[Fis] New Discussion Session--Complexity & feedback. Loops (OFF-LINE)

[Karl Javorszky]

Dear Péter,

Years flow by, and we keep discussing the same basic question of how our
concepts are related, and how the relationships among our concepts picture
the relationships we assume to be present in Nature.

The improvement in the discussion since 1995 is, in my eyes, that we can
now name in detail what our problems are. We have found the relations among
natural numbers which are depicting an interdependent interaction among the
symbols as such. Whether we use the natural numbers as a kind of Laws
Carved In Stone, as Nature certainly seems to do, is our decision.
Pythagoras is heavily behind the idea.

Alex gives a tour d'horizon about the philosophic-theological background of
our time. What I read out of his essay is that a great paradigm change is
overdue.

To Joseph, with great respect. The circularities that undeniably affect our
habitat (et nos in illis) should be accepted as fundamental rules for our
physiology, neurology. (breath, eat, sleep are periodic - circular). It
looks like a clever idea to embed our psychology in the factual limits -
constraits - structure that physiology and neurology build. If a fish has a
philosophy, according to which it uses legs and a tail to hunt on treetops,
that fish gives too much credence to its reasoning and not enough credence
to its observations.

In my latest summary,
 Liaisons Among Symbols, Javorszky, K. (2024). Liaisons Among Symbols. Curr
Res Stat Math, 3(3), 01-08,
this is explained in more detail.

The paradigm changes have already happened. It is possible to exchange
ideas about circular processes and which inbuilt patterns of coincidences
one can expect. In fact, one-armed bandits operate day and night eg in Las
Vegas. Only the mathematics behind the empirical existence of concurrently
operating cycles has not been publicly discussed yet.

A great intellectual revolution worth it's name comes always with the aha!
experience of something of course easy, self-evident and trivial, once one
gets the principles.

In our case, the perspective change is like that one initiated by Copernic
and Galileo.
1. Use a collection of related individuals
2. Use eg the values a, b of the sentence a+b=c
3. Order and reorder the collection
4. Find cycles
5. Organise the cycles
6. Use the numeric facts of there being different support-demand situations
for statements about the collection that refer to observations enumerable
by using identical units (Sumerian type of counting) relative to the
statements about the collection that refer to observations enumerable by
using different units (Akkadian type of counting).
7. Once there is too much space for so much diversity, once the diversity
doesn't fit in the space.
8. This is all in tables, comparable to the trigonometric tables.
9. Your students can write a Tautomat in less than two weeks.

Thank you for bringing up classic cases wherein the relationship between
parts and wholes can only be discussed if one has a symbol set made up of
different units.

As to the eye-catcher of how mistakes, misallocations and the like happen
during the functioning of a feedback based system, may I politely pose the
following suggestion :

Let us build a feedback based circular system that functions, at first. Let
us investigate in a subsequent step, what are critical components of that
system.

Best wishes

Karl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20241023/f23c5663/attachment.html>