undergrads trying to build a toboggan out of concrete.
>
> One issue I see is that the more removed the operator the less incentive he will have to connect his actions to the distant outcome.
> There was a profound moment in my memory when you and Nick , I think, dabbled with misinterpretation vs premature registration...
> I noticed that from the video I had a choice to imagine a squiggly line, a worm, a leaf or a set of leaves with a flower if I waited a bit longer. I thought of the process as a series of unfolding Emergence events passing by very quickly and soon forgotten when the last was accepted.
>
> Perhaps we jump through Metaphoric fiery rings till we think we understand.
> Thank-you again for the suggestions.
> I worry a bit about keeping this process as easy and transparent as possible, avoiding Python or Anaconda's.
> inSilico Ecology as an idea has startling possibilities. Energy flow will make that possible I think. But just where do I start...Hmmm
>
> vladimyr
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
> Sent: July-19-17 11:17 AM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
>
> If the forum expresses irritation, then we can take it offline. Otherwise, I will treat them like I like to be treated ... voyeurism can be a good thing. 8^)
>
> Rather than (or in addition to) using pseudo-random number generators, do something like:
>
> 1) https://api.random.org/guidelines,
> 2) use other numbers, like the number of hits you get when you google something (e.g. a source code function),
> 3) invoke a script engine and allow me to place some scripted functions on a website that you import and execute,
> 4) pass along some subset of the functions you're using, perhaps in pseudo-code, so that we can modify or suggest different ones that you then incorporate.
>
> Of these (3) is the most interesting to me. But even (4) would be cool.
>
>> On 07/18/2017 05:19 PM, Vladimyr wrote:
>> I intentionally left openings in the code that should allow independent operators even AI to attempt to generate some structures to prove that very few shapes are recognizable.
>> [...]
>> If you have any more suggestions on removing myself from the process please advise. Perhaps directly so as not to clutter the forum.
>> I will soon attempt to use random number generators.
>> [...]
>
> --
> ☣ glen
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Nick Thompson

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

I loved it. metaphors or no.

I am laid up, right now, and so won’t have much to say for a bit.

Keep up the good work, you guys.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 11:17 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

I think he was talking about earning prospects.

It's interesting that the Android mail editor won't let me punctuate the quote correctly.

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jul 24, 2017 8:36 PM, "Steve" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I just ordered my copy yesterday.

It IS conceivable that you avoided all use of literary metaphor.

In this very sentence I used at least 2 conceptual metaphors.

Nick might only acknowledge literary metaphors?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2017, at 9:42 PM, "Frank Wimberly" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> There have been no entries in the competition to find a metaphor in this book:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/New-Mexico-Legacy-Frank-Wimberly/dp/1548003360
>
> By the way, the title doesn't count.
>
> Frank
>
>
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> [hidden email] [hidden email]
> Phone: <a href="tel:%28505%29%20995-8715">(505) 995-8715 Cell: <a href="tel:%28505%29%20670-9918">(505) 670-9918
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Vladimyr
> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 4:02 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
> Glen,
>
> I already use AutoHotKey Script to run Code in Maple Math and Dump .txt vertex data embedded in Processing 3 code (some Java offshoot) The autoHotKey assembles the hundreds of images and 3D objects into ordered sets and then runs MovieMaker to produce video .wmv, which you have seen already.
>
> It was my intention to convert the functional routines from Maple directly into Processing and share that code widely.
> But few people other than web artists use Processing and it does not seem able to run on a web site. I guess this is a general problem or short coming.
>
> Processing graphics are fast and surprisingly good, better than I am used to elsewhere.
> I will try and write the Processing version of the Maple guts and get it out but it may take sometime and others will have to install the Processing engine which is free but sort of clunky to set up.
>
> There are a number of issues that all this cross talk introduces such as while Processing does crank out 3D object files readily accepted by 3D printers.
> But it handles colors strangely and seems unable to mix these objects with solid primitives during object creation. A task probably better suited to CAD packages.
>
> If this is done you will probably by amazed at all the useless junk that pours out at the far end. Like my undergrads trying to build a toboggan out of concrete.
>
> One issue I see is that the more removed the operator the less incentive he will have to connect his actions to the distant outcome.
> There was a profound moment in my memory when you and Nick , I think, dabbled with misinterpretation vs premature registration...
> I noticed that from the video I had a choice to imagine a squiggly line, a worm, a leaf or a set of leaves with a flower if I waited a bit longer. I thought of the process as a series of unfolding Emergence events passing by very quickly and soon forgotten when the last was accepted.
>
> Perhaps we jump through Metaphoric fiery rings till we think we understand.
> Thank-you again for the suggestions.
> I worry a bit about keeping this process as easy and transparent as possible, avoiding Python or Anaconda's.
> inSilico Ecology as an idea has startling possibilities. Energy flow will make that possible I think. But just where do I start...Hmmm
>
> vladimyr
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
> Sent: July-19-17 11:17 AM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
>
> If the forum expresses irritation, then we can take it offline. Otherwise, I will treat them like I like to be treated ... voyeurism can be a good thing. 8^)
>
> Rather than (or in addition to) using pseudo-random number generators, do something like:
>
> 1) https://api.random.org/guidelines,
> 2) use other numbers, like the number of hits you get when you google something (e.g. a source code function),
> 3) invoke a script engine and allow me to place some scripted functions on a website that you import and execute,
> 4) pass along some subset of the functions you're using, perhaps in pseudo-code, so that we can modify or suggest different ones that you then incorporate.
>
> Of these (3) is the most interesting to me. But even (4) would be cool.
>
>> On 07/18/2017 05:19 PM, Vladimyr wrote:
>> I intentionally left openings in the code that should allow independent operators even AI to attempt to generate some structures to prove that very few shapes are recognizable.
>> [...]
>> If you have any more suggestions on removing myself from the process please advise. Perhaps directly so as not to clutter the forum.
>> I will soon attempt to use random number generators.
>> [...]
>
> --
> ☣ glen
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Dean Gerber

