[FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 184, Issue 19
Jon Zingale
jonzingale at gmail.com
Sun Oct 28 11:28:01 EDT 2018
For those interested in the Algebraic Geometry thread,
I have so far been very impressed with the text:
'Elementary Algebraic Geometry
<https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781461569015>' by Keith Kendig.
Even if another text is chosen, I will likely continue
to use this one as a supplementary text. Also, though
not perhaps suitable as a reading group text, I have
been working through 'An invitation to Algebraic
<https://www.springer.com/us/book/9780387989808>
Geometry <https://www.springer.com/us/book/9780387989808>' by Karen Smith
et al. It is very terse
and moves very quickly, yet it is very insightful.
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM <friam-request at redfish.com> wrote:
> Send Friam mailing list submissions to
> friam at redfish.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> friam-request at redfish.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> friam-owner at redfish.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Friam digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (John Kennison)
> 2. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (John Kennison)
> 3. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (Marcus Daniels)
> 4. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (Frank Wimberly)
> 5. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (John Kennison)
> 6. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (Frank Wimberly)
> 7. Re: Open Letter, draft #2 (Nick Thompson)
> 8. Formalizing the concept of design (Nick Thompson)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Kennison <JKennison at clarku.edu>
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:32:37 +0000
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
> Hi Marcus, Frank, et al,
>
>
> I am a mathematician who knows category theory, which Rosen seems to
> have found exciting. My thinking about a machine that would learn how to
> reprogram itself is surely at a naive level, but it seems to me that it
> would feel more like a being than a machine. All I know about Genetic
> Programming is what I just read after Googling that term and it looks like
> great idea. Frank's credentials are impressive but I don't know enough to,
> as yet, formulate a reasonable question to him.
>
>
> It looks that some very sophisticated programs can evolve and reprogram
> themselves which means, I think, that sequential machines can do amazing
> things. I guess my question would be:
>
>
> Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which
> we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?'
>
>
> I have read Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" and Hofstadter's "I am a
> Strange Loop". There are parts of each book which still seem vague to me,
> but it seems likely that the answer to the above question is "No". But
> then I would need a different approach to trying to figure out what Rosen
> might be driving at. (I once had s copy of Rosen's "Life Itself" but
> I can't find it now --so I ordered a used copy for about $9.).
>
>
> On Geometric Algebra --my Googling of this term suggests that it has to do
> with what I would call tensors, which I saw briefly in an undergraduate
> Physics course, and very abstractly in a graduate Math course. I convinced
> myself they were about the same thing
>
>
> --John
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Marcus Daniels <
> marcus at snoutfarm.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 27, 2018 11:11:10 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
> How idoes genetic programming with automatic function definition not
> achieve this?
>
>
>
> *From: *Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of John Kennison <
> JKennison at clarku.edu>
> *Reply-To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com>
> *Date: *Saturday, October 27, 2018 at 6:21 AM
> *To: *"Friam at redfish. com" <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> I like the idea of a non-sequential machine, or perhaps, a being, whose
> operation is NOT determined by knowing how its component parts function. I
> don’t see how to go about constructing such a thing, unless I assume that
> there are laws of physics which remain undiscovered. So for now, I will
> settle on trying to describe a ``machine’’ which is not a sequential
> machine. I think that Rosen is right in saying that having a parallel
> machine (in which various operations happen simultaneously) will not do the
> trick because given any parallel machine one can define a sequential
> machine that functions in the same way. One might make a machine in which
> the outputs only happen with a certain specified probability, but I don’t
> think that is different enough. So I rephrase the problem as describing an
> entity that receives inputs and produces outputs that is cannot be
> duplicated (or reasonably modeled) by a probabilistic sequential machine
> (one in which the outputs happen with a specified probability). I thought
> of starting with a sequential machine, which has rules for how to react to
> inputs when in a given state. But now let’s suppose that the rules may
> change. The entity is capable of learning new rules. This seems more
> biological –the entity can reprogram itself. But I find that naive ways of
> reprograming can probably be duplicated by a sequential machine. For
> example, if the machine reprograms when dissatisfied with previous
> performance, then there is a new state, of being dissatisfied, and the
> reprograming activity can, it seems, be re-expressed as more sophisticated
> rules for producing an output.
>
>
>
> --John
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Tom Johnson <
> tom at jtjohnson.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:23:01 PM
> *To:* Friam at redfish. com
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> Yes, but not with multiple signatories. Sorry.
