Economy, as Science

A shift in paradigm can lead, via the theory-dependence of observation, to a difference in one's experiences of things and thus to a change in one's phenomenal world.ON Thomas Kuhn

 

Control the information you control the people?:) Again as heart felt and idealistic you can become in your efforts, it's not enough to cry out in political verbiage because you'll always end up with another person saying that it is only a political perspective. That it is the progressive conservative you don't like and their leader? It's not enough.

So what do you do?

Do you succumb to the frustration that what is moving as a sub-culture working from the inside/out, is the idea that you can build a better consensus from what is moving the fabric of society to know that we can change the outcome as to what Canada shall become as well?

They( a conspirator thought) as a force that is undermining the public perception while society did not grasp the full understanding of what has been done to them. Society having been cast to fighting at the "local level to advance a larger agenda?"

Does it not seem that once you occupy the mind in such close quarter conflagrations that mind has been circumvented from the larger picture?

Pain, and emotional turmoil does this.

Historically once the fire has been started, like some phoenix, a new cultural idealism manifests as to what the individual actually wants when they are in full recognition that "as a force" moved forward in a democratic compunction as a government in waiting to advance the principals by which it can stand as the public mind.

However, the incommensurability thesis is not Kuhn's only positive philosophical thesis. Kuhn himself tells us that “The paradigm as shared example is the central element of what I now take to be the most novel and least understood aspect of [The Structure of Scientific Revolutions]” (1970a, 187). Nonetheless, Kuhn failed to develop the paradigm concept in his later work beyond an early application of its semantic aspects to the explanation of incommensurability. The explanation of scientific development in terms of paradigms was not only novel but radical too, insofar as it gives a naturalistic explanation of belief-change. Naturalism was not in the early 1960s the familiar part of philosophical landscape that it has subsequently become. Kuhn's explanation contrasted with explanations in terms of rules of method (or confirmation, falsification etc.) that most philosophers of science took to be constitutive of rationality. Furthermore, the relevant disciplines (psychology, cognitive science, artificial intelligence) were either insufficiently progressed to support Kuhn's contentions concerning paradigms, or were antithetical to them (in the case of classical AI). Now that naturalism has become an accepted component of philosophy, there has recently been interest in reassessing Kuhn's work in the light of developments in the relevant sciences, many of which provide corroboration for Kuhn's claim that science is driven by relations of perceived similarity and analogy to existing problems and their solutions (Nickles 2003b, Nersessian 2003). It may yet be that a characteristically Kuhnian thesis will play a prominent part in our understanding of science.

I would advance that the word "science" in quote above, be changed to "economy."

What paradigmatic solution has been advanced that such a thing can turn over the present equatorial function assigned to the pubic mind, that we will be in better control of our destinies as Canadians?

Precursor to such changes are revolutions in the thought patterns established as functionary pundits of money orientated societies. They have become "fixed to a particular agenda." Rote systems assumed and brought up in,  extolled as to the highest moral obligation is  to live well, and on the way, fix ourselves to debt written obligations that shall soon over come the sensibility of what it shall take to live?

Force upon them is the understanding that we had become a slave to our reason and a slave to a master disguised as what is healthy and knows no boundaries? A capitalistic dream.

Update:

Money Supply and Energy: Is The Economy Inherently Unstable?

 

The Last Question by Isaac Asimov

The problem of heat can be a frustrating one if one can contend with the computer chips and how this may of resulted in a reboot of the machine( or it's death) into a better state of existence then what was previously used in working model form.

So the perfection is to the very defining model of a super race that is devoid of all the trappings in human form that can be ruled by the mistakes of combining body parts from Frankenstein sense to what the new terminator models have in taken over..but they are not human?

Multivac is a advanced computer that solves many of the world’s problems. The story opens on May 14, 2061 when Multivac has built a space station to harness the power of the sun – effectively giving humans access to a nearly unlimited source of power. Ah – and that’s the key, it is nearly unlimited. In fact two of Multivac’s technicians argue about this very idea – how long will humankind be able to glean energy from the universe? They decide to ask Multivac for the answer, and all it can say is “INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER.” Oh well, it was a good idea, and through several smaller stories we see that many more people ask Multivac the same question. Multivac has a difficult time answering – it is a hard question after all! But when do we (and Multivac) finally learn the answer? As you’ve probably guessed – not until the very end of the story.

“You ask Multivac. I dare you. Five dollars says it can’t be done.”

“Adell was just drunk enough to try, just sober enough to be able to phrase the necessary symbols and operations into a question which, in words, might have corresponded to this: Will mankind one day without the net expenditure of energy be able to restore the sun to its full youthfulness even after it had died of old age?

Or maybe it could be put more simply like this: How can the net amount of entropy of the universe be massively decreased?
Multivac fell dead and silent. The slow flashing of lights ceased, the distant sounds of clicking relays ended.

Then, just as the frightened technicians felt they could hold their breath no longer, there was a sudden springing to life of the teletype attached to that portion of Multivac. Five words were printed: INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER.