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Nick--

Are you OK? Many of us are concerned about each other over the effects of age, and we are concerned about you. What does "laid up" mean? Feel free to keep that private if you wish. But, we are concerned.

Best wishes,

Dean

On Wednesday, July 26, 2017, 11:17:04 PM CDT, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

I loved it. metaphors or no.

I am laid up, right now, and so won’t have much to say for a bit.

Keep up the good work, you guys.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

I think he was talking about earning prospects.

It's interesting that the Android mail editor won't let me punctuate the quote correctly.

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jul 24, 2017 8:36 PM, "Steve" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I just ordered my copy yesterday.

It IS conceivable that you avoided all use of literary metaphor.

In this very sentence I used at least 2 conceptual metaphors.

Nick might only acknowledge literary metaphors?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2017, at 9:42 PM, "Frank Wimberly" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> There have been no entries in the competition to find a metaphor in this book:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/New-Mexico-Legacy-Frank-Wimberly/dp/1548003360
>
> By the way, the title doesn't count.
>
> Frank
>
>
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> [hidden email] [hidden email]
> Phone: (505) 995-8715 Cell: (505) 670-9918
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Vladimyr
> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 4:02 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
> Glen,
>
> I already use AutoHotKey Script to run Code in Maple Math and Dump .txt vertex data embedded in Processing 3 code (some Java offshoot) The autoHotKey assembles the hundreds of images and 3D objects into ordered sets and then runs MovieMaker to produce video .wmv, which you have seen already.
>
> It was my intention to convert the functional routines from Maple directly into Processing and share that code widely.
> But few people other than web artists use Processing and it does not seem able to run on a web site. I guess this is a general problem or short coming.
>
> Processing graphics are fast and surprisingly good, better than I am used to elsewhere.
> I will try and write the Processing version of the Maple guts and get it out but it may take sometime and others will have to install the Processing engine which is free but sort of clunky to set up.
>
> There are a number of issues that all this cross talk introduces such as while Processing does crank out 3D object files readily accepted by 3D printers.
> But it handles colors strangely and seems unable to mix these objects with solid primitives during object creation. A task probably better suited to CAD packages.
>
> If this is done you will probably by amazed at all the useless junk that pours out at the far end. Like my undergrads trying to build a toboggan out of concrete.
>
> One issue I see is that the more removed the operator the less incentive he will have to connect his actions to the distant outcome.
> There was a profound moment in my memory when you and Nick , I think, dabbled with misinterpretation vs premature registration...
> I noticed that from the video I had a choice to imagine a squiggly line, a worm, a leaf or a set of leaves with a flower if I waited a bit longer. I thought of the process as a series of unfolding Emergence events passing by very quickly and soon forgotten when the last was accepted.
>
> Perhaps we jump through Metaphoric fiery rings till we think we understand.
> Thank-you again for the suggestions.
> I worry a bit about keeping this process as easy and transparent as possible, avoiding Python or Anaconda's.
> inSilico Ecology as an idea has startling possibilities. Energy flow will make that possible I think. But just where do I start...Hmmm
>
> vladimyr
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
> Sent: July-19-17 11:17 AM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
>
> If the forum expresses irritation, then we can take it offline. Otherwise, I will treat them like I like to be treated ... voyeurism can be a good thing. 8^)
>
> Rather than (or in addition to) using pseudo-random number generators, do something like:
>
> 1) https://api.random.org/guidelines,
> 2) use other numbers, like the number of hits you get when you google something (e.g. a source code function),
> 3) invoke a script engine and allow me to place some scripted functions on a website that you import and execute,
> 4) pass along some subset of the functions you're using, perhaps in pseudo-code, so that we can modify or suggest different ones that you then incorporate.
>
> Of these (3) is the most interesting to me. But even (4) would be cool.
>
>> On 07/18/2017 05:19 PM, Vladimyr wrote:
>> I intentionally left openings in the code that should allow independent operators even AI to attempt to generate some structures to prove that very few shapes are recognizable.
>> [...]
>> If you have any more suggestions on removing myself from the process please advise. Perhaps directly so as not to clutter the forum.
>> I will soon attempt to use random number generators.
>> [...]
>
> --
> ☣ glen
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Nick Thompson

