[FRIAM] The theory of everything
thompnickson2 at gmail.com
thompnickson2 at gmail.com
Sun Jul 5 16:31:28 EDT 2020
Dave,
Since they don’t evolve in my sense, in what sense to rocks evolve?
n
Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
<mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
<https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Sunday, July 5, 2020 1:08 PM
To: friam at redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The theory of everything
Nick,
Can't speak to tornadoes, but rocks certainly evolve. To understand how, you need to let go of your Western Rationalism just a tad.
Karma and reincarnation provide a theory that, in turns, provides a context for seeing how a rock can evolve, very slowly to be sure, simply by 'acting correctly' and thereby minimizing its accrual of karma. There is a lot more to it of course, but this gets the basic point across.
Now, before you dismiss this idea, simply by reflex, as utter mysticism; let me point out that the specific theory is grounded in a larger theory of physics that incorporates 'consciousness' as a fundamental property; and then point out that this theory of physics yields models, models that include prediction and verification, and that those models yielded mathematical insights that predated the 'rediscovery / reinvention' of some of the mathematics that underpin Western Rationalist Science.
Reading a book at the moment that makes the argument that Physics, in particular, is no longer 'Science' because theory at the leading edge of investigation is no longer subject to experimental verification and has become at least as "mystical" in essence as those bodies of knowledge so cavalierly dismissed.
This post does not argue that Karma and Reincarnation are "Real" or "Truth."
davew
On Sun, Jul 5, 2020, at 10:46 AM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
Jochen,
FOOD FIGHT! FOOD FIGHT! I absolutely and totally disagree that “everything evolves” [while agreeing that anything that is everything is nothing]. Rocks and tornadoes do not evolve. They change, but the don’t evolve. Evolution (to me) is a very specific pattern of design arising through phylogenetic descent – lineages being bent through time to match their circumstances. I am not entirely sure that some inanimate things don’t evolve. I would have a hard time arguing ferociously that the sorting of pebbles on a beach is not the result of some sort of evolution. I certainly don’t want to define evolution as something that only organisms can do, if only because that turns the assertion, “only organisms evolve” into a nothing, or an everything, depending on how you care to look at it
In this matter, as in all matters, Eric will correct me.
Nick
Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
<mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
<https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com> > On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Sunday, July 5, 2020 4:47 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com> >
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The theory of everything
Russ, I agree. Maybe we found it already, the theory of everything & nothing: Darwin's theory of evolution. It is a theory of everything because everything evolves. It doesn't say anything how fish, insects, dinosaurs, mammals, birds, religions, civilizations, companies, parties or states look like, though. Therefore it is also a theory of nothing. I have to reread your book.
<https://www.hpcoders.com.au/nothing.html> https://www.hpcoders.com.au/nothing.html
-J.
-------- Original message --------
From: Russell Standish < <mailto:lists at hpcoders.com.au> lists at hpcoders.com.au>
Date: 7/5/20 11:49 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < <mailto:friam at redfish.com> friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Book publishing advice needed
Being self-published hasn't stopped my book "Theory of Nothing" from
being cited. According to Google Scholar, it has 22 citations, 9th on
my list in terms of citation count, just after "Why Occams Razor", a
peer reviewed paper on similar topics. It got a bit of a boost from
Max Tegmark's book, as he singled it out as inspiration, kind of ironic when it
was one of Max's "crazy papers" that inspired me to write "Why Occams
Razor" and then "Theory of Nothing".
I think you need to have a reason to publish a book. Making money is
not one them - almost nobody makes money from writing books. Vanity
publications ("it looks good on the CV") is another one to avoid. Best
bet is if you have a story or a topic that needs telling, and you
think would be interesting to other people, then go for it. Marketing
then becomes telling other people about it, advancing arguments from
it in fora like this. With a bit of luck, it goes viral.
One good reason for writing academic books is that it gives you
expanded scope to explain your ideas more fully, and in less
technically forbidding terms. Allows you to expand your readership
beyond the narrow circle reading your peer revieed articles. But you
probably want those peer reviewed articles to back up/draw upon your
book work. That's probably the reason why old academics write books,
and young ones write papers.
In my case, I've self-published 3 books so far: "Theory of Nothing",
which has sold over 1000 copies, and perhaps 2-3 times as many free
downloads from my website and the usual pirate websites, but in no way
does the royalties cover the time I put into it (unless being paid
less than a Calcutta rickshaw driver was a career ambition); "Amoeba's
Secret", a translation of a semi-autobiography by Bruno Marchal, which
was about the clearest exposition he gave of his ideas, and "Magic
Cottage", an Anthology of my son's writing, which was quite exquisite,
and sadly something he's not really doing now. Magic Cottage proved to
be more of a vanity publication than I thought it would be - but
partly because he never took up my suggestion of leaving a copy around
his college room, now apartment, where it could act as a conversation
starter. I also envisaged him using the book when going for jobs that
might require writing skills, but it seems he hasn't needed to do that
to date.