***

Timeframe for heat death

From the Big Bang through the present day and well into the future, matter and dark matter in the universe is concentrated in stars, galaxies, and galaxy clusters. Therefore, the universe is not in thermodynamic equilibrium and objects can do physical work.^{[11], §VID.} The decay time of a roughly galaxy-mass (10¹¹ solar masses) supermassive black hole due to Hawking radiation is on the order of 10¹⁰⁰ years,^[12], so entropy can be produced until at least that time. After that time, the universe enters the so-called dark era, and is expected to consist chiefly of a dilute gas of photons and leptons.^{[11], §VIA.} With only very diffuse matter remaining, activity in the universe will have tailed off dramatically, with very low energy levels and very large time scales. Speculatively, it is possible that the Universe may enter a second inflationary epoch, or, assuming that the current vacuum state is a false vacuum, the vacuum may decay into a lower-energy state.^[11], §VE. It is also possible that entropy production will cease and the universe will achieve heat death.^{[11], §VID.}

^*** 

Creating the Perfect Human Being or Maybe.....

..... a Frankenstein? :)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the intelligence of machines and the branch of computer scienceintelligent agents,"^[1] where an intelligent agent is a system that perceives its environment and takes actions which maximize its chances of success.^[2] John McCarthy, who coined the term in 1956,^[3][4] which aims to create it. Textbooks define the field as "the study and design of defines it as "the science and engineering of making intelligent machines."
The field was founded on the claim that a central property of humans, intelligence—the sapience of Homo sapiens—can be so precisely described that it can be simulated by a machine.^[5] This raises philosophical issues about the nature of the mind and limits of scientific hubris, issues which have been addressed by myth, fiction and philosophy since antiquity.^[6] Artificial intelligence has been the subject of breathtaking optimism,^[7] has suffered stunning setbacks^[8][9] and, today, has become an essential part of the technology industry, providing the heavy lifting for many of the most difficult problems in computer science.
AI research is highly technical and specialized, deeply divided into subfields that often fail to communicate with each other.^[10] Subfields have grown up around particular institutions, the work of individual researchers, the solution of specific problems, longstanding differences of opinion about how AI should be done and the application of widely differing tools. The central problems of AI include such traits as reasoning, knowledge, planning, learning, communication, perception and the ability to move and manipulate objects.^[11] General intelligence (or "strong AI") is still a long-term goal of (some) research.^[12]

Creating the Perfect Human Being or Maybe.....

..... a Frankenstein?:)




Seriously , there are defined differences in the human being versus AI Intelligence. I think people have a tendency to blurr the lines on machinery. This of course required some reading and wiki quotes herein help to orientate.

Of course the pictures in fiction development are closely related to the approach to development, while in some respects it represents to be more the development of the perfect human being


It seems there is a quest "to develop" human beings, not just robots.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the intelligence of machines and the branch of computer scienceintelligent agents,"^[1] where an intelligent agent is a system that perceives its environment and takes actions which maximize its chances of success.^[2] John McCarthy, who coined the term in 1956,^[3][4] which aims to create it. Textbooks define the field as "the study and design of defines it as "the science and engineering of making intelligent machines."
The field was founded on the claim that a central property of humans, intelligence—the sapience of Homo sapiens—can be so precisely described that it can be simulated by a machine.^[5] This raises philosophical issues about the nature of the mind and limits of scientific hubris, issues which have been addressed by myth, fiction and philosophy since antiquity.^[6] Artificial intelligence has been the subject of breathtaking optimism,^[7] has suffered stunning setbacks^[8][9] and, today, has become an essential part of the technology industry, providing the heavy lifting for many of the most difficult problems in computer science.
AI research is highly technical and specialized, deeply divided into subfields that often fail to communicate with each other.^[10] Subfields have grown up around particular institutions, the work of individual researchers, the solution of specific problems, longstanding differences of opinion about how AI should be done and the application of widely differing tools. The central problems of AI include such traits as reasoning, knowledge, planning, learning, communication, perception and the ability to move and manipulate objects.^[11] General intelligence (or "strong AI") is still a long-term goal of (some) research.^[12]

Lacking a heart.....

Knowledge representation

Main articles: Knowledge representation and Commonsense knowledge

Knowledge representation^[43] and knowledge engineering^[44] are central to AI research. Many of the problems machines are expected to solve will require extensive knowledge about the world. Among the things that AI needs to represent are: objects, properties, categories and relations between objects;^[45] situations, events, states and time;^[46] causes and effects;^[47][48] and many other, less well researched domains. A complete representation of "what exists" is an ontology^[49] (borrowing a word from traditional philosophy), of which the most general are called upper ontologies. knowledge about knowledge (what we know about what other people know);
Among the most difficult problems in knowledge representation are:

Default reasoning and the qualification problem

Many of the things people know take the form of "working assumptions." For example, if a bird comes up in conversation, people typically picture an animal that is fist sized, sings, and flies. None of these things are true about all birds. John McCarthy identified this problem in 1969^[50] as the qualification problem: for any commonsense rule that AI researchers care to represent, there tend to be a huge number of exceptions. Almost nothing is simply true or false in the way that abstract logic requires. AI research has explored a number of solutions to this problem.^[51]

The breadth of commonsense knowledge

The number of atomic facts that the average person knows is astronomical. Research projects that attempt to build a complete knowledge base of commonsense knowledgeCyc) require enormous amounts of laborious ontological engineering — they must be built, by hand, one complicated concept at a time.^[52] A major goal is to have the computer understand enough concepts to be able to learn by reading from sources like the internet, and thus be able to add to its own ontology. (e.g.,

The subsymbolic form of some commonsense knowledge

Much of what people know is not represented as "facts" or "statements" that they could actually say out loud. For example, a chess master will avoid a particular chess position because it "feels too exposed"^[53] or an art critic can take one look at a statue and instantly realize that it is a fake.^[54] These are intuitions or tendencies that are represented in the brain non-consciously and sub-symbolically.^[55] Knowledge like this informs, supports and provides a context for symbolic, conscious knowledge. As with the related problem of sub-symbolic reasoning, it is hoped that situated AI or computational intelligence will provide ways to represent this kind of knowledge.^[55]

....they wanted to embed robotic feature with emotive functions...

