[MD] Chaos

[Case]

Chin,

I do not have as much time as I would like to analyze the Sneddon Thesis but
from what I have read so far he is presenting an alternative to the mystical
view widely held in this forum. I have tried many times to present similar
notions although I was and still am very unfamiliar with Whitehead. I like
the fact the Sneddon has Chaos front and center in his introduction. In his
description of Prigogine's thinking he summarizes with the quote below. It
is a very succinct description of Chaos. Ham would do well to paste it on
his refrigerator.

"The world is made up of systems which are in contact with their
environments. These systems exchange energy with the environment. A stable
system--one that is not suffering dramatic change- - is said to be at
equilibrium. Once upon a time, it was thought that equilibrium was the rule
and disorder the exception. Prigogine thinks the reverse is true, and shows
how change actually produces order.

A system that is disrupted from its history of order--due, perhaps, to some
change in the environment--moves from equilibrium to a state 'far from
equilibrium. Equilibrium functions as an attractor state, meaning systems
move from one state of equilibrium to another--systems far from equilibrium
are caught up in the process of the change. At a far from equilibrium
position, a system is at a 'bifurcation' point--its future cannot be
predicted from what is known about its history. It can jump to a new, higher
(become more complex, and requiring more energy) state of equilibrium, or it
can drop to a condition of less order, and hence less complex. In other
words, the choice for the system is one between order and chaos."
-Sneddon, 1995

I wonder if this applies to the quantum issue of electrons seeming to jump
from shell to shell without apparently existing at all in the intervening
space.

Case








-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of
PhaedrusWolff at carolina.rr.com
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 7:33 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Chaos

Hi all,

Case) Feel free to jump in anytime. I have forgotten an awful lot 
about this Chaos
stuff so any help would be appreciated.

Chin) You've probably forgotten more than I ever knew. You're doing a 
fine job, and I have just learned to accept what chaos tells us, and 
that is pretty much that things, including our understanding change. 

Ian said to Ham,
> You said to Case
> "the assertions you and Chin have made about chaos contradict the
> universal meaning of this term."
> 
> Contradict is not the right word.
> The "universal" meaning you have in mind is largely a theoretical
> concept - the idea of "total chaos" (defined by the Greeks ?)

Chin) Total Chaos may have been what Marsha was referring to, and this 
is not what I answered to. What I answered to was to more modern Chaos 
Theory beginning with Poincare and still with us in quantum chaology. 
Pirsig made mention of Poincare in ZMM, and Phaedrus' thoughts about 
how a multitude of hypotheses could grow from one experiment. He 
called this science creating "scientific chaos." Maybe I'm too simple 
minded, but it made sense to me, or maybe I too am a little insane. 
Science is not immune to favoring one hypothesis over another any more 
than theology is of favoring one book of the bible over another. With 
probabilities, the physicists seem to be able to make enough sense out 
of chaos to continue with their experiments (and once again, no I am 
no physicist). 

Just simply stating as Poincare did with math, there are no scientific 
facts, and you cannot draw from all the information, data and 
hypotheses all that can be measured, tested or considered leaves us 
open to new discoveries as we do not place our prejudices on what we 
might otherwise consider 'Fact'. Even if you could, measure, test and 
consider all, there would still be the selection prejudices of 
discarding that which does not make sense in our current 
understanding. Chaos Theory serves a purpose. 

I didn't even consider any validity to Total Chaos, but then again 
that may be my own preconceived prejudices. 

Chin

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/