Dan
It's not proof but I think it is evidence that strengthens the argument.
The thing about critical systems seems to be that they are in a paradoxical position of non-equilibrium stability which means that anything can - but probably won't just now - happen for no "good" reason.
Not quite as whacky as Douglas Adams fabulous infinite improbability drive but heading that way perhaps.
What do(es) the mathematician(s?) think
Chris
--
Chris Burton, [log in to unmask] on 13/02/2002
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 15:06:34 -0000, Dan Munday wrote:
>Dear Chris
>
>Thanks, sounds like it is worth a read.
>
>Do you think that power law scaling helps us practically? Is it just
>a phenomenon which is "very interesting", or does it help us to
>understand complex systems any better? Also will being able to
>measure it help us "prove" anything?
>
>Perhaps its just that I am not a mathematician and perhaps I had
>better shut up until I have read the book!
>
>Regards
>
>Dan
>
>
>On 12 February 2002 08:49, Chris Burton
>[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>wrote:
>> Hi there
>>
>> Glad some of you have started mailing again after Krysia's and my
>>rebuke
>about threading messages. Thought I'd shut you up for too long -
>even DK has gone quiet!
>>
>> I've just read Ubiquity by Mark Buchanan (now in paperback from
>Amazon.co.uk for less than a tenner) and an intriguing read.
>Basically he takes the idea of self-organised criticality - the
>sandpile phenomenon -
>for a walk into all kind of areas (forest fires, population change,
>history of ideas) in an easy to read way. OK my "easy to read" is
>someone cleverer's pitifully simplistic but hey...
>>
>> The attraction is that power law scaling as the marker of
>>complexity /
>criticality IS measurable - if you get enough number to do it with.
>>
>> Anyone else read it? Or anything else worthwhile lately?
>>
>>
>> Chris (Listowner and general saddo)
>>
>> --
>> Chris Burton, [log in to unmask] on 12/02/2002
>>
>
>
|