Social intelligence

Main article: Affective computing

Kismet, a robot with rudimentary social skills

Emotion and social skills^[73] play two roles for an intelligent agent. First, it must be able to predict the actions of others, by understanding their motives and emotional states. (This involves elements of game theory, decision theory, as well as the ability to model human emotions and the perceptual skills to detect emotions.) Also, for good human-computer interaction, an intelligent machine also needs to display emotions. At the very least it must appear polite and sensitive to the humans it interacts with. At best, it should have normal emotions itself.

....finally, having the ability to dream:)

Integrating the approaches

Intelligent agent paradigm

An intelligent agent is a system that perceives its environment and takes actions which maximizes its chances of success. The simplest intelligent agents are programs that solve specific problems. The most complicated intelligent agents are rational, thinking humans.^[92] The paradigm gives researchers license to study isolated problems and find solutions that are both verifiable and useful, without agreeing on one single approach. An agent that solves a specific problem can use any approach that works — some agents are symbolic and logical, some are sub-symbolic neural networks and others may use new approaches. The paradigm also gives researchers a common language to communicate with other fields—such as decision theory and economics—that also use concepts of abstract agents. The intelligent agent paradigm became widely accepted during the 1990s.^[93]

Agent architectures and cognitive architectures

Researchers have designed systems to build intelligent systems out of interacting intelligent agents in a multi-agent system.^[94] A system with both symbolic and sub-symbolic components is a hybrid intelligent system, and the study of such systems is artificial intelligence systems integration. A hierarchical control system provides a bridge between sub-symbolic AI at its lowest, reactive levels and traditional symbolic AI at its highest levels, where relaxed time constraints permit planning and world modelling.^[95] Rodney Brooks' subsumption architecture was an early proposal for such a hierarchical system.

So to me there is an understanding that needs to remain consistent in our views as one moves forward here to see that what is create is not really the human being that we are, but a manifestation of. I think people tend to "loose perspective" on human intelligence versus A.I. So that the issue then is to note these differences? This distinction to me rests in "what outcomes are possible in the diversity of human population matched to a purpose for personal development toward an ideal." No match can be found in terms of this creative attachment which can arise distinctive to each person's in probable outcome. The difference here is that "if" all knowledge already existed, and "if" we were to have access to this "collective unconscious per say," then how it is that such thinking cannot point toward new paradigms for personal development that are developed in society? New science? AI Intelligence already has all these knowledge factors inclusive, so it can give outcomes according to a "quantum leap??":) No, it needs human intervention, or AI can already give us that new science? You see? There would be "no need" for an Einstein?

***

"Bag Model," for the Economy

“In this edition, as a fifth appendix, a presentation of my views on the problem of space in general and the gradual modifications of our ideas on space resulting from the influence of the relativistic view-point. I wished to show that space-time is not necessarily something to which one can ascribe a separate existence, independently of the actual objects of physical reality. Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended. In this way the concept of “empty space” loses its meaning”. A. Einstein (June 9th, 1952)

Photo by Steve Hsu-

The first photo is the morning panel discussion. From left to right, Eric Weinstein, Nouriel Roubini, Richard Freeman and Nassim Taleb.

The Economic Crisis and its Implications for The Science of Economics.

May 1 - 4, 2009
Perimeter Institute

Concerns over the current financial situation are giving rise to a need to evaluate the very mathematics that underpins economics as a predictive and descriptive science. A growing desire to examine economics through the lens of diverse scientific methodologies - including physics and complex systems - is making way to a meeting of leading economists and theorists of finance together with physicists, mathematicians, biologists and computer scientists in an effort to evaluate current theories of markets and identify key issues that can motivate new directions for research. Perimeter Institute was suggested to be the gathering point and conference organizers plan to foster a very careful, dispassionate discussion, in an atmosphere governed by the modesty and open mindedness that characterizes the scientific community.

The conference will begin on May 1, 2009, with a day of talks by leading experts to an invited audience on the status of economic and financial theory in light of the current situation. Three days of private, focused discussions and workshops will ensue, aimed at addressing complex questions and defining future research agendas for the world that can help address and resolve them.

See: Reflections from PI’s economics conference, May 1-4 2009

***



The economy is in a ideological struggle to be free:) The more you try to pull it apart the stronger it resists.:)But in a collision, what happens. The rest, you know about?:)

Jets Provide Evidence for Quark Confinement Models

Deep inelastic scattering experiments provided the evidence that the proton and neutron are made up of three more fundamental particles called quarks . One type of experiment in the proton-antiproton colliders produces jets of mesons which correlate with the models of quark confinement. As visualized in the bag model for quark confinement, an individual quark cannot be pulled free because the energy required to do it is much greater than the pair production energy of a quark-antiquark pair. If in a high energy collision, something scatters directly off one of the constituent quarks, it will give it a high energy. With an energy many times the pair production energy, it will create a jet of quark-antiquark pairs (mesons).