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Thanks for your concern, Dean. Don’t have a heart attack in Maine in the summer, if you can avoid it. Apparently, Maine beds are full of vacationing stock-brokers from NYC Took a week from the day of the attack, lying about in hospital beds, to find a surgical bed at the I begged to be ambulanced to Massachusetts at my own expense, but apparently there was a shortage of ambulances willing to go out of state, and nobody would guarantee the stability of my heart in an ordinary vehicle. If I had been a live lobster, I could have been in Boston in six hours. Anyway, bypass ten days ago, driven back to MA three days ago by my son and wife, doing rehab at my house for the moment.

Funny stories to tell. You know how they tell you might have hallucinations as your body sheds the anesthetic. Boy Howdy! I never knew I had the makings of a modernist painter.

Everybody extraordinarily kind. One day, I decided to count the number of different professionals who came into my room to do this and that in a single day and gave up at sixty. And remember I was sleeping much of the day. Some really interesting, and all with patience and humor. And I rarely saw the same person any two days running. Such an extraordinary demonstration of the power of coordination via computers.

Keep up your good work.

Faithfully yours,

Nicholas S. Thompson

01/29/1938

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Dean Gerber
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 12:39 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Nick--

Best wishes,

Dean

On Wednesday, July 26, 2017, 11:17:04 PM CDT, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

I loved it. metaphors or no.

I am laid up, right now, and so won’t have much to say for a bit.

Keep up the good work, you guys.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 11:17 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

I think he was talking about earning prospects.

It's interesting that the Android mail editor won't let me punctuate the quote correctly.

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jul 24, 2017 8:36 PM, "Steve" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I just ordered my copy yesterday.

It IS conceivable that you avoided all use of literary metaphor.

In this very sentence I used at least 2 conceptual metaphors.

