Re: The Grand Unified Theory! C and C Please!

From: jonathan (Write_at_Instead.com)
Date: 02/06/05 

Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 04:03:33 -0500

"Eric Chomko" <echomko_at_@polaris.umuc.edu> wrote in message
news:ctv08s$2e7c$1@news.ums.edu...
> jonathan (Write@Instead.com) wrote:
>

> : When the two opposite extremes, light and motion, stand
> : poised at the transition state between each other then
> : increasing order or evolution takes place....Darwin.
>
> I don't follow. Light and motion are related to relativistic
> physics; Einstein and not Darwin, which starts with DNA and
> moves into the direction of more and more complex organisms.

Quantum mechanics and classical motion are two different things though.
Relating the two is the big goal isn't it? On earth we see the clear
relationships between the quantum, classical and living worlds
if we shift our frame of reference to the system level.
Earth is not too close or far from the sun, just the optimum
level of light/energy. The earth also has the optimum level
of thermodynamics as it's not dry or frozen solid.
Which means earth enjoys an unstable equilibrium between
light and motion. And as a result the earth is swimming in
life.

The three realms of quantum, classical and living worlds
are related to, and dependent on each other, within
a single system. All three with equal weight in
driving the system forward.

>
> : For example, when opposite extremes in possibility
> : space are in a dynamic interaction or union, then creation
> : takes place.
>
> Creation of what?

Everything. This is an abstract description of how evolution
of either material or living systems are initiated.

> : Order and self organization occur at the phase transition
> : between static and chaotic system specific attractors.
>
> Have you try to simulate this on a computer? The simulation
> of "Life" comes to mind. Used to be a big thing with Forth
> programmers back in the late 70s.

Run the simulations yourself in the link below to see
how self-organization or evolution is driven.
Notice that evolution is a property of /non-living/
systems. And that randomness is the primary
element.
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~quee0818/complexity/complexity.html

The point that random interactions of non-living objects
spontaneously organize and evolve changes everything.
Since this means the Darwinian evolution we all know
and love applies to material systems. This means the
evolution of geology to life is not a fluke, but a
seamless process of ever increasing order.

How does that change the Drake equation?

There is a huge difference between a random
walk assumed in that equation, and a directed
one both material and living systems follow of
ever greater emergence

Random interactions spontaneously create order.

I can't overemphasize that enough. Think about
what the second law does best, breaking things
down and creating more variables and interaction.
Just the food for self-organization as shown by
the simulations in the above link.

The second law is not a destructive force, but provides
the prerequisites for evolution of material systems
into living ones.

> : I use these concepts, as best I can, in the stock market
> : or looking at Meridiani. Even personal goals or
> : relationships for that matter. It works, I've been
> : testing it. It has panned out fine with a stock trading
> : system. I've been playing obci for example, look at the
> : five day chart of that. Once it fell to near $2.5 it become
> : an obvious buy looking for a very predictable short
> : squeeze or two. An easy 20% in two days.
> : I play stocks through /system dynamics/ instead of
> : company specifics.
>
> Hold te phone! Somebody was mentioning this to me. It is
> sort of like using the Fibonacci Sequence as a predictor yet
> more complex. And instead of it being tied into a golden
> ratio growth curve it is more like a sine wave cyclical
> results patterns over time.

In chaos theory the idea is that systems at equilibrium
experience occasional short term bursts of transient
activity. A sudden disturbance that drives the system
far from equilibrium. When driven away from rest
with an intermediate or complex level of force the
system will self-organize. Meaning universal behavior
takes over that is not dependent on system specific
properties. In this state the company details become
irrelevant. Also in this edge state simplicity in near
future behavior is found, as the system displays
its future by bifurcating into either a chaotic or
static pre-image.

The fibonacci method looks for a fall of just
under 40%, as I do. But look at the ten day chart of
hpol, which retraced about this much.

Now compare that to the same fall from
remix. Monday remix will bounce back ten
percent or so, hpol will not. Why?

Hpol shows a classic chaotic pre-image where
the future cannot be predicted from the conditions
displayed in the short term chart. It's a cliff.

Remix shows a classic static pre-image that has been
pulled from equilibrium in a complex manner, and will
rebound somewhat towards equilibrium. It's a storm.