See:Evidence for Quark Theory

***

At times the economy can flow quite easily, while other times, it resists. It is the elastic nature that defines the symbiotic relation of a cultural thinking about what the economy can actually permit, and what of itself, it shall not.

This is a "toposense" synesthesically imbued as relevant too, an expression of what can surround the "psychology of society?" What proof do I have that such thinking geometrically induced shall not find itself "in movement" as it is thought about, as well? Dynamically this was lead too. How one can move in straight lines and such, was moved to a new mode of thinking that excels toward a movement in thought. It is done, as if theoretically moved toward a QGP recognition of the dynamical recognition, as if, the theory of strings.

***

See Also:

Coin, as a Constituent of Symmetry

The Other Side of the Coin

The Toposense of Spacetime

Topo-sense?

All Possible Outcomes?

I must say to you that in my case I am asking of Calabi Yau's, can have some predictability to how universe selection is accomplished and thus any steady development in mathematics pushing that landscape to credibility?

This entry is for representing a point of view much clearer then had been previously demonstrated in the following links shown below at the bottom of this post.

Phil:

I wouldn’t exactly say that the evidence presented on its own would not have been enough, yet rather that it became more quickly evident and compelling as the speaker was relaying his findings and conclusions while reliving for us his ‘eureka” moment you might say. This has the learner trade places with the discoverer as to experience the moment. Anthony Zee had the same effect on me in the book I have mentioned. Where I am certain you are correct is that despite the abilities of the teacher if one is not open to things in these ways they will never be sought to be enjoyed. This for me is the difference in simply learning a fact and realizing a truth.

Of course I like humour and in this context, it can show another side to the coin to show that while it has a quality to it in that humour, it also has a science consideration in structure as well. The Aristotelean arch is representative here then of the moment that the climax is reached, as if telling a story about, and we know very well its meaning.

It is the assessment of a "body of thought" that arranges itself around a progressive point of view, that while matter forming in retention times of those smaller peaks of the classroom it became the written word of the orators. You see, smaller peaks versus written transmission of the idea.

Pg 191, Symmetry and the Beautiful Universe, by Leon M. Lederman and Christopher T. Hill

That this place can reside in the thinking mind is a quandary of sorts knowing full well the probabilistic outcome ensures that the direction, after critical thinking, is the way in which the mind comes to see itself as it rests in the valley below. Conceptually the thinking has formed.

Pg 200, Symmetry and the Beautiful Universe, by Leon M. Lederman and Christopher T. Hill

***

You see while some are expanding their physical horizons, it is of note that I see they had been expanding their mental one too. Some have comment on the flexibility of an intelligent mind to traverse across the globe of that same thinking mind, to expand the relationships that are psycho relevant in an metaphorical relation to contract it to a humour of a kind, and a hence a deeper meaning.

See:Backreaction-Power Spectrum

So in all aspects while we see this relational pictorial chart it is in relation to the potential I see, that any mind might have settled down to a state to have caught the jest of the revision so that its relevance can been seen in that same relationship to the universe at large.

So the peak in this case is a rendition of the unstableness of the pencil in relation to Cosmic inflation. That any mind might come to this position is to recognize that it has found the fastest route to the understanding of the symmetry of this universe and that th energy contained here is although unstable it is found to be expressive.




***

See:

Coin, as a Constituent of Symmetry

Stargazers and Hill Climbers

Orators Reduced to Written Words

See Also:

The Location of the Rooms

The Landscape Again and again....

Coin, as a Constituent of Symmetry

I wanted to offer a perspective that recognizes the coin as a basis of the reality much as strings would be as contingent products of the whole theory of economics. So in this context that quantum mechanically one perceive the basis of this exploration into the vast transactions taking place within a larger framework, is the idea that I have would have to include all possible transaction much as E8 would encapsulate. So it becomes an object of the economic system.

I take to heart, what fear may be induced into the society, is an assessment of where stand now, which allows a projection into the future. This then, is the particulate discriminant of money as a basis of that society, that we now ask while facing the object of E8, that such a universe in expression is recognized as topics discussed as theorems produced. Are "Transactional Phase Changes" in the economy.

I end this blog posting encapsulating these Transactional Phase Changes in context of the structure accumulative too, and as an object of the whole system. Not yet have I described the quality here to be taken into account while only mentioning the mechanics of this Monetary Universe.

***

May 1 - 4, 2009
Perimeter Institute

The Perimeter Institute conference on economics is being organized in an effort to better evaluate the state of economics as a predictive and descriptive science in light of the current market crisis. We believe that this requires careful, dispassionate discussion, in an atmosphere governed by the modesty and open mindedness that characterizes the scientific community. To do this we aim to bring leading economists and theorists of finance together with physicists, mathematicians, biologists and computer scientists to evaluate current theories of markets, and identify key issues that can motivate new directions for research.

The conference will begin on May 1, 2009, with a day of invited talks by leading experts to a public audience of around 200 on the status of economic and financial theory in light of the crisis. We will then continue for three days of focused discussion and workshops with an invited group of around 30, aimed at defining research agendas that address that question and beginning work on them.

To register for this conference, please click here.