>
>
> ============================================
> Tom Johnson
> Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> 505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h)
> *NM Foundation for Open Government* <http://nmfog.org>
> *Check out It's The People's Data
> <https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>*
>
> http://www.jtjohnson.com tom at jtjohnson.com
> ============================================
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nick Thompson <nickthompson at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Tom,
>
>
>
> Still trying to figure out logistics. I have written the NM-ican to find
> out how to submit a letter from many signers, but got no response. Do you
> have any experience with this?
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Tom
> Johnson
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:14 AM
> *To:* Friam at redfish. com <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> I will sign on, Nick.
>
> Tom Johnson, Professor Emeritus, San Francisco State University
>
>
>
> ============================================
> Tom Johnson
> Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> 505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h)
> *NM Foundation for Open Government* <http://nmfog.org>
> *Check out It's The People's Data
> <https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>*
>
> http://www.jtjohnson.com tom at jtjohnson.com
> ============================================
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:09 PM Nick Thompson <nickthompson at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> Hi, all,
>
>
>
> Here is a new draft of the open letter, pared down to meet the New
> Mexican’s requirements. I have a few signatories, would love some more. I
> will bring the letter with me to our service on Friday. Even if you don’t
> plan to sign, please feel free to point out typos and other infelicities.
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> *To the New Mexican*
>
> *We are industrial researchers and retired college professors, living in
> Santa Fe. We urge all Santa Feans to vote, but particularly young voters
> and their parents. Institutions of learning and their students are under
> stress. Every day, we meet young people as dedicated to learning as our
> best research students in the 70’s and 80’s, yet are working as cashiers,
> ride hail drivers, waiters and waitresses. Under present conditions, these
> talented young people cannot afford to go to university and, without that
> training, will never take up the leadership positions their talent should
> make possible. The nation will need these students as our generation
> retires from institutes, government laboratories, colleges, and
> universities. Please take time to vote and to tell your representatives to
> support education at every level. The future safety and prosperity of our
> nation depends on it. *
>
>
>
> 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_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
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Kennison <JKennison at clarku.edu>
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:39:23 +0000
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
> P.S. I just realized that when Frank said "Look no further than me" he was
> not referring to his considerable knowledge, but to himself. It's a nice
> point.
>
> JK
> ------------------------------
> *From:* John Kennison
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 27, 2018 2:32:37 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
> Hi Marcus, Frank, et al,
>
>
> I am a mathematician who knows category theory, which Rosen seems to
> have found exciting. My thinking about a machine that would learn how to
> reprogram itself is surely at a naive level, but it seems to me that it
> would feel more like a being than a machine. All I know about Genetic
> Programming is what I just read after Googling that term and it looks like
> great idea. Frank's credentials are impressive but I don't know enough to,
> as yet, formulate a reasonable question to him.
>
>
> It looks that some very sophisticated programs can evolve and reprogram
> themselves which means, I think, that sequential machines can do amazing
> things. I guess my question would be:
>
>
> Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which
> we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?'
>
>
> I have read Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" and Hofstadter's "I am a
> Strange Loop". There are parts of each book which still seem vague to me,
> but it seems likely that the answer to the above question is "No". But
> then I would need a different approach to trying to figure out what Rosen
> might be driving at. (I once had s copy of Rosen's "Life Itself" but
> I can't find it now --so I ordered a used copy for about $9.).
>
>
> On Geometric Algebra --my Googling of this term suggests that it has to do
> with what I would call tensors, which I saw briefly in an undergraduate
> Physics course, and very abstractly in a graduate Math course. I convinced
> myself they were about the same thing
>
>
> --John
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Marcus Daniels <
> marcus at snoutfarm.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 27, 2018 11:11:10 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
> How idoes genetic programming with automatic function definition not
> achieve this?
