|
|
Post by karl on Sept 10, 2020 3:01:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Sept 10, 2020 15:02:38 GMT
It's impossible for a chaos to not have any orders and structurally each chaos has each order.
Ultimate chaos doesn't exist, however it if would it would have enumerous sequences.
|
|
|
|
Post by karl on Sept 10, 2020 20:09:01 GMT
It's impossible for a chaos to not have any orders and structurally each chaos has each order. Ultimate chaos doesn't exist, however it if would it would have enumerous sequences.
In principle I agree. There is a longing in humans to be able to describe the complexity of reality in a simplistic manner. That will never really succeed, but it reminds me of an old Swedish saying:
"He who reaches for the stars will end up in the top of the trees."
If a simple mathematical equation can give us some idea about how complex systems might evolve, then that is better than not having a clue. But I don't think that approach will ever produce predictions that are accurate enough to be useful. It's rather a theoretical and philosophical exercise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Sept 10, 2020 21:48:13 GMT
It's impossible for a chaos to not have any orders and structurally each chaos has each order. Ultimate chaos doesn't exist, however it if would it would have enumerous sequences.
In principle I agree. There is a longing in humans to be able to describe the complexity of reality in a simplistic manner. That will never really succeed, but it reminds me of an old Swedish saying:
"He who reaches for the stars will end up in the top of the trees."
If a simple mathematical equation can give us some idea about how complex systems might evolve, then that is better than not having a clue. But I don't think that approach will ever produce predictions that are accurate enough to be useful. It's rather a theoretical and philosophical exercise.
Aye, and I know some philosophers who still try to go through transcendental areas. They claim that to beat such areas we have to use all our "mind artillery". Usually they lean to Kant's methods, and in a few cases go through "the third realm" of Popper's. Being at the top of the trees is not so bad. There were some Finland's snipers (as the famous "Cuckoo") who get rid of soviet military squads just sitting from trees's tops. My point of view here is the reason that changing of our views about physical universe (the Sun goes round the Earth to the Earth goes round the Sun) is in words too. So, what we've changed is our points of views. Maybe if we had such points of view as Aristarchus of Samos we wouldn't need to debate so heat about this during some period of history. Reformation was the one. It put shores out from sight of people. Luter just nailed 95 thesis, and by it he made something like Nicola Copernicus did. That's why maybe we work on this side to make people able to watch, for example, their mistakes from more higher level. |
|
