[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] 

Re: Rosennean "Cookbook"

Tim,

It seems to me that there are several aspects to a good cookbook that need articulation. One is the tutorial side that shows where various kinds of analytics are valuable. The next is the "recipes" for application.

But, I think, it is larger than that. Any systems modeling in the large calls for some sort of framework that guides entry into the analytics themselves. Engineers were trained: "when you see this problem class, apply that methodology." Sure, doing science is bound to be more complex and unyielding to simplification, and I'm not asking for that. But, Judith and others have mentioned, here and elsewhere, a Rosennean way of "doing science." A proper cookbook would include such guidance.

At the same time, I repeat my "where's the beef" sentiment. Aging, excitation and inhibition, enzyme-substrate recognition, those sorts of things are all important. But, there are large problems that I suspect this methodology can be applied to, and those are the kinds of problems that large segments of the population would best be served by bringing Rosennean analytics to rather soon. Recall that Rashevsky was really interested in modeling traffic flows. Sounds lame? I don't think so. That's a whole class of problems that would serve, by way of analogy, to other problems.

Just a few thoughts for the time being.
I'm sure I'm not alone in a quest for a cookbook.

Jack

Tim Gwinn wrote:

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