Brad Paulsen wrote:
Richard,
I think I'll get the older Waldrop book now because I want to learn more
about the ideas surrounding complexity (and, in particular, its
association with, and differentiation from, chaos theory) as soon as
possible. But, I will definitely put an entry in my Google calendar to
keep a lookout for the new book in 2009.
Thanks very much for the information!
Cheers,
Brad
You're welcome. I hope it is not a disappointment: the subject is a
peculiar one, so I believe that it is better to start off with the kind
of journalistic overview that Waldrop gives. Let me know what your
reaction is.
Here is the bottom line. At the core of the complex systems idea there
is something very significant and very powerful, but a lot of people
have wanted it to lead to a new science just like some of the old
science. In other words, they have wanted there to be a new, fabulously
powerful 'general theory of complexity' coming down the road.
However, no such theory is in sight, and there is one view of complexity
(mine, for example) that says that there will probably never be such a
theory. If this were one of the traditional sciences, the absence of
that kind of progress toward unification would be a sign of trouble - a
sign that this was not really a new science after all. Or, even worse,
a sign that the original idea was bogus. But I believe that is the
wrong interpretation to put on it. The complexity idea is very
significant, but it is not a science by itself.
Having said all of that, there are many people who so much want there to
be a science of complexity (enough of a science that there could be an
institute dedicated to it, where people have real jobs working on
'complex systems'), that they are prepared to do a lot of work that
makes it look like something is happening. So, you can find many
abstract papers about complex dynamical systems, with plenty of
mathematics in them. But as far as I can see, most of that stuff is
kind of peripheral ... it is something to do to justify a research program.
At the end of the day, I think that the *core* complex systems idea will
outlast all this other stuff, but it will become famous for its impact
on oter sciences, rather than for the specific theories of 'complexity'
that it generates.
We will see.
Richard Loosemore
Richard Loosemore wrote:
Brad Paulsen wrote:
Or, maybe...
"Complexity: Life at the Edge of Chaos"
Roger Lewin, 2000 $10.88 (new, paperback) from Amazon (no used copies)
Complexity: Life at the Edge of Chaos by Roger Lewin (Paperback - Feb
15, 2000)
Nope, not that one either!
Darn.
I think it may have been Simplexity (Kluger), but I am not sure.
Interestingly enough, Melanie Mitchell has a book due out in 2009
called "The Core Ideas of the Sciences of Complexity". Interesting
title, given my thoughts in the last post.
Richard Loosemore
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=106510220-47b225
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