International Organizing Committee:

Mike Brown, ex CFO Microsoft, ex Chair NASDAQ
Richard Freeman, Harvard University
Bill Janeway, Senior Advisor and Partner at Warburg Pincus LLC and Cambridge University
Stuart Kauffman, University of Calgary
Zoe-Vonna Palmrose, University of Southern California
Lee Smolin, Perimeter Institute
Eric Weinstein, Natron Group

Eric Weinstein's talk on “Gauge Theory and Inflation(link)

Abstract: The close relationship between geometry and fundamental physics can be seen from surveying the basic equations underlying the known forces of nature. What has made these repeated appearances of gauge fields and curvature tensors particularly striking in recent years is lack of any comparable applications outside of the Standard Model and General Relativity. In this talk we will pose the question of whether Yang-Mills theory is simply a unifying principle with application well beyond its current use by exhibiting unreasonably effective applications of Gauge Theory beyond those familiar in the Natural Sciences. Armed with these examples, we will then revisit the question about what is most truly special about the Standard Model and Relativity.

 

Coase theorem

In law and economics, the Coase theorem, attributed to Ronald Coase, describes the economic efficiency of an economic allocation or outcome in the presence of externalities. The theorem states that when trade in an externality is possible and there are no transaction costs, bargaining will lead to an efficient outcome regardless of the initial allocation of property rights. In practice, obstacles to bargaining or poorly defined property rights can prevent Coasian bargaining.

This theorem, along with his 1937 paper on the nature of the firm (which also emphasizes the role of transaction costs), earned Coase the 1991 Nobel Prize in Economics. The Coase theorem is an important basis for most modern economic analyses of government regulation, especially in the case of externalities. George Stigler summarized the resolution of the externality problem in the absence of transaction costs in a 1966 economics textbook in terms of private and social cost, and for the first time called it a "theorem". Since the 1960s, a voluminous literature on the Coase theorem and its various interpretations, proofs, and criticism has developed and continues to grow.

Modigliani-Miller theorem

 

The Modigliani-Miller theorem (of Franco Modigliani, Merton Miller) forms the basis for modern thinking on capital structure. The basic theorem states that, in the absence of taxes, bankruptcy costs, and asymmetric information, and in an efficient market, the value of a firm is unaffected by how that firm is financed.^[1] It does not matter if the firm's capital is raised by issuing stock or selling debt. It does not matter what the firm's dividend policy is. Therefore, the Modigliani-Miller theorem is also often called the capital structure irrelevance principle.

Modigliani was awarded the 1985 Nobel Prize in Economics for this and other contributions.

Miller was awarded the 1990 Nobel Prize in Economics, along with Harry Markowitz and William Sharpe, for their "work in the theory of financial economics," with Miller specifically cited for "fundamental contributions to the theory of corporate finance."

Noether's theorem

Noether's theorem (also known as Noether's first theorem) states that any differentiable symmetry of the action of a physical system has a corresponding conservation law. The action of a physical system is an integral of a so-called Lagrangian function, from which the system's behavior can be determined by the principle of least action. This seminal theorem was proven by Emmy Noether in 1915 and published in 1918.^[1]

Gauge theory

 

In physics, gauge theory is a quantum field theory where the Lagrangian is invariant under certain transformations. The transformations (called local gauge transformations) form a Lie group which is referred to as the symmetry group or the gauge group of the theory. For each group parameter there is a corresponding vector field called gauge field which helps to make the Lagrangian gauge invariant. The quanta of the gauge field are called gauge bosons. If the symmetry group is non-commutative, the gauge theory is referred to as non-abelian or Yang-Mills theory. Quantum electrodynamics is an abelian gauge theory with the symmetry group U(1) and one gauge field, the electromagnetic field, with the photon being the gauge boson. The standard model is a non-abelian gauge theory with the symmetry group U(1)×SU(2)×SU(3) and twelve gauge bosons: the photon, three weak bosons Z0 and W^\pm; and eight gluons.

***

Appendix, Pg 316, Symmetry and the Beautiful Universe, by Leon M. Lederman and Christopher T. Hill

The Money Trust

TO THE JOKER:

HERE I HOLD A GOLD COIN

What a false illusion thou art to human mind ! How cruelly thou deceivest thy possessor and those who covet thee ! Thou buyest for me by thy betrayal of mankind. Thou didst tax my energy to gain thee, and thy discount has lost to me and my fellow-men the greatest blessings of a continent, as well as the principal products of our toil. Few indeed are they who know and understand thy seductive power. We shall expose thy falseness so that our children shalt not be deceived by thee.

General Observations-Charles Lindbergh,
Banking and Currency and the Money Trust

What has been transpiring in the economy as of late is a wonderful exercise for me.

When you see the credibility of scientists and an economist open themselves to scrutiny "to wonder", if they are just replaying the inevitable and not really offering anything new?

The market prices of commodities vary from day to day and often several times a day. This occurs when there is no radical difference in the proportion of the supply and the natural demand. This fact is conclusive proof that our system is controlled by manipulators and fundamentally wrong. I have sought to elucidate this problem within this volume and have suggested a plan which, if adopted, would make the people the master of the world, instead of the present master—THE MONEY TRUST.

I am repeating the article the article here for consideration.

Is it more astonishing that a God created all that exists in six days, or that the natural processes of the creative universe have yielded galaxies, chemistry, life, agency, meaning, value, consciousness, culture without a Creator. In my mind and heart, the overwhelming answer is that the truth as best we know it, that all arose with no Creator agent, all on its wondrous own, is so awesome and stunning that it is God enough for me and I hope much of humankind.

