Re: [FRIAM] Link to Pradeep Sen's Dual Photography

[Eric Smith]

Thanks Stephen,

Writing you from Germany, after the week before in Chile.  Will look  
forward to going through this as the moving-around settles.


Was good to run into you in SF.

Take care,

Eric


On Oct 26, 2014, at 11:38 PM, Stephen Guerin wrote:

At FRIAM, there was a discussion on Pradeep's work on Dual  
Photography. Here's a link to his research which includes the paper  
and a nice video:

  http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/dual_photography/

-Stephen
--- -. .   ..-. .. ...    - .-- ---   ..-. .. ... 
stephen.gue...@redfish.com
1600 Lena St #D1, Santa Fe, NM 87505
office: (505) 995-0206  mobile: (505) 577-5828
tw: @redfishgroup  skype: redfishgroup
redfish.com  |  simtable.com

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 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

Re: [FRIAM] Does philosophy have a heuristic value

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

To Roger and Nick,

 

That idea has been on the backburner of Biology for 5 decades or more.

The greatest problem in the 70’s and later was Statistics which tended to 
dismiss anything outside of a curve.

 

It started after the second war when an unusual coincidence of scientific minds 
started talking.

Soviets and Americans when strange Tick-Borne plagues started emerging in the 
middle east, Russia, Crimea

and parts of Africa.

 

I was just a kid doing my first MSc when I met 

Harry Hoogstraal at an Acarology Workshop at OSU. What did I know, nothing. 
What the hell. He was 

Jimmy Carter’s science advisor, I was told later . And the de facto head of the 
NAMRU facility outside Cairo.

 

Anyway he was checking on students in the lab one night I was the only nightowl 
and we chatted over microscopes.

 

He asked me what I thought happened to all the parasites of the Woolly Rhino 
when it died out, it was a big source of blood in an Arctic Landscape? ( I was 
working on Moose Ticks at the time)

What he was after was an answer to the stream of life question, did they die or 
simply find new real estate?

 

I returned to Canada and only brought it up a few times usually when very 
drunk, spoiling for a fight or  a real argument.

Bits and pieces accumulated over time spared from the statisticians. Then 
totally ignored during all the subsequent eras of utter confusion and money 
grubbing.

 

Mostly entomologists were the first to notice something did not fit the 
consensus narrative. Then microbiologists who were asked to help out  and they  
saw the same principals with better tools. 

 

Evo-Devo made a great set of contributions not mentioned directly in the paper.

 

This is a disturbing topic when examined carefully. Philosophers rarely examine 
parasites on carcasses of the dead,  let alone count them. They see only what 
they expect.

They were always averse to the smell of science. So my answer is No not 
usually. Since it stinks.

 

The bias appears to originate in our simple minds that can not cope with more 
than 3 dimensions . A living system need not be  so limited for that matter 
neither is mathematics (see Snarks  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snark_(graph_theory ).

Darwin is now a relic fought over by fools. I count Dawkins among the fools, he 
started out well but soon degenerated into a strange demented warrior against 
Theists.

 

I love the discussions and even though I can not always respond I look forward 
to reading.

vib

 

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Nick Thompson
Sent: October-25-14 12:21 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Does philosophy have a heuristic value

 

Nice paper, roger.  I posted it to the thread.  Any chance I will see you next 
Friday?  N

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

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

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Roger Critchlow
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 11:48 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Does philosophy have a heuristic value

 

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ptb;view=text;rgn=main;idno=6959004.0001.003

 

Most biologists are philosophically and biologically incoherent on this subject.

 

-- rec --

 

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Nick Thompson  
wrote:

Dear Friammers, 

 

Often in FRIAM I have been called upon to defend philosophy as an important 
part of the scientific enterprise  Recently, on research gate, somebody posed 
the following question: 

 

*   Has the philosophical analysis contributed to solve any biological 
conceptual problems?
Of course the first question would be how many conceptual/empirical problems, 
of philosophy's interest the biology has? How many of those problems has been 
solved?
Just in case of any extremist response, what would you say to a biology 
scientists who thinks that the philosophy cannot solve anything?

The discussion (such as it is) can be found at :

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Has_the_philosophical_analysis_contributed_to_solve_any_biological_conceptual_problems#544a6a0ad685cc4d678b4654

 

It seemed only to confirm the questioner’s fears that philosophers of science 
are neither  the generals who set the battle nor the diplomats that make the 
peace, but are merely the scavengers that bicker over the spoils of war.   .  . 

 

N

 

 

I think we can do better.  

 

See you next week. 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

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

 



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_r