Why the Big Bang is Wrong undefined John Kierein The Big Bang theory of the universe is wrong because the cosmological red shift is due to the Compton effect rather than the Doppler effect. See The Endless, Boundless, Stable Universe by Grote Reber and Hubble's Constant in Terms of the Compton Effect by John Kierein. Reber showed that the Compton effect was the cause of the red shift in order to explain the observations of bright, very long wavelength, extragalactic radio waves. Quasars may be much closer than their red shift would indicate if they have an "intrinsic" red shift due to being surrounded by a 'fuzzy' atmosphere containing free electrons and other material. Some such quasars may be double stars, with one member being an ordinary star and the other exhibiting a large red shift and being labeled as a quasar. The red shift on the sun is obviously not Doppler since the sun is not moving away from us. Recently discovered cosmic radio bursts show dispersion as they interact with intergalactic electrons.
Autopoietic.net -- Journal of Autopoietic Theory Complex systems tutorial Jan Burian burianj (at) vse.cz You can find here: Basic introduction to Complex Systems Science and relevant modeling tools Many links to web resources and a list of relevant literature "Complex systems" (4IZ636), lecture on University of Economics, Prague Content Intuitive definitions of complexity Basics of (complex) systems science Self-organization and related concepts Formal definitions of complexity Very short introduction to modeling methodology Cellular automatons Complex networks Agent-based models References Intuitive Definitions of Complex Systems System is an entity in terms of parts and relations between them. Structural relations define which parts are connected together. Structurally complex system A system that can be analyzed into many components having relatively many relations among them, so that the behavior of each component can depend on the behavior of many others. Basics of (complex) systems science Remember: Interconnection of parts matters in complex systems! Feedback
Geology.com: News and Information for Geology & Earth Science 11.19.2007 - New technique captures chemical reactions in a single living... UC Berkeley Press Release New technique captures chemical reactions in a single living cell for the first time By Sarah Yang, Media Relations | 19 November 2007 BERKELEY – Bioengineers at the University of California, Berkeley, have discovered a technique that for the first time enables the detection of biomolecules' dynamic reactions in a single living cell. By taking advantage of the signature frequency by which organic and inorganic molecules absorb light, the team of researchers, led by Luke Lee, professor of bioengineering and director of UC Berkeley's Biomolecular Nanotechnology Center, can determine in real time whether specific enzymes are activated or particular genes are expressed, all with unprecedented resolution within a single living cell. The technique, described in the Nov. 18 issue of the journal Nature Methods, could lead to a new era in molecular imaging with implications for cell-based drug discovery and biomedical diagnostics.
Second-order cybernetics Second-order cybernetics, also known as the cybernetics of cybernetics, investigates the construction of models of cybernetic systems. It investigates cybernetics with awareness that the investigators are part of the system, and of the importance of self-referentiality, self-organizing, the subject–object problem, etc. Investigators of a system can never see how it works by standing outside it because the investigators are always engaged cybernetically with the system being observed; that is, when investigators observe a system, they affect and are affected by it. Overview[edit] The anthropologists Gregory Bateson and Margaret Mead contrasted first and second-order cybernetics with this diagram in an interview in 1973.[1] It emphasizes the requirement for a possibly constructivist participant observer in the second order case: . . . essentially your ecosystem, your organism-plus-environment, is to be considered as a single circuit.[1] See also[edit] Gyroteleostasis References[edit]
Fallacy of systems thinking and reversing the productivity game The problem with productivity enthusiasts these days, is that they will pay more attention to the hacks and tricks, than doing the actual work. We’ve created this “work masturbation” environment, where doing it better is more important than doing it at all. The problem lies with the saturation of the marketers in the field. They are creating all these artificial needs, like systems, and gadgets, in order to sustain themselves and their continuous work. First you need wake up to the truth… …that system is irrelevant. You are justifying your procrastination by doing what has perceived notion of urgency, instead of doing what is important. The habit of mindfulness and it’s impact on productivity For a long while I was procrastinating on mindfulness, it sounded to me like yet another fad. As any other addiction, procrastination can be cured by being completely mindful of what you are doing in any given time. Brain patterns and Mindfulness Some thoughts for the system thinkers
