Saturday, January 28, 2006
Generative Methodology Glass Bead Games
possibility of complexity arising in grid computing
[368] ß [comment on four issues
(Richard Ballard)
[367] ß [Four Issues facing
Ontological Modeling (Paul Werbos)
[371] ß [Discussion about founding
the Second School (Paul Prueitt)
[151] ß [Comment by Paul Werbos on
invariance of natural laws
[152] ß [Continuing discussion
between Peter Krieg and Judith Rosen
Communication
to part of the SOA Blueprint Technical Committee (at OASIS) à [144],
Comment by Paul Werbos on invariance of natural laws
Footnote by Paul Prueitt
-------- it was said:
If you choose words and processes that cannot change to describe things
that
do change, failure appears an absolute certainty.
---------------------
Paul Werbos communicated:
Not really.
The essence of physics since Newton has been the search for invariant dynamical laws. The Heraclitus position was "everything changes except the laws of change itself" -- and so what ARE those laws?
The quest for such laws in physics is certainly not bankrupt even now. There is certainly no a priori reason why it has to be bankrupt -- and the empirical evidence in hand suggests it has a ways to go still. This quest certainly has led to extremely useful knowledge through the years, however incomplete that knowledge still is. [1]
In the end, the quest to understand "how things work" is more fundamental than physics itself, and allows for a very broad range of possible methodologies. The effort to understand the unchanging laws which govern change itself... is not something to be lightly given up.
Of course, part of that quest is to accept that WE must be prepared to change our understanding, as we learn more...
All for now.
[1] Prueitt: The point that I make, that Robert Rosen makes, that Peter Kugler makes and others make is that the type of science that looks for universal laws is not “ALL of natural science. There are situational “laws” and these are the ones that Dr Ballard referred to when he made the statement.