Nick might only acknowledge literary metaphors?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2017, at 9:42 PM, "Frank Wimberly" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> There have been no entries in the competition to find a metaphor in this book:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/New-Mexico-Legacy-Frank-Wimberly/dp/1548003360
>
> By the way, the title doesn't count.
>
> Frank
>
>
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> [hidden email] [hidden email]
> Phone: (505) 995-8715 Cell: (505) 670-9918
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Vladimyr
> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 4:02 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
> Glen,
>
> I already use AutoHotKey Script to run Code in Maple Math and Dump .txt vertex data embedded in Processing 3 code (some Java offshoot) The autoHotKey assembles the hundreds of images and 3D objects into ordered sets and then runs MovieMaker to produce video .wmv, which you have seen already.
>
> It was my intention to convert the functional routines from Maple directly into Processing and share that code widely.
> But few people other than web artists use Processing and it does not seem able to run on a web site. I guess this is a general problem or short coming.
>
> Processing graphics are fast and surprisingly good, better than I am used to elsewhere.
> I will try and write the Processing version of the Maple guts and get it out but it may take sometime and others will have to install the Processing engine which is free but sort of clunky to set up.
>
> There are a number of issues that all this cross talk introduces such as while Processing does crank out 3D object files readily accepted by 3D printers.
> But it handles colors strangely and seems unable to mix these objects with solid primitives during object creation. A task probably better suited to CAD packages.
>
> If this is done you will probably by amazed at all the useless junk that pours out at the far end. Like my undergrads trying to build a toboggan out of concrete.
>
> One issue I see is that the more removed the operator the less incentive he will have to connect his actions to the distant outcome.
> There was a profound moment in my memory when you and Nick , I think, dabbled with misinterpretation vs premature registration...
> I noticed that from the video I had a choice to imagine a squiggly line, a worm, a leaf or a set of leaves with a flower if I waited a bit longer. I thought of the process as a series of unfolding Emergence events passing by very quickly and soon forgotten when the last was accepted.
>
> Perhaps we jump through Metaphoric fiery rings till we think we understand.
> Thank-you again for the suggestions.
> I worry a bit about keeping this process as easy and transparent as possible, avoiding Python or Anaconda's.
> inSilico Ecology as an idea has startling possibilities. Energy flow will make that possible I think. But just where do I start...Hmmm
>
> vladimyr
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
> Sent: July-19-17 11:17 AM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
>
> If the forum expresses irritation, then we can take it offline. Otherwise, I will treat them like I like to be treated ... voyeurism can be a good thing. 8^)
>
> Rather than (or in addition to) using pseudo-random number generators, do something like:
>
> 1) https://api.random.org/guidelines,
> 2) use other numbers, like the number of hits you get when you google something (e.g. a source code function),
> 3) invoke a script engine and allow me to place some scripted functions on a website that you import and execute,
> 4) pass along some subset of the functions you're using, perhaps in pseudo-code, so that we can modify or suggest different ones that you then incorporate.
>
> Of these (3) is the most interesting to me. But even (4) would be cool.
>
>> On 07/18/2017 05:19 PM, Vladimyr wrote:
>> I intentionally left openings in the code that should allow independent operators even AI to attempt to generate some structures to prove that very few shapes are recognizable.
>> [...]
>> If you have any more suggestions on removing myself from the process please advise. Perhaps directly so as not to clutter the forum.
>> I will soon attempt to use random number generators.
>> [...]
>
> --
> ☣ glen
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Steve Smith

Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Nick!

Thanks for sharing your status and good news (well, relatively?). I'm glad Dean had the forwardness to ask the "obvious question".

Keep up the recovery!

- Steve

On 7/27/17 11:01 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

Thanks for your concern, Dean. Don’t have a heart attack in Maine in the summer, if you can avoid it. Apparently, Maine beds are full of vacationing stock-brokers from NYC Took a week from the day of the attack, lying about in hospital beds, to find a surgical bed at the I begged to be ambulanced to Massachusetts at my own expense, but apparently there was a shortage of ambulances willing to go out of state, and nobody would guarantee the stability of my heart in an ordinary vehicle. If I had been a live lobster, I could have been in Boston in six hours. Anyway, bypass ten days ago, driven back to MA three days ago by my son and wife, doing rehab at my house for the moment.

Funny stories to tell. You know how they tell you might have hallucinations as your body sheds the anesthetic. Boy Howdy! I never knew I had the makings of a modernist painter.

Everybody extraordinarily kind. One day, I decided to count the number of different professionals who came into my room to do this and that in a single day and gave up at sixty. And remember I was sleeping much of the day. Some really interesting, and all with patience and humor. And I rarely saw the same person any two days running. Such an extraordinary demonstration of the power of coordination via computers.

Keep up your good work.

Faithfully yours,

Nicholas S. Thompson

01/29/1938

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Dean Gerber
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 12:39 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Nick--

Are you OK? Many of us are concerned about each other over the effects of age, and we are concerned about you. What does "laid up" mean? Feel free to keep that private if you wish. But, we are concerned.

Best wishes,

Dean

On Wednesday, July 26, 2017, 11:17:04 PM CDT, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

I loved it. metaphors or no.

I am laid up, right now, and so won’t have much to say for a bit.