>
>
>
> *From: *Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of John Kennison <
> JKennison at clarku.edu>
> *Reply-To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com>
> *Date: *Saturday, October 27, 2018 at 6:21 AM
> *To: *"Friam at redfish. com" <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> I like the idea of a non-sequential machine, or perhaps, a being, whose
> operation is NOT determined by knowing how its component parts function. I
> don’t see how to go about constructing such a thing, unless I assume that
> there are laws of physics which remain undiscovered. So for now, I will
> settle on trying to describe a ``machine’’ which is not a sequential
> machine. I think that Rosen is right in saying that having a parallel
> machine (in which various operations happen simultaneously) will not do the
> trick because given any parallel machine one can define a sequential
> machine that functions in the same way. One might make a machine in which
> the outputs only happen with a certain specified probability, but I don’t
> think that is different enough. So I rephrase the problem as describing an
> entity that receives inputs and produces outputs that is cannot be
> duplicated (or reasonably modeled) by a probabilistic sequential machine
> (one in which the outputs happen with a specified probability). I thought
> of starting with a sequential machine, which has rules for how to react to
> inputs when in a given state. But now let’s suppose that the rules may
> change. The entity is capable of learning new rules. This seems more
> biological –the entity can reprogram itself. But I find that naive ways of
> reprograming can probably be duplicated by a sequential machine. For
> example, if the machine reprograms when dissatisfied with previous
> performance, then there is a new state, of being dissatisfied, and the
> reprograming activity can, it seems, be re-expressed as more sophisticated
> rules for producing an output.
>
>
>
> --John
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Tom Johnson <
> tom at jtjohnson.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:23:01 PM
> *To:* Friam at redfish. com
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> Yes, but not with multiple signatories. Sorry.
>
>
> ============================================
> Tom Johnson
> Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> 505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h)
> *NM Foundation for Open Government* <http://nmfog.org>
> *Check out It's The People's Data
> <https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>*
>
> http://www.jtjohnson.com tom at jtjohnson.com
> ============================================
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nick Thompson <nickthompson at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Tom,
>
>
>
> Still trying to figure out logistics. I have written the NM-ican to find
> out how to submit a letter from many signers, but got no response. Do you
> have any experience with this?
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Tom
> Johnson
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:14 AM
> *To:* Friam at redfish. com <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> I will sign on, Nick.
>
> Tom Johnson, Professor Emeritus, San Francisco State University
>
>
>
> ============================================
> Tom Johnson
> Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> 505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h)
> *NM Foundation for Open Government* <http://nmfog.org>
> *Check out It's The People's Data
> <https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>*
>
> http://www.jtjohnson.com tom at jtjohnson.com
> ============================================
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:09 PM Nick Thompson <nickthompson at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> Hi, all,
>
>
>
> Here is a new draft of the open letter, pared down to meet the New
> Mexican’s requirements. I have a few signatories, would love some more. I
> will bring the letter with me to our service on Friday. Even if you don’t
> plan to sign, please feel free to point out typos and other infelicities.
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> *To the New Mexican*
>
> *We are industrial researchers and retired college professors, living in
> Santa Fe. We urge all Santa Feans to vote, but particularly young voters
> and their parents. Institutions of learning and their students are under
> stress. Every day, we meet young people as dedicated to learning as our
> best research students in the 70’s and 80’s, yet are working as cashiers,
> ride hail drivers, waiters and waitresses. Under present conditions, these
> talented young people cannot afford to go to university and, without that
> training, will never take up the leadership positions their talent should
> make possible. The nation will need these students as our generation
> retires from institutes, government laboratories, colleges, and
> universities. Please take time to vote and to tell your representatives to
> support education at every level. The future safety and prosperity of our
> nation depends on it. *
>
>
>
> 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_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
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com>
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:56:49 +0000
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
> John writes:
>
>
>
> “Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do
> which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
>
>
>
> A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random
> numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself
> (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that
> even had an instruction to do that random dispatching. To counter the
> arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
>
>
>
> https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
>
>
>
> There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical
> supercomputers, of course.
>
>
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com>
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 15:53:53 -0600
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
> Sorry, John. It was a weak attempt to be humorous.
>
> Also, I mistyped. I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a
> book recommendation.
>
> Frank
>
> -----------------------------------
> Frank Wimberly
>
> My memoir:
> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
>
> My scientific publications:
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
>
> Phone (505) 670-9918
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 12:56 PM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com>
> wrote:
>
>> John writes:
>>
>>
>>
>> “Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do
>> which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
>>
>>
>>
>> A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random
>> numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself
>> (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that
>> even had an instruction to do that random dispatching. To counter the
>> arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
>>
>>
>>
>> There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical
>> supercomputers, of course.
>>
>>
>>
>> Marcus
>> ============================================================
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Kennison <JKennison at clarku.edu>
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 23:16:29 +0000
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
> Hi Frank,
>
>
> I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant
> example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but:
>
>
> . . . there is a historical survey in
> https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf
> Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra
> <https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf>
> www.ime.usp.br
> Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s):
> Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83,
> No. 6 (Jun. - Jul ...
