[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: inequivalent complmentary models
- From: John M <***>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 11:33:08 -0400
Judith:
I am looking forward to your post "tomorrow":
could you include a not more than some lines adequate definition of
Rosennean Complexity? The chapter in Tim's Website is too comprehensive with
many examples and counter examples.
John M
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judith Rosen" <***>
To: <***>
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: inequivalent complmentary models
> I haven't been following all of this discussion but in Tim's latest post,
> there was a statement by Howard Pattee that requires me to comment:
> Skip
> .... It strikes me that a post on the basic areas
> where Rosennean Complexity Theory is radically different from the current
> paradigm might be useful. I will look into crafting something along those
> lines, tomorrow.
>
> Judith
>
> > Tim
> >