Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Topology _is_ applied math.Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Why limit it to topology? Why not any theoretical math? Unless itDon't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Not to mention the bio sphere _needs_ you to be doing something
useful.
Biosphere talking to you again, is it?Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Not to mention the bio sphere _needs_ you to be doing something
useful.
Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Not to mention the bio sphere _needs_ you to be doing something
useful.
You're part of the biosphere.On Jun 12, 7:48 pm, Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Not to mention the bio sphere _needs_ you to be doing something
useful.
Biosphere talking to you again, is it?
Marshall
http://www.google.com/search?q=topology+chemistry [over 4 millionDon't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right
out and admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more
lucrative than topology.
Trivial issue. The real problem is that the majority of potentialOn Jun 12, 9:48 pm, Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Not to mention the bio sphere _needs_ you to be doing something
useful.
Why limit it to topology? Why not any theoretical math? Unless it
has practical applications.
Reminds of the post denouncing biologists for borrowing terms fromDon't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right
out and admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more
lucrative than topology.
http://www.google.com/search?q=topology+chemistry[over 4 million
hits]
Bret Cahill wrote:
Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Topology _is_ applied math.
Hope This Helps!
Rich
Well, one way to look at it is that everything is useful, evenOn Sun, 12 Jun 2011 20:12:02 -0700 (PDT), Don Stockbauer
donstockba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 12, 9:48 pm, Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Not to mention the bio sphere _needs_ you to be doing something
useful.
Why limit it to topology? Why not any theoretical math? Unless it
has practical applications.
Trivial issue. The real problem is that the majority of potential
useful college grads - what few there are - are being sucked up by the
financial services industry, where they do more harm than good. Not to
mention useless social networking outfits glomming onto programmers.
But really, is "applied math" any more useful to society than
topology?
No, one must look at the net benefit. This fallacy causes Democrats to breakOn Jun 13, 10:41 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 20:12:02 -0700 (PDT), Don Stockbauer
donstockba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 12, 9:48 pm, Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Not to mention the bio sphere _needs_ you to be doing something
useful.
Why limit it to topology? Why not any theoretical math? Unless it
has practical applications.
Trivial issue. The real problem is that the majority of potential
useful college grads - what few there are - are being sucked up by the
financial services industry, where they do more harm than good. Not to
mention useless social networking outfits glomming onto programmers.
But really, is "applied math" any more useful to society than
topology?
Well, one way to look at it is that everything is useful, even
theoretical math and contradictions.
I've been getting four - 5 sig figs out of political "science."Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Topology _is_ applied math.
Hope This Helps!
Rich
Has it occurred to anyone that math can be applied to the
subjective disciplines also?
All those messy real world
disciplines that have always been 'more art than science'?
The other half of the equation of reality, which is currently
handled by a thousand narrow specialties, one for each
type of 'thing'. Whether sociology, philosophy, art
and so on.
But what if a single discipline could explain them all?
So by learning one mathematical specialty, you've
learned them all.
It only takes a little curiosity to see how this has been
accomplished by Complexity Science. It's easy really.
Simply inverse classical reductionist methods rigorously.
And by rigorously, this means the new math is also
qualitative opposites, not just quantitative.
If classical methods assume upward causation by
reducing to the objective detailed part properties
to find fundamental laws.
Then in a complexity approach, we assume downward
causation by expanding to the outward system behavior
to find fundamental laws. Where precise equations or
quantities were desired, is replaced by subjective pattern
recognition.
But we must also inverse the way in which we observe
or measure things. Instead of comparing one thing
to another, or some independent yardstick, we
measure all things against ...itself. But to be rigorous
we would measure current system behavior against
it's own potential future behavior.
We should compare all observations of current reality
against the opposite extremes in possible behavior.
In short, our source of fundamental law should be derived
by comparing the ...actual against the ...possible.
For instance, a system called a cloud.
It's opposite extremes in possibility are to become
either water, or vapor. But while both opposites
are entangled, a more organized or complex system
emerges.
So a cloud is the persistent phase transition between the
subcritical (condensation) and the supercritical (evaporation)
extremes in possible future behavior. In fact, we can be
sure the cloud will become one, or the other possibility
eventually. Since such transients like clouds or emotions
never last very long.
For a universe, this takes the form of the two opposites
in possibility, classical and quantum motion. When entangled
a more organized or complex system emerges.
Spontaneous order, or self-organization, or evolution
emerges at the persistent transition between classical
and quantum like system behavior. We know this
to be true just by the easy observation that clouds
are the result of it's entangled opposites of condensation
and evaporation. Just as we know an idea is the
result of the entanglement of it's opposites, facts and
imagination.
Or a democracy emerges from it's opposites in future
possibilities, too much law, or too much freedom.
Dictatorship or anarchy. But when in balance, entangled
then spontaneous order and evolution emerge.