>
>
> <https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf>If
> you read that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a more
> thorough survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists and
> Engineers'' (including computer scientists.
>
>
> --John
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Frank Wimberly <
> wimberly3 at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
> Sorry, John. It was a weak attempt to be humorous.
>
> Also, I mistyped. I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a
> book recommendation.
>
> Frank
>
> -----------------------------------
> Frank Wimberly
>
> My memoir:
> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
>
> My scientific publications:
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
>
> Phone (505) 670-9918
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 12:56 PM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com>
> wrote:
>
> John writes:
>
>
>
> “Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do
> which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
>
>
>
> A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random
> numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself
> (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that
> even had an instruction to do that random dispatching. To counter the
> arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
>
>
>
> https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
>
>
>
> There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical
> supercomputers, of course.
>
>
>
> Marcus
> ============================================================
> 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
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com>
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 17:23:38 -0600
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
> Well, I'm not a sequential machine although my wife has her doubts.
>
> Thanks for the algebraic geometry suggestions. Jon Zingale and I will try
> to master the subject. Others may join us on Saturday mornings if they
> wish.
>
> Frank
>
> -----------------------------------
> Frank Wimberly
>
> My memoir:
> https://wacsequentisl mww.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
>
> My scientific publications:
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
>
> Phone (505) 670-9918
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 5:16 PM John Kennison <JKennison at clarku.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>>
>> I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant
>> example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but:
>>
>>
>> . . . there is a historical survey in
>> https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf
>> Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra
>> <https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf>
>> www.ime.usp.br
>> Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s):
>> Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83,
>> No. 6 (Jun. - Jul ...
>>
>>
>> <https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf>If
>> you read that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a more
>> thorough survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists and
>> Engineers'' (including computer scientists.
>>
>>
>> --John
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Frank Wimberly <
>> wimberly3 at gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM
>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>>
>> Sorry, John. It was a weak attempt to be humorous.
>>
>> Also, I mistyped. I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a
>> book recommendation.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> -----------------------------------
>> Frank Wimberly
>>
>> My memoir:
>> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
>>
>> My scientific publications:
>> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
>>
>> Phone (505) 670-9918
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 12:56 PM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> John writes:
>>
>>
>>
>> “Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do
>> which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
>>
>>
>>
>> A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random
>> numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself
>> (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that
>> even had an instruction to do that random dispatching. To counter the
>> arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
>>
>>
>>
>> There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical
>> supercomputers, of course.
>>
>>
>>
>> Marcus
>> ============================================================
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Nick Thompson <nickthompson at earthlink.net>
> To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" <
> friam at redfish.com>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 18:05:12 -0600
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
> Frank, Jon, John, etc.,
>
>
>
> I wish you guys would look at Rosen. I would be happy to loan you my
> copy. In Chapter 4, The Concept of State, he is arguing that assumptions
> deep in Newtonian Mechanics preclude or constrain a discussion of
> biological organization (let alone, a psychological one) leading to a
> fallacious sense of reduceability. His argument is mathematical, and
> involves assumptions built into what he calls Newtonian “chronicles”,
> mathematical expressions that have time of occurrence on the x axis and
> position, or velocity, or acceleration, or … or etc. on the Y. Something
> about the manner in which Newton sets this all up is claimed to obscure
> organizational properties of systems. Somehow, the problem of organization
> is made to disappear. Best I can do.
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Frank
> Wimberly
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:24 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> Well, I'm not a sequential machine although my wife has her doubts.
>
>
>
> Thanks for the algebraic geometry suggestions. Jon Zingale and I will try
> to master the subject. Others may join us on Saturday mornings if they
> wish.
>
>
>
> Frank
>
> -----------------------------------
> Frank Wimberly
>
> My memoir:
> https://wacsequentisl mww.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
>
> My scientific publications:
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
>
> Phone (505) 670-9918
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 5:16 PM John Kennison <JKennison at clarku.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi Frank,
>
>
>
> I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant
> example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but:
>
>
>
> . . . there is a historical survey in
> https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf
>
> Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra
> <https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf>
>
> www.ime.usp.br
>
> Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s):
> Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83,
> No. 6 (Jun. - Jul ...
>
>
>
>
>
> If you read that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a
> more thorough survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists
> and Engineers'' (including computer scientists.
