Re: Rosennean "Cookbook"

[Tim Gwinn <***>]

Jack,

Relational modeling is one way to answer certain questions about some
complex systems. Aloisius' paper for the first issue of BioTheory describes
an approach which he notes "The phenomenological calculus has proven to be
extremely versatile in its applicability to various biological, physical,
and chemical topics: the list beginning with aging [2], enzyme-substrate
recognition [3], (M,R)-systems [4], ...". His 'Categorical System Theory' in
Rosen's "Theoretical Biology and Complexity" (1985) provides a broad formal
framework for modelling systems.Steve Kercel utilized hyperset theory to
model impredicative aspects of Rosennean complex systems. There are other
tools, such as activation-inhibition networks. Which kind(s) of tools are
needed are going to depend upon the problem at hand and the question asked
in regard to that problem.

What for you would constitute a "recipe" or "cookbook" of Rosennean
complexity?

Regards,
Tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ROSEN Forum [mailto:*** Behalf Of Jack
> Park
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 12:19 PM
> To: ***
> Subject: Re: Quantum Physics
>
>
> Thank you very much Ayten.
>
> After I posted that, I had a second thought, which is this. I stated
> that Rosennean Complexity is "just another model" among models. What I
> didn't say was that I strongly believe it has all the potential to be
> the next "Newtonian Mechanics" with which all humankind will grow to
> ever more powerful understandings of our universe. I wish I had said
> that then.
>
> Having said that now, I hold that the word "potential" is quite
> important here. I'm awfully inclined to repeat that famous line:
> "Where's the beef?"
>
> I say that because, on reflection of years, I really mean *years* of
> following discussions about RR's work, only a few people have actually
> demonstrated it in practice. Newton got sucked up and applied
> immediately, in a very large way and for many different purposes. Thus
> far, as memory serves, we have seen the prediction of telomeres. That's,
> at once, profound, and valuable. I don't think it's enough.  Most all of
> the rhetoric I have followed (and contributed to) has been much closer
> to "my interpretation is more right than yours", and that's just not
> helpful.
>
> On several occasions, I have asked for a cookbook. Yup. A *cookbook*.
> Just show me some recipes and I'll personally take Rosennean Complexity
> to the moon and beyond, or at least, that's how I think about it.  In my
> case, as I have stated elsewhere, I am animated by a personal drive to
> understand a cancer that tried to kill me. I won. The way I won was to
> build a model of that cancer, look for ways to defeat it, and then
> follow those ways. True, several M.D.s were involved -- you need them in
> order to get the drugs you might require. But, the therapy was thought
> through and approved by me before any doctor got to apply the drugs.
>
> I'd like to think that, with Rosennean Complexity implemented as a
> massive, online modeling system, one with which people all over the
> planet can interact, learn from, and "teach", we will have the
> opportunity to solve massivly complex, and terribly urgent problems,
> problems we are, even now, creating. Having said that, I am bracing for
> the onslought of laughter and jeers that I "just don't get it." I
> probably don't, but that's all I've got at this time.
>
> If I had any admonishment to this tribe, it would be: "Just give me the
> damned cookbook and stop arguing!"
>
> Couple more EUROs for the day.
> Thanks again, Ayten.
> Jack