BEYOND REDUCTIONISM: REINVENTING THE SACRED

Stuart Alan Kauffman (28 September 1939) is an US American theoretical biologist and complex systems researcher concerning the origin of life on Earth. He is best known for arguing that the complexity of biological systems and organisms might result as much from self-organization and far-from-equilibrium dynamics as from Darwinian natural selection, as well as for proposing the first models of Boolean networks.

Kauffman presently holds a joint appointment at the University of Calgary in Biological Sciences and in Physics and Astronomy, and is an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Philosophy. He is also an iCORE (Informatics Research Circle of Excellence) [1] chair and the director of the Institute for Biocomplexity and Informatics.

BEYOND REDUCTIONISM

See:Reinventing the Sacred: A New View of Science, Reason, and Religion (Hardcover)

Well now, I have followed the work of those whose ultimate destination has been by seeking results from LHC as to the nature of some Higg's field that would bring together an organizational effort to the particle of nature. Now I should be much clearer here just as Stuart Kauffman should.

Higgs Fields

A Higgs field (named after a Scottish physicist Peter Higgs) is a field supposed to be responsible for the genesis of inertial mass (and, because of Einstein's equivalence principle, gravitational mass). When the universe is extremely hot, a Higgs field (which is supposed to have a certain curve of potential energy; as regards the shape of this curve, there is no unique consensus, except for a certain general feature, among the physicists) exerts a wild influence; but we will neglect this here. Once the universe cools down enough, below a certain temerature, the Higgs field assumes a certain value (i.e. a value of the Higgs field) which corresponds to the lowest energy level (i.e. the potential energy is zero, but the value of the Higgs field is nonzero; this level may be called vacuum). And this energy level continues to prevail throughout the whole universe (uniform, nonzero Higgs field).

So here I am alone thinking about this self organization that goes on and I picked out Stuart Kauffman's book because I know that such a view is garnered by the likes of Lee Smolin, that it presents a challenge for me.

Been at it long enough to know there are opposing views and methods to determination that shall judge one's approach as too the "nature of reality." I am not going to go into the definition of this nature of reality but to assume that such a definition will become apparent in the selection of this title and the consequence of choosing Stuart's book. My reasons for expanding here under this title of the new Garden of Eden.

How it it that I could ever compare the very nature of the "Arch Model" to the insightful development of us as participants in the nature of reality that we could shape our destines and not think us less then a participant in this adventure called life.

At 9:15 AM, August 18, 2008, Blogger Plato said...

Experimentally, this became a basis for exploration which implanted experimental choice departures from euclidean space, which is flat.

This was a mathematical adventure of "pure thought" toward the process of interpreting this mathematics in the natural world.

How could one say the experimental process was first when such thought had to exist? It had to already exist in nature for us to test the theorization by definition.

So we emulate the process by experimentation. Oh sweet "spooky action at a distance?"

One should not think that such an avenue of research had not taken me down this road in regards to spooky, that I would not have adventured too, entanglement, or scattering amplitudes, that I would not of looked at Young's experiment and thought about the photon's travel. The combination or how calorimeters have been used to discern this interaction in the decay process.

Has Reductionism run to it's limit?

This is what Stuart Kauffman did not realize when thinking about reductionism or what Robert Laughlin spoke of toward the idea's of self organizational attributes of those things that gather, while we take them apart. It's not that they ever came to a definition of this limit, but tried to explain reductionism away, by the introduction of new ways, new approaches.


The Keystone

ON one side of this arch is an approach to Reductionism, and on the other, is emergence. The keystone, is the Equivalence principal.

Zombie Central

Peter Woit:Hopefully Nature won’t take its place as Zombie-central…

December 30th, 2007 at 11:10 am if link deleted(yep! it sure has:) see here

Plato said,

"I have never deviated from the name I use, so you get the sense of who I am.

I do not see how "pushing back the physics and energies involved" would have made these issues abut cosmology inept or classed as fantasy in the making.

Tim May, some things helped toward our understanding whether they are in the kitchen "to help gain in conceptual understanding, what others are less then able to explain in their opinion biased.

Gabe:I really don’t have any knowledge of this, but: What exactly are they trying to say about liquid helium phases and extra dimensions?

Has anyone has sufficiently answered Coin or Gabe in their questions to have offered a conclusion?

Thanks Bee for challenging what would have otherwise been a chorus of the same ole, same ole."

Now what choice do I have, if I were to comment on anything that had to do with what "String theory is doing?" Now, I would have supposedly worn out the title of any string theory article as coming from Zombie central.

Now you know the title of this post and it's origination. The source of inspiration that allows me to comment and let stand, as to the substance of Peter Woit's post. The comments that come along as well.

Zombies

What more can I say, that by putting out front the reasons why this process is not just some fantasy woven for illusionists Peter seems to qualify. To all those who may speak toward the topic of string theory or not.

Will media just leave it "to the expert" to speak for them and not challenge what is the highest opinion Peter has for the topic of string theory? I guess if you are not willing to do the work, then like Scientist, it is better to not write an article and let it die a quick death.

The Articles in Question?

Since I too cannot gain access to the Nature article without paying, I can only go by the "press releases" that Peter has been kind enough to show us. So these are directed to the Nature article.



ow-temperature physicists at Lancaster University may have found a laboratory test of the ‘untestable’ string theory.