>
>
>
> --John
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Frank Wimberly <
> wimberly3 at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> Sorry, John. It was a weak attempt to be humorous.
>
>
>
> Also, I mistyped. I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a
> book recommendation.
>
>
>
> Frank
>
> -----------------------------------
> Frank Wimberly
>
> My memoir:
> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
>
> My scientific publications:
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
>
> Phone (505) 670-9918
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 12:56 PM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com>
> wrote:
>
> John writes:
>
>
>
> “Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do
> which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
>
>
>
> A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random
> numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself
> (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that
> even had an instruction to do that random dispatching. To counter the
> arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
>
>
>
> https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
>
>
>
> There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical
> supercomputers, of course.
>
>
>
> Marcus
>
> ============================================================
> 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
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Nick Thompson <nickthompson at earthlink.net>
> To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" <
> friam at redfish.com>
> Cc: "'Jon Zingale'" <jonzingale at gmail.com>, Frank Wimberly <
> wimberly3 at gmail.com>
> Bcc:
> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2018 00:32:56 -0600
> Subject: [FRIAM] Formalizing the concept of design
>
> Dear Frank, Jon, Eric, and anybody else,
>
>
>
> OK. Let me be blunt. I wish that the mathematically inclined among you
> would help me. As I have told you all before, my brother was a
> mathematician and I got one of his two math genes, which was enough to give
> me vague mathematical intuitions but not enough that I could actually make
> good on more than a few of them. I have long been carrying around in my
> head the notion of “design arrays" which I have offered as a kind of
> universal way of looking at such troublesome concepts as adaptation,
> motivation, communication, learning, development, etc., where our
> explanatory concepts seem to be fatally entangled with our descriptive
> ones. A design co-array is a co-listing of circumstances and adaptive
> techniques, with all the pairings leading to a common outcome.
>
>
>
> I guess I am wondering, Is this way of thinking about telic phenomena a
> mathematical way? It seems to me to relate to the idea of mapping. The
> motivated animal maps his behavior onto his circumstances and thence,
> convergently, onto outcomes. But I am also wondering, aside from making my
> deceased big brother proud, is there any benefit to formalizing it. It is
> my understanding of mathematics that the benefit of formalization is the
> capacity to be led, through the formalization to some unexpected prediction
> concerning the phenomenon. It’s hard for me to see what benefits such a
> formalization would provide.
>
>
>
> To make it as easy for you to think about this problem, I have ocr-ed its
> most lucid and concise description among my papers, cleaned it up, and
> attached it above.
>
>
>
> I am eager for anybody’s thoughts.
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> From: Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
>
> Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:24 PM
>
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> Well, I'm not a sequential machine although my wife has her doubts.
>
>
>
> Thanks for the algebraic geometry suggestions. Jon Zingale and I will try
> to master the subject. Others may join us on Saturday mornings if they
> wish.
>
>
>
> Frank
>
> -----------------------------------
>
> Frank Wimberly
>
>
>
> My memoir:
>
> https://wacsequentisl mww.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
>
>
>
> My scientific publications:
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
>
>
>
> Phone (505) 670-9918
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 5:16 PM John Kennison <JKennison at clarku.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi Frank,
>
>
>
> I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant
> example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but:
>
>
>
> . . . there is a historical survey in
> https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf
>
> Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra
>
> www.ime.usp.br
>
> Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s):
> Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83,
> No. 6 (Jun. - Jul ...
>
>
>
> If you read that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a
> more thorough survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists
> and Engineers'' (including computer scientists.
>
>
>
> --John
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
>
> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Frank Wimberly <
> wimberly3 at gmail.com>
>
> Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM
>
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> Sorry, John. It was a weak attempt to be humorous.
>
>
>
> Also, I mistyped. I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a
> book recommendation.
>
>
>
> Frank
>
> -----------------------------------
>
> Frank Wimberly
>
>
>
> My memoir:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
>
>
>
> My scientific publications:
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
>
>
>
> Phone (505) 670-9918
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 12:56 PM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com>
> wrote:
>
> John writes:
>
>
>
> “Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do
> which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
>
>
>
> A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random
> numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself
> (not its memory). One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that
> even had an instruction to do that random dispatching. To counter the
> arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
>
>
>
> https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
>
>
>
> There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical
> supercomputers, of course.
>
>
>
> Marcus
>
> ============================================================
>
> 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 mailing list
> Friam at redfish.com
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20181028/b3550ff4/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Friam
mailing list