Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Complexity Explained

complexityexplained.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 128 posts

Re: Complexity Explained

#31

Post by JoeAltmaier »

hliyan wrote: post #30
jameal wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious how this epiphany came to you. This strikes me as very similar to the Buddhist concept of the Five Aggregates, which describe five elements that combine to make up our existence: Physical form -> Sensation -> Perception -> Mental formations -> Consciousness

I was just trying to understand what people mean when they say that "consciousness is an emergent property", which always felt like a hand-wavy explanation. I was weighing that explanation against panpsychism and then this thought emerged.

I'm wondering which sort of consciousness is under scrutiny. We know when we're conscious and unconscious. E.g. Awake vs Asleep. Even animals exhibit that dichotomy.

The other consciousness is self-awareness. Which is hard to detect from the outside. Some animals may have it. Do they understand when they look silly? Do they recognize themselves in a mirror? These may be diagnostic.

It's important to know which one is intended since they are so very different, at least in their distribution among living creatures.

Re: Complexity Explained

#33

Post by hliyan »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #31
hliyan wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was just trying to understand what people mean when they say that "consciousness is an emergent property", which always felt like a hand-wavy explanation. I was weighing that explanation against panpsychism and then this thought emerged.

I'm wondering which sort of consciousness is under scrutiny. We know when we're conscious and unconscious. E.g. Awake vs Asleep. Even animals exhibit that dichotomy. The other consciousness is self-awareness. Which is hard to detect from the outside. Some animals may have it. Do they understand when they look silly? Do they recognize themselves in a mirror? These may be diagnostic. It's important to know which one is…

Awareness, definitely. I'm using consciousness in the same sense Julian Jaynes used it (he used to call the other form "reactivity", a term that never quite caught on).

Re: Complexity Explained

#34

Post by tenaciousDaniel »

hliyan wrote: post #23

I recently had the (possibly flawed) epiphany that all behavior is emergent . If you think about it, all things that we consider objects are just semi-permanent aggregations of fundamental particles that we recognize and label as objects for convenience of thought. When the patterns in such aggregations are outside the space and time scales that allow human minds to recognize them, the only label available is "comple…

I've always found videos like these to be the most direct (and beautiful) examples of this principle:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCiIUjPF060

Re: Complexity Explained

#35

Post by beaconstudios »

hliyan wrote: post #23

I recently had the (possibly flawed) epiphany that all behavior is emergent . If you think about it, all things that we consider objects are just semi-permanent aggregations of fundamental particles that we recognize and label as objects for convenience of thought. When the patterns in such aggregations are outside the space and time scales that allow human minds to recognize them, the only label available is "comple…

This is the reality of bottom up organisation, and is basically a completely different metaphysics to the current Western modernist one. Going further down this path of thought will lead you to ideas like constructivism, teleology, and non-dualism - all ideas that have long philosophical histories but are currently out of vogue.

Re: Complexity Explained

#36

Post by breck »

robbmorganf wrote: post #19

How does complexity theory benefit real people? Unlike theories of physics or economics, it doesn't appear to describe how anything actually works , rather that things are just more complex than they seem. For instance, complexity theory just points out that the double pendulum is hard to predict without adding value, while controls theory was more useful by stabilizing the double pendulum. So what are some real-worl…

I wrote a paper called "Counting Complexity" (https://github.com/treenotation/research/tree/master/papers/...).

In it are the beginnings of a new simple universal way to measure complexity.

The "real-world benefits" are that you can compare 2 systems that accomplish the same problem and objectively choose the less complex one, much like you could use the measurement of "weight" to pick a lighter material for something like a plane.

Re: Complexity Explained

#37

Post by zikzak »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #31
hliyan wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was just trying to understand what people mean when they say that "consciousness is an emergent property", which always felt like a hand-wavy explanation. I was weighing that explanation against panpsychism and then this thought emerged.

I'm wondering which sort of consciousness is under scrutiny. We know when we're conscious and unconscious. E.g. Awake vs Asleep. Even animals exhibit that dichotomy. The other consciousness is self-awareness. Which is hard to detect from the outside. Some animals may have it. Do they understand when they look silly? Do they recognize themselves in a mirror? These may be diagnostic. It's important to know which one is…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Guide_for_the_Perplexed

I discovered this book in my early teens and it helped me in structuring my thinking about this sort of thing.

Re: Complexity Explained

#38

Post by ReactiveJelly »

beaconstudios wrote: post #35
hliyan wrote: post #23

I recently had the (possibly flawed) epiphany that all behavior is emergent . If you think about it, all things that we consider objects are just semi-permanent aggregations of fundamental particles that we recognize and label as objects for convenience of thought. When the patterns in such aggregations are outside the space and time scales that allow human minds to recognize them, the only label available is "comple…

This is the reality of bottom up organisation, and is basically a completely different metaphysics to the current Western modernist one. Going further down this path of thought will lead you to ideas like constructivism, teleology, and non-dualism - all ideas that have long philosophical histories but are currently out of vogue.

It would be nice if someone could untie them from religion, make them simpler to understand, and bring them back into vogue, if they're so useful.

Re: Complexity Explained

#39

Post by moosebear847 »

franze wrote: post #22

I wrote the book "Understanding SEO"[1] with Systems Theory in mind. After the 1000 meeting w people talking about tips and tricks and competing theoretical constructs including bullshit and thoughtcancer constructs like "linkjuice, pagerank, pinguins, pandas, ..." I set out to build a bullshit free theory of SEO. For my own sake - otherwise I would have had to quit my job. And yeah "All models are wrong, but some of…

Wow.. love your clear and straightforward writing. And it's the first time I've felt I understand what SEO is and isn't (super secret magical sorcery).

How come you would have had to quit the job wo this book?

Re: Complexity Explained

#40

Post by probablypower »

robbmorganf wrote: post #19

How does complexity theory benefit real people? Unlike theories of physics or economics, it doesn't appear to describe how anything actually works , rather that things are just more complex than they seem. For instance, complexity theory just points out that the double pendulum is hard to predict without adding value, while controls theory was more useful by stabilizing the double pendulum. So what are some real-worl…

You mention economics.

Macro-economic theories are based on high-level relationships that economists have observed in reality, and that have some theoretical basis. For example, supply and demand can be represented as curves (aggregates of individual positions), and that in a perfect market the value of a good will converge at the intercept of supply and demand. There are a considerable number of assumptions required to make a statement like this, most of which are made to 'manage away' complexity.

Complexity theory helps us find ways to address and model complexity, such that we can reduce the number of assumptions required. For example, if we can build an agent-based simulation of supply and demand, and we model these agents as realistically as possible (few assumptions), we can then see if the same realisation of a good's value occurs.

The value in this is that we can then test the assumptions directly (what happens if 20% of people make irrational decisions?) and see how it affects the emergent behaviour.

Complexity theory can help in properly building these kinds of fine-grained simulations in a smart way, and can also help in understanding and debugging such simulations when the wrong behaviour emerges.

In my field (power systems) complexity theory can help us investigate and understand why large-scale blackouts have a fat tail distribution. That is, to understand why our macro-level statistical models aren't accurate in the edge cases. Primarily it is because these outliers occur 'emergently' due to the complexity of power systems, in ways that we overlook by applying old-school approaches to grid development and system operation.

In short: complexity theory helps us look beyond our 'mostly right' high-level statistical models and theories.

Post reply on HN