3quarksdaily: PC AI sucks at Civilization, reads manual, starts kicking ass The Massachusetts institute of technology have been experimenting with their computers' AI. Specifically the way they deal with the meaning of words. You might think that the best way to analyse this kind of thing would be with a human to PC conversation, like in Short Circuit. That's not the case. Instead, the boffins handed over PC classic, Civilization, and let the AI get on with it. They sucked - winning a mere 46 per cent of the time. Then the researchers handed over the instructions and taught the PCs a "machine-learning system so it could use a player's manual to guide the development of a game-playing strategy." Associate professor of computer science and electrical engineering, Regina Barzilay, offered insight into why they used a game manual to prove their point. Civ was picked because it's a really fun game, and they didn't want the computers to get bored during the testing. Not really. These kind of systems could make developer's jobs a lot easier. (via Reddit)
Norbert Wiener American mathematician and philosopher Wiener is considered the originator of cybernetics, the science of communication as it relates to living things and machines,[4] with implications for engineering, systems control, computer science, biology, neuroscience, philosophy, and the organization of society. Norbert Wiener is credited as being one of the first to theorize that all intelligent behavior was the result of feedback mechanisms, that could possibly be simulated by machines and was an important early step towards the development of modern artificial intelligence.[5] Biography[edit] Youth[edit] Wiener was born in Columbia, Missouri, the first child of Leo Wiener and Bertha Kahn, Jewish immigrants from Lithuania and Germany, respectively. A child prodigy, he graduated from Ayer High School in 1906 at 11 years of age, and Wiener then entered Tufts College. Harvard and World War I[edit] In 1914, Wiener traveled to Europe, to be taught by Bertrand Russell and G. After the war[edit] Fiction:
Why I don’t agree that systems thinking is a ‘fallacy’ It’s been some time since I wrote my counterpoint to Bojan’s article on quitting GTD, and in that time I’ve come to know him a great deal better, to respect his opinion, and I consider him a friend. However when I read his latest post on the fallacy of systems thinkers I felt compelled to lay out the things I disagree with, and to defend what I see as my position as one of the ‘systems thinkers’ he refers to. Here’s the case for the defence: Exhibit A: The Review process ‘doesn’t work’ Bojan says that for the ‘majority’ of people, the review part of productivity systems is a ‘complete disaster’. Whilst it’s hard to dispute that many people (including me) find the review aspect of GTD tough, I think it’s worth considering two points: Not all productivity systems require a ‘review’ in the same way that GTD does. I would add that there are a lot (I’d love to know the numbers) of people for whom GTD, and the review process, has been incredibly helpful. I say the exact opposite. Of course not.
Brain Pickings 20 WebGL sites that will blow your mind | Feature | .net magazine Almost all modern computers and most smartphones have powerful GPUs, graphics processors that often have more number-crunching power than the CPU. But until recently web pages and mobile websites couldn't use them - meaning slow, low-quality graphics, almost always in 2D. That all changed when WebGL was released in the latest versions of Firefox and Chrome. WebGL, based on the well-known OpenGL 3D graphics standard, gives JavaScript plugin-free access to the graphics hardware, via the HTML5 canvas element - making realtime 3D graphics in web pages possible. Tech support Apple are supporting the standard too, so we can (hopefully!) So sit back, crank up your latest browser, and check out these demos - if you think you can do better, go for it: there are some hints and tips on how at the end. 01. 3 Dreams of Black 02. 03. No Comply is another WebGL demo from the Mozilla Audio API team, mixing video and graphics with a very 1980s-computer-game-meets-the-Matrix vibe. 04. 3Dtin 05. 06. 07. 08.
Erik Verlinde - Wikipedia Erik Peter Verlinde (Dutch: [ˈeːrɪk ˈpeːtər vərˈlɪndə]; born 21 January 1962) is a Dutch theoretical physicist and string theorist. He is the identical twin brother of physicist Herman Verlinde. The Verlinde formula, which is important in conformal field theory and topological field theory, is named after him. His research deals with string theory, gravity, black holes and cosmology. At a symposium at the Dutch Spinoza-institute on 8 December 2009 he introduced a theory of entropic gravity. Biography[edit] That fall he began his studies in theoretical physics together with his twin brother at Utrecht University. In 1985, Verlinde started work on his PhD at Utrecht University under the formal supervision of Bernard de Wit. After his PhD, Verlinde joined the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton as a postdoctoral fellow. Major contributions[edit] Verlinde's main field of research is string theory. Verlinde formula[edit] Witten–Dijkgraaf–Verlinde–Verlinde equation[edit] References[edit]