The test – which uses two distinct phases of liquid helium - is reported online this week in Nature Physics (published 23 December). Their paper will also be published as the cover article in the paper edition of Nature Physics in January.

String theory is a multidimensional theory based on vibrating strings, as opposed to the point particles described in the Standard Model.

Second Article

DOI: 10.1038/nphys815-Richard Haley, George Pickett and co-workers have taken a lateral step to address this barrier. They cool helium-3 isotope to a superfluid state — that is, a quantum fluid with non-classical properties such as completely frictionless flow. Adding a magnetic field creates a second superfluid phase, and the interface between these two phases behaves like a two-dimensional brane. Indeed, the collision of a brane–antibrane pair leaves traces of a stringy residue of defects: a tangle of vortices.

Third article

Can you model what happened after the Big Bang in your lab?

Helium-3 experiment replicates colliding-brane theory of cosmology.

Yes, according to one group of physicists. A team at Lancaster University in the United Kingdom has used liquid helium and a magnetic field to build a finger-sized representation of the early cosmos. Their findings, published today in Nature Physics 1, could help string theorists to refine their models.

Fourth Article

Again it is one that has to be purchased from nature. All I can do it "re-quote" the selections Peter has made, and direct you to the quotes in question. You have to take my word for what is represented and how it is used by Peter. Sorry. See source of quotes here

The subject of string cosmology is a hot one these days, with theoretical advances in understanding string dynamics riffing with recent precise observations of the cosmic microwave background

The quality of the details of the comparison between 3He and cosmology is not really the point. Like a tap-dancing snake, what is amazing is not that it is done well, but that it is done at all.

Contribution to Zombie Central?

I can only assume that the example given is none other then what Peter has classified?

Does one of these test tubes hold a baby Universe?

The test tube, the size of a little finger, has been cooled to a fraction of a degree above the lowest possible temperature, absolute zero, which is just over 273 degrees below the freezing point of water.

Inside the tube an isotope of helium (called helium three) forms a "superfluid", an ordered liquid where all the atoms are in the same state according to the theory that rules the subatomic domain, called quantum theory.

What is remarkable is that atoms in the liquid, at temperatures within a thousandth of a degree of absolute zero, form structures that, according to the team at Lancaster University, are similar those seen in the cosmos.

"In effect, we have made a universe in a test tube," says Richard Haley, who did the work with Prof George Pickett and other members of the "Ultra-low Temperature Group."

Now, just hold your horses here while we consider not only the context of this article by Richard Highfield, but of the very questions I myself have asked that we might consider the context of the Telegraph article other then contributing to Zombie Central.

Warning to Viewers

It is true that there has been a lot of debate about how information currently being dealt within in science articles are giving concern to people at the forefront of science. So in this effort I see what Peter is saying. Scientists are indeed asking for this responsibility, and not just of the media themself , but of the individual in their "pursuit of the truth" of what is being portrayed out there in the science media's global vision.

I do not sanction "the classifications" that have been drummed up by Peter Woit, from intelligent design theorists, to Zombies.

The View of the Cosmos?

Now why is it that we would look to the cosmos and ask ourselves about the views that would happen in the context of universal display, as having some relevances to the microsomal world that surrounds us.

Over and over again, we are directed to applications of what happens in that cosmos as experimental processes which reveal the origins of the universe in that microcosm view? So they use a test tube. The origins of life has it's basis in that tube on a simplistic level, whether you'd like to think so or not.

Would it have been better to use the "image of the tube" and an emergent image of the colliders over top of it, as a better view of the microscopic view of the world we live in?

Powers of Ten

Many physical quantities span vast ranges of magnitude. Figures 0.1 and 0.2 use images to indicate the range of lengths and times that are of importance in physics.

Many of us understand the powers of ten, Qui?

See: Perspectives on the Power of Ten

So to get from the cosmos pallet of investigation, to one of drawing analogical
views of the vortices, is not so uncommon that we can see such vortices out there in the cosmos and not draw some conclusion to the "relativistic interpretation" that may arise in some super fluid?

I can understand Tim May's "bubble in the test analogy in the kitchen," but I would have drawn a better parallel to sonofusion(you can find examples of this on this site) as an example about reduction to the "principals of the early universe." While I see such collapse dynamically related to "gravitational collapse" this is my view with regards to the increase in temperature values that may have been attributed to the ideas about the energy increase in blackhole development and motivation for providing the routes for cosmological expansion rates. An analogy, yes.

The escape pathway for that "extra energy" to loose itself, while the computations of the values of particle creations are left for inspection. Where did that extra energy go? Is it such a "bad question" to have when looking at the microscopic view of particle creation in the birth of our cosmos? To have the universe being in such a cosmological state, that the variance of speed of expansion shall vary? Explained, with such a idea?

