[FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS: Any non-biological complex systems?

Sat Jun 10 00:20:37 EDT 2017

"strata in geology have *some* precedent (shears and folds) for that, but I
can't think of a biological example"

Epidermis, dermis, hypodermis?  They interact.

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jun 9, 2017 10:12 PM, "Steven A Smith" <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:

> Vlad -
>
> I find your use/choice/settling-upon "lamina/laminae" seems very
> motivated, though I can't articulate why.  I suppose because it has some
> connotation related to concepts like "laminar flow" which is structurally
> similar to the vulgar (your implication not mine) "layer" which connotes
> the "laying down of" a series of membranes or strata.  I'm not sure I know
> how to think about ply which seems to be derived from the world of
> engineered "laminates", suggesting perhaps a small number (under 5?) and
> engineered rather than "grown" or "evolved"?
>
> The idea of one lamina penetrating another is fascinating... it seems like
> strata in geology have *some* precedent (shears and folds) for that, but I
> can't think of a biological example, nor can I guess what you were trying
> to achieve by developing methods for said penetration?
>
> I appreciate your offering the insight that networks (can?) offer a
> redistribution of "stress" (which I take to include engineering/mechanical
> stress, but also hydrostatic pressure, even semantic stresses in a concept
> graph/network) ?
>
> As a long time practicioner in the field of 3D Viz, I understand your
> affinity for it, but feel it has it's limits.   Not all concepts ground
> directly out in 3D Geometry, but require much more subtle and complex
> metaphorical basis which in turn might be *rendered* as a 3D object (more
> to the point, a complex system projected down into a 3D space using
> geometric primitives?)
>
> I do agree with what I think is your supposition that our evolution as
> animal/mammal/primate/omnivore/predator has given us tools for 3D spatial
> reasoning, but I think we are also blessed (cursed) with topological
> reasoning (graphs/networks) of which linguistics/semiotics might simply be
> a (signifcant) subset of? I would claim that code is primarily topological,
> though in a somewhat degenerate fashion.   I used to wonder why the term
> "spaghetti code" was used in such derision, I suspect the most interesting
> code might very well be so arbitrarily complex as to deserve that term.   I
> understand that taking (otherwise) simple linear structures and rendering
> them unrecognizeable with jumps/goto's is pathological.
>
> I think I will have to think a little (lot) more about your description of
> your stack of rectangular matrices, self-avoiding walks and
> Hamiltonian/Eulerian (processes?).  I will attempt to parse more of this
> and respond under separate cover.
>
> Referencing your (imaginary) namesake, I am feeling mildly impaled on my
> own petard here!
>
> - Steve
>
> On 6/9/17 6:51 PM, Vladimyr wrote:
>
>> Nicholas,
>> I hear your plea and would come to your defense if we were closer.
>>
>> I have a small story that explains my attitude to layer from an
>> Advanced Composite Engineering view point.
>> It took me probably 3 years to eradicate the word in my laboratory We
>> were using various materials and filament
>> winding with robotic machines. The basic concept is to use lamina as a
>> term to describe an entity with specific material properties.
>> When we talked about many lamina then we used the term laminae each was
>> composed of any number of lamina
>> having a unique material property set and referenced to local and global
>> coordinates. This aggressive language facilitated
>> structural analysis of complex structures. Each lamina had a designation
>> to allow it to function within a laminate . no one really cared
>> very much about what a single lamina of unidirectional Carbon fiber
>> thought of the terminology. What mattered was the finished structure
>> with interacting laminates and monolithic components to remain intact
>> when used by people.
>>
>> Layer is a word used by simpletons or illiterates that never have to
>> analyze why something failed and killed good people.
>> The Onion is a metaphor for some complicated word gamers or a hamburger
>> condiment but one must specify which context before
>> breaking into a brawl.
>>
>> We had other terms used at the same time as layer, such as plies from the
>> lumber industry but they were easier to eradicate.
>>
>> Our specificity was a consequence of our Mathematics and our robots.
>> Matrix Stacking was the key procedure we used.
>> In our case no lamina ever penetrated another, until I violated the
>> social norms and found a method to do so but that innovation
>> never found a mathematical support structure nor does it have a
>> biological analogue.
>>
>> The language seems to control the way your group thinks. English was my
>> third language so I am not so biased about some words
>> as some of you seem. Now the conversation is sliding ever closer to my
>> interests, graph theory and networks, though I seem unique
>> in seeing engineered structures as networks that can or cannot
>> redistribute stress.
>>
>> Since language can become a tool of Control Freaks I tend to favour 3D
>> images to explain critical matters. They usually shut down the bickering.
>>
>> But lately I have gone a bit rogue using stacks of images and video to
>> try and explain what twirls in my head. Nicholas and Steve Smith
>> seem to be punching in the right direction. I ran into a problem with
>> some of my code that was wholly unexpected and it actually
