Has Chaos Been Explained (original) (raw)
Related papers
Review of Peter Smith: "Explaining Chaos
2001
Explaining Chaos is an informative, original and enjoyable introduction to chaos theory and its associated philosophical problems. The book does not presuppose any previous background in chaos theory. Nevertheless, the discussion may be as interesting to experienced readers as it is to novices. In particular, several mathematical interludes deepen the discussion of technical issues and provide numerous interesting insights that could further enlighten readers already familiar with the central ideas. The reader will ®nd an accessible discussion striking a good balance between scienti®c and philosophical topics. Unfortunately, the physical and the philosophical parts are uneven in quality. While the treatment of the scienti®c issues is thorough and skilful, the philosophical discussions have signi®cant lacunas. Nevertheless, Smith's enthusiasm for exploring these issues is contagious and the book is a valuable contribution to a ®eld that has, despite its importance, received little attention from philosophers so far. Explaining Chaos consists of ten chapters that could be divided into two main categories: the mathematics and physics of chaos, and the implications of chaos for scienti®c practice and methodology. In Chapters 1 (dynamical systems), 2 (fractals), 6 (universality), 8 (experimental evidence for chaos), and 9 (randomness), Smith introduces the central topics of chaos theory and discusses important results. In Chapter 10, he addresses the question of how chaos could adequately be de®ned. On the whole, these chapters provide a very knowledgeable and skilful presentation of the basics of chaos theory. In Chapters 3 (models and simplicity), 4 (prediction), 5 (approximate truth), and 7 (explanation), Smith considers the methodological implications of chaos theory. Here, he aims at showing that chaos, though an interesting and exciting ®eld of investigation, by no means requires a revision of the basic traits of scienti®c methodology. Smith successfully resists the temptation to be carried away by fancy bold claims and, on the contrary, argues that chaos theory may be considered a respectable tool for decent scienti®c research.
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 2001
Explaining Chaos is an informative, original and enjoyable introduction to chaos theory and its associated philosophical problems. The book does not presuppose any previous background in chaos theory. Nevertheless, the discussion may be as interesting to experienced readers as it is to novices. In particular, several mathematical interludes deepen the discussion of technical issues and provide numerous interesting insights that could further enlighten readers already familiar with the central ideas. The reader will ®nd an accessible discussion striking a good balance between scienti®c and philosophical topics. Unfortunately, the physical and the philosophical parts are uneven in quality. While the treatment of the scienti®c issues is thorough and skilful, the philosophical discussions have signi®cant lacunas. Nevertheless, Smith's enthusiasm for exploring these issues is contagious and the book is a valuable contribution to a ®eld that has, despite its importance, received little attention from philosophers so far. Explaining Chaos consists of ten chapters that could be divided into two main categories: the mathematics and physics of chaos, and the implications of chaos for scienti®c practice and methodology. In Chapters 1 (dynamical systems), 2 (fractals), 6 (universality), 8 (experimental evidence for chaos), and 9 (randomness), Smith introduces the central topics of chaos theory and discusses important results. In Chapter 10, he addresses the question of how chaos could adequately be de®ned. On the whole, these chapters provide a very knowledgeable and skilful presentation of the basics of chaos theory. In Chapters 3 (models and simplicity), 4 (prediction), 5 (approximate truth), and 7 (explanation), Smith considers the methodological implications of chaos theory. Here, he aims at showing that chaos, though an interesting and exciting ®eld of investigation, by no means requires a revision of the basic traits of scienti®c methodology. Smith successfully resists the temptation to be carried away by fancy bold claims and, on the contrary, argues that chaos theory may be considered a respectable tool for decent scienti®c research.
CHAOS : Review/Essay of CHAOS: 'Making a New Science' by James GLEICK (1987)
This book describes the birth of the new theory of Chaos. This is a difficult new concept that is still evolving but it popularized the term: Butterfly Effect and introduced new concepts to a popular audience, such as fractals and introduced pioneering thinkers, such as Feigenbaum and Mandelbrot; it inspired the novel and movie Jurassic Park. This concept opens up a new view of nature: where previously randomness had to be forced in to explain the unpredictable variations, now chaos is seen as spanning both order (patterns) and disorder. Now, this phenomenon helps explain the shape of clouds, smoke, water eddies, mountain ranges and coastlines. Implicitly, it shows how Newtonian mathematics has constrained physics (and science in general) to make simplifying assumptions that enable the calculus to become the universal tool-set of the scientific viewpoint. The book describes how this tough problem was cracked by five theoreticians described herein with a novelist's eye. Key to the solution was the early use of computers to repeat simple calculations, very many times. The viewpoint changed from static 'state' to dynamic process: becoming rather than being. Chaos is everywhere, it is switching the simple mathematical models of classical physics. It is the science of the global nature of systems. I show here (but not in the book or Wiki) that this is the start of the Death of Newtonian Physics and the Calculus: a TRUE REVOLUTION.
Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 2007
Whether every effect can be precisely linked to a given cause or to a list of causes has been a matter of debate for centuries, particularly during the 17th century, when astronomers became capable of predicting the trajectories of planets. Recent mathematical models applied to physics have included the idea that given phenomena cannot be predicted precisely, although they can be predicted to some extent, in line with the chaos theory. Concepts such as deterministic models, sensitivity to initial conditions, strange attractors, and fractal dimensions are inherent to the development of this theory A few situations involving normal or abnormal endogenous rhythms in biology have been analyzed following the principles of chaos theory. This is particularly the case with cardiac arrhythmias, but less so with biological clocks and circadian rhythms.
The Nature & Sensitivity of Chaos
In this paper, the nature and sensitivity of chaos will be illustrated. Failure to appreciate the generative nature of chaos has led to it being one of the last scientific frontiers to be discovered, over fifty years after relativity and quantum theory. Far from being the nemesis of order, or the primal ooze in which order is imposed, chaos is genesis of new form. Most complex systems arise from the mutual interaction between chaos and order, through bifurcation. The eternal religious war of light and dark is very much the battle of chaos as the dark 'force' and order as the principle of light.