Relativistic Fluid Dynamics: Physics for Many Different Scales-Nils Andersson and Gregory L. Comer

In writing this review, we have tried to discuss the different building blocks that are needed if one wants to construct a relativistic theory for fluids. Although there are numerous alternatives, we opted to base our discussion of the fluid equations of motion on the variational approach pioneered by Taub [108] and in recent years developed considerably by Carter [17, 19, 21]. This is an appealing strategy because it leads to a natural formulation for multi-fluid problems. Having developed the variational framework, we discussed applications. Here we had to decide what to include and what to leave out. Our decisions were not based on any particular logic, we simply included topics that were either familiar to us, or interested us at the time. That may seem a little peculiar, but one should keep in mind that this is a “living” review. Our intention is to add further applications when the article is updated. On the formal side, we could consider how one accounts for elastic media and magnetic fields, as well as technical issues concerning relativistic vortices (and cosmic strings). On the application side, we may discuss many issues for astrophysical fluid flows (like supernova core collapse, jets, gamma-ray bursts, and cosmology).

In updating this review we will obviously also correct the mistakes that are sure to be found by helpful colleagues. We look forward to receiving any comments on this review. After all, fluids describe physics at many different scales and we clearly have a lot of physics to learn. The only thing that is certain is that we will enjoy the learning process!

So you understand that the views of the string theorist is not limited to the microcosmic view, but endorses the cosmological one as well.:) See the Lagrangian views supplied on this site to understand how gravity has been incorporated in the cosmological view.

The Other Side of the Coin

Susan Holmes- Statistician Persi Diaconis' mechanical coin flipper.

In football's inaugural kickoff coin toss, the coin is not caught but allowed to bounce on the ground. That introduces an extra complication, one mathematicians have yet to sort out.

Persi Diaconis See here.

The Ground State

There is always an "inverse order to Gravity" that helps one see in ways that we are not accustom too. The methods of "prospective measurements" in science have taken a radical turn? Satellites as a measure, have focused our views.



While one may now look at the "sun in a different way" it had to first display itself across the "neutrino Sudbury screen" before we knew to picture the sun now in the way we do. It was progressive, in the way the sun now forms a picture of what we now know in measure.

So you try and bring it all together under this "new way of seeing" and hopefully your account of "the way reality is," is shared by others who now understand what the heck I am doing?

To get a simple physical understanding of what the acoustic oscillations are, it may be helpful to change the perspective. Normally, the common way of presenting the phenomenon has been in terms of standing waves where the analysis is done in Fourier space. But the baryon-photon fluid really is just carrying sound waves, and the dispersion relation is even pretty linear. So let’s instead think of things in terms of traveling waves in real spacehttp://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:xLcnPGO6BDQJ:cmb.as.arizona.edu/~eisenste/acousticpeak/spherical_acoustic.ps+Fourier+space+when+I%27m+thinking+about+sound.&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ca-Steward Observatory, University of Arizona
c 2005

"Uncertainty" has this way of rearing it's head once we reduce our perspective to the microscopic principals(sand), yet, on the other side of the coin, how is it that only 5% of mass determination allows us to see the universe mapped in the way it has in regards to the CMB?

There is this "entropic valuation" and with it, temperature. Some do not like the porridge "to hot or to cold," with regards to "living in a place" within the universe.

So I'll repeat the blog comment entry here in this blog so one can gather some of what I mean.

At 2:56 AM, December 11, 2007, Plato said...

As a lay person with regards to the complexity of the language(sound)and universe, it is sometimes reduced to "seeing in ways that are much easier to deal with," although of course, it may not be the same for everyone?:)

:)Something good science people "do not want to hear?"

Good link in html.

The launching of the sound waves is very similar to dropping a rock in a pond and seeing the circular wave come off (obviously that a gravity wave, not a compressional wave, but I’m focusing on the geometry). The difference here is that the area where the “rock” entered is still the most likely region to form galaxies; the spherical shell that it produced is only carrying 5% of the mass.

Hopefully, this demystifies the effect: we’re seeing the imprint of spherical sound waves launched from the sites of dark matter overdensities in the early universe. But also I hope it makes it more clear as to why this effect is so robust: the propagation of sound in the baryon-photon plasma is very simple, and all we’re doing is measuring how far it got.

"Mapping," had to begin somewhere. Whatever that may mean,one may think of Mendeleeev or Newlands.

Generally Grouping Order increases the density of objects within a frame of reference, resulting in a more pronounced single object.

"Sand with pebbles" on a beach? It had to arise from someplace?

The other side of the Coin is?

This recording was produced by converting into audible sounds some of the radar echoes received by Huygens during the last few kilometres of its descent onto Titan. As the probe approaches the ground, both the pitch and intensity increase. Scientists will use intensity of the echoes to speculate about the nature of the surface.

and not to be undone.

Mass results in an increase in the gravitational force exerted by an object. Density fluctuations on the surface of the Earth and in the underlying mantle are thus reflected invariations in the gravity field.As the twin GRACE satellites orbit the Earth together, these gravity field variations cause infinitesimal changes in the distance between the two. These changes will be measured with unprecedented accuracy by the instruments aboard GRACE leading to a more precise rendering of the gravitational field than has ever been possible to date.

Layman pondering.

So now that you have this "comprehensive view" I have gained on the way I am seeing the universe. You can "now see" how diverse the application of sound in analogy is. It is helping me to develop the "Colour of Gravity" as a artistic endeavour. I refrain from calling it "scientific" and be labelled a crackpot.

A Synesthesic View on Life.

Who knows how I can put these things together and come up with what I do. Yet, it had not gone unnoticed that such concepts could merge into one another, and come out with some tangible result as a "artistic effort." Some may be used to the paintings of Kandinsky(abstract), yet the plethora of imaging that unfolds in the conceptual framework might have been self evident, from such a chaotic mess of the layman's view here?