Cheers
On Sat, Jul 04, 2020 at 10:25:03PM +0200, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> Thanks. Yes, self-publishing is an option. I am looking for an official
> publisher mainly for one reason, namely that other scientists and researchers
> can cite it, since I still cling to the illusion that someone would actually do
> it. Normally self-published texts are not considered as reliable or trustworthy
> sources. I didn't expect that finding a decent publisher would be so
> difficult.
>
> -J.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Tom Johnson < <mailto:tom at jtjohnson.com> tom at jtjohnson.com>
> Date: 7/4/20 20:10 (GMT+01:00)
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < <mailto:friam at redfish.com> friam at redfish.com>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Book publishing advice needed
>
> Jochen:
> The deal being offered strikes me as a bad deal.
>
> Background: I have been practicing and teaching about "Be Your Own Publisher"
> for nearly 15 years. There are, in my opinion, some major problems with all
> publishers today. It starts with control of the copyright. I think YOU should
> want to maintain control of the copyright to your work. It will depend on the
> contract, but many or most publishers will try to lock down the copyright in
> their favor for all -- ALL -- forms of your work in perpetuity and throughout
> the universe. Sometimes quite literally.
>
> Second, you should assume -- especially with a small publisher and you, not
> being as well known as Stephen King or Daniel Steele -- the publisher will do
> little if anything to promote your book beyond a mention in its catalog and,
> maybe, some promotional links on Amazon. Given that, a 5 percent royalty
> should be seen as a con.
>
> Third, given your computing experience, you should find it easy to format and
> produce the book yourself. I have used Lulu.com for years. It is especially
> good if you want to have both hardback, paperback and PDF editions. Again the
> advantages: you keep the copyright, you can set (and change) the prices and to
> a degree the royalties. Also, Lulu and Amazon handle all the backend financial
> arrangements and administration and pay directly and quickly. I also use a
> very good, high quality digital printer in Albuquerque for paperback editions.
> It is Lithexcel. It handles all the printing (one copy to any number) quickly,
> along with all the fulfillment and accounting. The folks there will also, for
> only $25, set up your book in the Amazon inventory search engine. Finally,
> there is Amazon's self-publishing arm. While Amazon might take a bigger slice,
> the control over all aspects is in your hands.
>
> Here's the problem/challenge with all of these. YOU have to do the marketing/
> publicity/promotion. But so what? If you today sign with any publisher of any
> size you will have to do the same thing.
>
> Hope this helps. Feel free to contact me with questions. Also you might want
> to see <https://bit.ly/2ZvihKc> https://bit.ly/2ZvihKc
> Tom
>
> ============================================
> Tom Johnson - <mailto:tom at jtjohnson.com> tom at jtjohnson.com
> Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> 505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h)
> NM Foundation for Open Government
> Check out It's The People's Data
> ============================================
>
>
>
> [icon-] Virus-free. <http://www.avast.com> www.avast.com
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 1:29 AM Jochen Fromm < <mailto:jofr at cas-group.net> jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:
>
> At one end of the spectrum there are the 5 big commercial publishers
> Hachette, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin Random House and Simon &
> Schuster. They only publish stuff their agents select to make a lot of
> money. There are also the big academic publishers like OUP, CUP, HUP and
> MIT Press, which preferably publish strictly peer-reviewed content from
> professors at Ivy League universities who made their PhD at the age of 20.
>
> At the other end of the spectrum there are "predatory publishers" who
> publish anything you submit as long as you pay enough money for it. Open
> access books can also be very expensive. Publishing an "open access book"
> at De Gruyter for example costs up to 8000 $. You pay for it so that other
> people read it. It is basically some kind of advertising of your own work.
>
> For my own new book I finally have an offer from a small publisher in
> Washington D.C. who is somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. They are
> really small and offer 5% royalties. Should I accept this offer or wait for
> a better one? It is the only one from more than 25 publishers I have asked,
> and the publishers at the moment are flooded with submissions. :-/
> <https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2020/mar/26/> https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2020/mar/26/
> novel-writing-during-coronavirus-crisis-outbreak
>
> -J.
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/> http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/> http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders <mailto:hpcoder at hpcoders.com.au> hpcoder at hpcoders.com.au
<http://www.hpcoders.com.au> http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/> http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/> http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200705/51f805be/attachment.html>
More information about the Friam
mailing list