>> was the circularity condition. You had to view it from a certain location
>> to see the Circularity , anywhere else you would see either columns or
>> helices.
>>
>> I had not specifically written the code to do any of these, my brain was
>> jumping to conclusions.  I had the code on one screen and the graphics
>> running beside on the left.
>>
>> I had to spend hours staring and watching my own brain fight over which
>> reality to accept. Evolution has left us many peculiar brain structures
>> that were once useful but now
>> a hindrance.
>>
>> Complexity may be real, but it may also be an unnatural effort for some
>> brains. Words are nearly  useless in this arena. So well maybe are the 2D
>> excel charts. Steve may just be accidentally
>> flattering my interests having recently been reading up on Graph Theory.
>> Indeed I wonder about Nodes and unusual valences. To illustrate my own bent
>> mental models I used
>> my mental models to write code and translate a Stack of Rectangular
>> Matrices (6 in total) 28 rows and 162 columns  Each represents a Self
>> Avoiding walk neither Eulerian or Hamiltonian,
>> or a little of each since I work in 3D at least. I did the unthinkable...
>> I connected Nodes to Nodes of different Matrices, then I purged nodes only
>> connected to those of each sheet. What remained
>> I plotted as surfaces in 3D. Then I converted these vertex positions into
>> Object files .obj which now can be printed by 3D printers when scaled
>> properly. So there gentleman I can now print my
>> Mad Mental Models but that is just the beginning I have established a
>> methodology to distinguish rigid Body Motion from Growth and present them
>> simultaneously. But now it get`s very weird,
>> To see the growth I had to do much fiddling with code. The growth must be
>> synchronized to the  frame rate of the display. Or to my brain throughput
>> capacity.
>> I have seen great Hollywood animations and may have repeated what is
>> already well known but generally out of reach for academics. I use
>> Processing to display these moving 3D objects with some difficulty
>> but it does work.
>>
>> So take a look you may have to download
>>
>> https://1drv.ms/v/s!AjdC7pqwzaUUkyNFoHD7DbjevjZM
>>
>> This Flower is the intersection of 5 Self Avoiding Walk Graphs in 3D
>> space, each Matrix is tubular they are nested inside each other as like a
>> Russian Doll.
>> Not an Onion .I applied a growth factor to a single region of the fifth
>> matrix while moving the entire structure via rotation. Examination of any
>> single Matrix would
>> never reveal the existence of the whole entity but a combination of any
>> two would give the wrong conclusion but only some vague insight that
>> something exists but not what it is.
>> Oh each frame is a complete 3D structure so this may mean the video is 4D
>> yet you are seeing it on a 2D display device pretty good for a geezer.
>> Next each edge needs to be given some material properties amenable to
>> change perhaps based on proximity.
>>
>> I suppose any man that goes this far must be quite Mad Indeed , but I
>> hope it helps keep us engaged and civil.
>> It looks like it may be possible to target each region with unique Growth
>> Factors or engineering properties.
>>
>> I hope this qualifies as useful.
>> vib
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Nick Thompson
>> Sent: June-09-17 3:02 PM
>> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS:
>> Any non-biological complex systems?
>>
>> Sorry.  Slip of the "pen".   Layers it is.
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> Nicholas S. Thompson
>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen ?
>> Sent: Friday, June 09, 2017 3:06 PM
>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com
>> >
>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] IS: Does Complexity have a circularity problem WAS:
>> Any non-biological complex systems?
>>
>>
>> Ha!  I don't know if this is fun or not.  But you are making me giggle.
>> So that's good. 8^)
>>
>> On 06/09/2017 11:54 AM, Nick Thompson wrote:
>>
>>> But wait a minute!  Holding a side the mathematical meaning of model for
>>> a minute, what is the difference between a model and a metaphor?
>>>
>>
>> I recently made an ass of myself arguing this very point with Vladimyr
>> and Robert.  But to recap, "model" is too ambiguous to be reliable without
>> lots of context.  Onions are definitely not metaphors.  When you bit into
>> one, your body reacts.  To the best of my knowledge, no such reaction
>> occurs when you bite into a metaphor.
>>
>>
>> In which case, don't we get to examine which features of an onion you
>>> have in mind?
>>>
>>
>> The feature I care about is the 3 dimensional near-symmetry and the fact
>> that the concept of levels is less useful in such a situation.  We could
>> also use Russian dolls instead of onions, if that would be clearer.
>>
>>
>> If your notion of an onion is just a project of your notion of levels of
>>> complexity, then how does it help to say that levels of complexity (or
>>> whatever) are onion-like?
>>>
>>
>> Sheesh.  I'm trying to stop you from using the word "level".  That's all
>> I'm doing.  Maybe you're too smart for your own good.  I don't care about
>> ANYTHING else at this point, simply that the word "level" sucks.  Stop
>> using it.
>>
>>
>> Remember, I am the guy who thinks that a lot of the problems we have in
>>> evolutionary science arise from failing to take Darwin's metaphor (natural
>>> selection) seriously enough.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I know.  That's why it baffles me that you can't see my point that
>> layer is better than level.
>>
>>
>> --
>> ☣ 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20170609/dc5f5ad2/attachment-0001.html>