Darwin, then, emerges from the entanglement of
quantum and classical realms.
The most complex the universe has to offer best shows
the fundamental laws of the universe. The most complex
is life. So, logically, Darwinian evolution, but in abstract
mathematical form, should provide a universal template
for all visible order, whether physical, living or platonic.
This should all be self-evident.
Here it is....
Calresco Themes (*in essay forn)http://calresco.org/themes.htm
Self-Organizing Faqhttp://calresco.org/sos/sosfaq.htm
Dynamics of Complex Systems
(full online textbook)http://www.necsi.org/publications/dcs/
Steinhardt
Director, Princeton Center for Theoretical Physicshttp://wwwphy.princeton..edu/~steinh/cycliccosmology.html
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Three or 4 years ago when mathematicians had their big get together inDon't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Not to mention the bio sphere _needs_ you to be doing something
useful.
Why limit it to topology? Why not any theoretical math? Unless it
has practical applications.
Trivial issue. The real problem is that the majority of potential
useful college grads - what few there are - are being sucked up by the
financial services industry, where they do more harm than good. Not to
mention useless social networking outfits glomming onto programmers.
But really, is "applied math" any more useful to society than
topology?
Well, one way to look at it is that everything is useful, even
theoretical math and contradictions.
Topology is a branch for pure math,Bret Cahill wrote:
Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Topology _is_ applied math.
im' inkleined to think it may actually be the mobiusphereIn article
4ac040c9-4650-43c6-8afd-59f8d4ec97e4@y27g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:
Don't try to bs your way out of this one. Just come right out and
admit it: applied math is more fun as well as more lucrative than
topology.
Not to mention the bio sphere _needs_ you to be doing something
useful.
Topologists prefer the bio-torus.
Yeah, right... I still laugh when I recall my EconomicsHas it occurred to anyone that math can be applied to the
subjective disciplines also? All those messy real world
disciplines that have always been 'more art than science'?
The other half of the equation of reality, which is currently
handled by a thousand narrow specialties, one for each
type of 'thing'. Whether sociology, philosophy, art
and so on.
Many economists are either very stupid or out right frauds and nowHas it occurred to anyone that math can be applied to the
subjective disciplines also? All those messy real world
disciplines that have always been 'more art than science'?
The other half of the equation of reality, which is currently
handled by a thousand narrow specialties, one for each
type of 'thing'. Whether sociology, philosophy, art
and so on.
Yeah, right... I still laugh when I recall my Economics
class: They were quite concerned about being accepted as a
"real" science, so the textbook was full of equations. Of
course, the variables in those equations were things like
"Supply", "Demand", "Productivity" and other ill-defined
terms. Result: Scientific paint on the same old goat
entrails.
Best regards,
Bob Masta
DAQARTA v6.02
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com
Scope, Spectrum, Spectrogram, Sound Level Meter
Frequency Counter, FREE Signal Generator
Pitch Track, Pitch-to-MIDI
Science with your sound card!
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 13:39:50 -0400, "Jonathan"
Email@Yahou.net> wrote:
Has it occurred to anyone that math can be applied to the
subjective disciplines also? All those messy real world
disciplines that have always been 'more art than science'?
The other half of the equation of reality, which is currently
handled by a thousand narrow specialties, one for each
type of 'thing'. Whether sociology, philosophy, art
and so on.
Yeah, right... I still laugh when I recall my Economics
class: They were quite concerned about being accepted as a
"real" science, so the textbook was full of equations. Of
course, the variables in those equations were things like
"Supply", "Demand", "Productivity" and other ill-defined
terms. Result: Scientific paint on the same old goat
entrails.
Best regards,
Bob Masta
DAQARTA v6.02
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com
Scope, Spectrum, Spectrogram, Sound Level Meter
Frequency Counter, FREE Signal Generator
Pitch Track, Pitch-to-MIDI
Science with your sound card!
Is this where economists get to dodge any and all basic questions byHas it occurred to anyone that math can be applied to the
subjective disciplines also? All those messy real world
disciplines that have always been 'more art than science'?
The other half of the equation of reality, which is currently
handled by a thousand narrow specialties, one for each
type of 'thing'. Whether sociology, philosophy, art
and so on.
Yeah, right... I still laugh when I recall my Economics
class: They were quite concerned about being accepted as a
"real" science, so the textbook was full of equations. Of
course, the variables in those equations were things like
"Supply", "Demand", "Productivity" and other ill-defined
terms. Result: Scientific paint on the same old goat
entrails.
Best regards,
Like I'm trying to say, things have changed in the last few years.
An entirely new field of math has evolved.
Behold the new field of Complexity Economics.
In other words these economists have as much credibility withWhere all is defined
in terms of the well-established mathematics of static and chaotic
attractors.