Keep up the good work, you guys.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 11:17 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought

Thanks, Steve. The metaphor allusion was a not very humorous way to make the pointer to my little book allegedly relevant. As Nick pointed out, the title itself is a metaphor. The dictionary definition of "legacy" mentions money or other posessions which are left in a bequest. There are some phrases in the text which are unambiguously metaphors.

I would be very interested in feedback about the book. Not because I expect to improve it but just because... Nick says that his father, a publisher, always said, "You should only become a writer if you can't do anything else".

I think he was talking about earning prospects.

It's interesting that the Android mail editor won't let me punctuate the quote correctly.

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jul 24, 2017 8:36 PM, "Steve" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I just ordered my copy yesterday.

It IS conceivable that you avoided all use of literary metaphor.

In this very sentence I used at least 2 conceptual metaphors.

Nick might only acknowledge literary metaphors?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2017, at 9:42 PM, "Frank Wimberly" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> There have been no entries in the competition to find a metaphor in this book:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/New-Mexico-Legacy-Frank-Wimberly/dp/1548003360
>
> By the way, the title doesn't count.
>
> Frank
>
>
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> [hidden email] [hidden email]
> Phone: (505) 995-8715 Cell: (505) 670-9918
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Vladimyr
> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 4:02 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
> Glen,
>
> I already use AutoHotKey Script to run Code in Maple Math and Dump .txt vertex data embedded in Processing 3 code (some Java offshoot) The autoHotKey assembles the hundreds of images and 3D objects into ordered sets and then runs MovieMaker to produce video .wmv, which you have seen already.
>
> It was my intention to convert the functional routines from Maple directly into Processing and share that code widely.
> But few people other than web artists use Processing and it does not seem able to run on a web site. I guess this is a general problem or short coming.
>
> Processing graphics are fast and surprisingly good, better than I am used to elsewhere.
> I will try and write the Processing version of the Maple guts and get it out but it may take sometime and others will have to install the Processing engine which is free but sort of clunky to set up.
>
> There are a number of issues that all this cross talk introduces such as while Processing does crank out 3D object files readily accepted by 3D printers.
> But it handles colors strangely and seems unable to mix these objects with solid primitives during object creation. A task probably better suited to CAD packages.
>
> If this is done you will probably by amazed at all the useless junk that pours out at the far end. Like my undergrads trying to build a toboggan out of concrete.
>
> One issue I see is that the more removed the operator the less incentive he will have to connect his actions to the distant outcome.
> There was a profound moment in my memory when you and Nick , I think, dabbled with misinterpretation vs premature registration...
> I noticed that from the video I had a choice to imagine a squiggly line, a worm, a leaf or a set of leaves with a flower if I waited a bit longer. I thought of the process as a series of unfolding Emergence events passing by very quickly and soon forgotten when the last was accepted.
>
> Perhaps we jump through Metaphoric fiery rings till we think we understand.
> Thank-you again for the suggestions.
> I worry a bit about keeping this process as easy and transparent as possible, avoiding Python or Anaconda's.
> inSilico Ecology as an idea has startling possibilities. Energy flow will make that possible I think. But just where do I start...Hmmm
>
> vladimyr
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
> Sent: July-19-17 11:17 AM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the role of metaphor in scientific thought
>
>
> If the forum expresses irritation, then we can take it offline. Otherwise, I will treat them like I like to be treated ... voyeurism can be a good thing. 8^)
>
> Rather than (or in addition to) using pseudo-random number generators, do something like:
>
> 1) https://api.random.org/guidelines,
> 2) use other numbers, like the number of hits you get when you google something (e.g. a source code function),
> 3) invoke a script engine and allow me to place some scripted functions on a website that you import and execute,
> 4) pass along some subset of the functions you're using, perhaps in pseudo-code, so that we can modify or suggest different ones that you then incorporate.
>
> Of these (3) is the most interesting to me. But even (4) would be cool.
>
>> On 07/18/2017 05:19 PM, Vladimyr wrote:
>> I intentionally left openings in the code that should allow independent operators even AI to attempt to generate some structures to prove that very few shapes are recognizable.
>> [...]
>> If you have any more suggestions on removing myself from the process please advise. Perhaps directly so as not to clutter the forum.
>> I will soon attempt to use random number generators.
>> [...]
>
> --
> ☣ glen
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

1234