[MD] evolution.....MOQ v SOM

[ian glendinning]

Gav, Mark,

You maybe being a bit harsh on the first paper in the choice of the
word "incidental", which does kind say something about the writer as
you say. I suspect (maximum positive spin) he may have meant
"incidental" in the not directly causal sense ... when he didn't have
"emergence" or buddhism in his vocabulary ... rather than trying to
demean its significance ... but you've read the paper and I haven't
:-)

I think Mark's coherence stuff is an important view and (although I've
not seen him say it directly) his recent point about "more or less
static" sq's is related to this IMHO.

Where the first paper talks about "equilibration" it is missing the
difference between "meta-stable" equilibria - those coherent sweet
spots with plenty of DQ potential, and stable equilibria with plenty
of stasis. I think I made a similar observation when you delivered
your paper at last year's conference Mark, about the mechanical
analogy to your stability / coherence / chaos quality axis.

Great stuff.
That Mae-Wan Ho book sounds interesting and strangely familiar ?
Ian

On 8/17/06, Squonkonguitar at aol.com <Squonkonguitar at aol.com> wrote:
> Gav,
> You're too good too be missed.
> Academia needs you.
>
> Love,
> Mark
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>