When pulled far from equilibrium behavior will bifurcate
into one or the other images. Or some combination of
the two.

The first pattern shows another thing, the big money
just panicked and sold. The second shows the little
money walked. It's a matter of quantifying the level
of volatility. Falling straight down, the max rate of change
of price, may seem to most as the max volatility. But
it's only a vector change, not an increase in turbulence.

Falling at a scale-independent 45 degrees is where the
maximum volatility resides. And once that fall has reached
the 40% level the system is on the edge and at the
max sensitivity. Which means universal behavior
sets in. The chart behaves independently of its
specific details and starts behaving like bird flocking
or a thunderstorm.

TOWARD THE 'EDGE METHODOLOGY' FOR COMPLEX
SYSTEMS SIMULATION
http://www.calresco.org/milov/ymtemcss.htm

A precise chart and narrow set of parameters can be drawn
from theory that displays a static pre-image and
self organizing behavior. The formula is simple.

All the primary variables must be 'complex' at the same time.

That's the formula that draws the chart of the ideal
technical adjustment.

Complex being used as defined by complexity science.
Which is simply when a variable is midway between its
system specific possibility space. In a stock chart one
would draw complex values for price, volume and time.
And the rates of change of each.

http://www.calresco.org/themes.htm

For example. Finding the complex realm for the variable
of time is as easy as all the rest. One extreme in possibility
for time is the day traders, which trade in time periods
of minutes or hours. The other extreme is the longs, which
trade in months or years. The midpoint, or complex realm, is
then simply what's between....days or weeks.

So the complex time frame would be a five or ten day pattern.

All the other variable parameters are deduced in just the
same way. It's really easy. And btw, evolution and the creation
all of things in the universe are defined by the very same
formula.

Once you've become familiar with the pattern of life and
creation, you suddenly realize it's everywhere.

It's at Meridiani. All the primary variables are complex.
The soil, the rocks the spheres. All three primary variables
show equal measures and dependencies of the other two.

Meridiani is complex in all the primary variables at the
same time. It's an ecosystem with a life of its own.

Jonathan

s

>
> : /Connectivity/ instead of particle physics.
>
>
> : Now I'm waiting to see if these ideas put
> : me on the right track in figuring out Meridiani.
>
> What is your goal?
>
> : A true test as the answer is not known, so I
> : can't ~cheat. Bacterial concretions and
> : stromatolites are at Meridiani I believe.
>
> Wouldn't life on Mars really necessitate an actual
> witnessing of a birth/reproduction of some sort? I mean
> fossils, though exciting from the sense that life once
> existed, are not the same as actual life. Petrified wood is
> cool, but don't you prefer a living tree?
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> : Jonathan
>
>
> : http://www.calresco.org/sos/sosfaq.htm
> : http://users.ox.ac.uk/~quee0818/complexity/complexity.html
> : http://www.pscs.umich.edu/
> : http://www.pscs.umich.edu/
> : http://www-chaos.umd.edu/
>
> : http://www.calresco.org/
>
>
> : s
>
>
> : >
> : > Eric
> : >
> : > : Jonathan
> : >
> : > : s
> : >
> : >
> : > : An Introduction to Complex Systems
> : > : Torsten Reil, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford
> : > : http://users.ox.ac.uk/~quee0818/complexity/complexity.html
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
> : >
>
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Grand Unified Theory! C and C Please!
    ... classical and living worlds ... This is an abstract description of how evolution ... :> of "Life" comes to mind. ... All the primary variables are complex. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Christof Koch
    ... Simpler Origin for Life" from earlier this year by Prof. Robert Shapiro, ... Life began with the appearance of the first RNA molecule. ... before proteins and DNA in the evolution of life. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Christof Koch
    ... Simpler Origin for Life" from earlier this year by Prof. Robert Shapiro, ... Life began with the appearance of the first RNA molecule. ... before proteins and DNA in the evolution of life. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Christof Koch
    ... Simpler Origin for Life" from earlier this year by Prof. Robert Shapiro, ... Life began with the appearance of the first RNA molecule. ... before proteins and DNA in the evolution of life. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Christof Koch
    ... Simpler Origin for Life" from earlier this year by Prof. Robert Shapiro, ... Life began with the appearance of the first RNA molecule. ... before proteins and DNA in the evolution of life. ...
    (talk.atheism)