Climate Change – Initially we could only hear its rumble. Later it became visible like a speck on the horizon. Now that it has come closer, its speed and ominous proportions have become clearly discernible. Yet, many among us prefer to keep our eyes turned away, hoping that it will pass us by. Some hate it. Some are overeager to denigrate the supporting scientific evidence. Some refuse to acknowledge it. Among those who recognize the threat, many are reluctant to admit the role played by humans. However, if the ‘flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil can set off a Tornado in Texas’ (see Butterfly Effect - Edward Lorenz), what unpredictable and catastrophic outcomes can result from our uninhibited and destructive exploitation of the environment? Unlike motorists watching out for pedestrians, climate change is a blind force and could run us over, unless we pay attention.

If we change ways, adopt environment friendly lifestyles, reduce dependence on conventional fuels and embrace renewable sources of energy, we can probably save ourselves. But “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insanity” as Albert Einstein put it. Harbouring a false hope and continuing our present course could have disastrous consequences.

Rabindranath Tagore, in his poem “Where the Mind is Without Fear” hoped that India would “rediscover the clear stream of reason and awake into a heaven of freedom”. As the Copenhagen summit to reach an agreement on emission cuts is underway, I too wish that “nations broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls” would overcome their differences and galvanize into positive action.

Where The Mind is Without Fear

Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high
Where knowledge is free
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments
By narrow domestic walls
Where words come out from the depth of truth
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way
Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit
Where the mind is led forward by thee
Into ever-widening thought and action
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.
 - Rabindranath Tagore

Ordo ab Chao…Order out of Chaos

I’ve been thinking about the Rubik’s cube and what intrigues me most is that to me the cube represents, to a limited degree, a sense of chaos when all the faces are jumbled up and ‘random’.  I like the fact that you can have the cube in this state or you can ‘order’ the faces back to their correct places and have the sides all the same colour.

This quote sums it up quite well i thought:

“the paradox of chaos theory is that chaos is not actually random, that chaos contains order, and that order contains chaos” Dr. David Pincus

From a brief group discussion of the Rubik’s cube I’ve got the following words;

• Simultaneity

Derived from the adjective simultaneous, meaning occurring, existing or operating at the same time.

(Collins Dictionary)

From simultaneity I’ve looked up synchronicity, care of Wikipedia: Synchronicity is the experience of two or more events that are causally unrelated occurring together in a meaningful manner. To count as synchronicity, the events should be unlikely to occur together by chance.

• Transformative

Derived from the verb transform, meaning to alter of be altered in form. (Collins Dictionary)

• Fragments

Meaning, a piece broken off or detached or an incomplete piece. (Collins Dictionary)

• Non linear

Obviously non of a straight line,  especially with regard to dimension. (Collins Dictionary)

Keeping each of the terms in mind and doing some research I found the following videos which have begun to help my thinking process.

————————————————————————————————————————————————-

4D Animation & Apophysis One Fractal Animation

In both of the videos above I like the way all the patterns appear to stem from the centre. It is the opposite of this idea of synchronicity, two events completely different events happening at the same time, as it seems the lines emerge from a central source, so I’d like to investigate further, two lines to start with from different points amassing in to something in the center.

In 4D Animation I especially like the fluidity of the movement and the collapsing in on itself of the object. It reminded me a lot of black holes, vortexes, the disappearing nature of time and objects being sucked in and vanishing.

Apophysis One Fractal Animation

While researching a bit more into the idea of non linear and fragments i  back came across fractals.

Care of Wikipedia and B.B Mandelbrot “A fractal is a rough or fragmented geometric shape that can be split into parts, each of which is (at least approximately) a reduced-size copy of the whole“

There’s some open source software called Apophysis to render fractals, which creates some really beautiful pieces of what i would consider art. Further understanding of the software and the scripting behind it might make for some interesting visual pieces, which are can be animated to show the fractals mutating and changing in real time.

Some examples of the type of images being produced using Apophysis can be seen below.

While i was thinking about this idea of chaos and order, the ‘chaos theory’ came to mind.  It’s not something i knew anything about other than the name of so i thought this might be an interesting path to follow and see if it went anywhere.

One definition of chaos theory is;

‘”chaos theory’ comes from the fact that the systems that the theory describes are apparently disordered, but chaos theory is really about finding the underlying order in apparently random data.”

Edward Lorenz is credited with discovering the theory whilst working on a meteorological problem. Full explanation can be found here. What i found more interesting than the chaos theory itself was the ‘butterfly effect’ Lorenz’s discovery inspired. The image below has become the symbol for the chaos theory, it’s called  the ‘Lorenz attractor’ or the butterfly.

This video is very good at showing the information it contains as a form of narrative, we watch the light pass along in a linear, as far as time is concerned, and traditional way.

In keeping with the chaos theory and depictions of it I found this really nice video, which i think could inspire my project.

3D Visualization of Lorenz attractor in a VR System

Once you get past the fact that there’s a guy stood right next to the screen blocking the image, I really like the ’fly through’ feeling or the video. Perhaps this would make for an interesting project in the dome? I loved the feeling of flying through when we were shown the universe demonstration, going thought the galaxies etc. Combining this with perhaps a 3D experience is an avenue I’d be interested to follow.

Where am I going with this?

Synchronicity.

As I’ve said I’d like to investigate how to show creatively two lines from different points amassing in to something very visual in the center. Stripping down synchronicity I think the idea of having two lines each line representing a very different ‘event’ from the other and how the combination to create something, at the moment i cant get an explosion out of my head (this isn’t really what i want to depict).

By lines i don’t mean straight lines, I’m thinking rubbery lines which bend and move in a very fluid natural way created using a 3D modeling software perhaps.

Another area I found interesting after our hour in the uni’s immersive theatre is the ‘fly through’ feeling i got while watching a computer generated film. I’d quite like to maybe create something which can be viewed in the dome.  Panning around an animation, flying through it, looking at it from different angles, zooming in and out of the emerging structure trying to keep the viewer on edge.

Video is a good way of showing time as it passes and creating narratives based upon this or indicative of this, I’d like to use this as inspiration but create a more interactive digital representation of this.

What I’ve been referencing in addition to the videos and images:

CATCHING THE BUG OF SYNCHRONICITY by Paul Levy In particular the fist paragraph.
SYNCHRONICITY Gives examples of, which helped me understand the concept.
THE SKEPTIC’S DICTIONARY Questions if synchronicity is really possible.

THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT (2004)  The tag line for the film  is ‘Change one thing, Change everything.’ Hollywood’s depiction of the butterfly effect using conventional film techniques, moving backward and forward in flashbacks.

Here is a study sheet for an old scientist.

Sketchbook Saturday is off to a good start.

Twipple Magnets used as "Removable Grafitti"

When Floyd Hayes sold “voicevertising” to Hall’s Fruit Breezers, he made quite a splash in the marketing world.  These days Floyd causes a stir on Twitter through encouraging random acts of kindness, called Twipple.  The Twipple logo reflects the Butterfly Effect, founded by Edward Lorenz:

The idea was that if a butterfly chances to flap his wings in Beijing in March, then, by August, hurricane patterns in the Atlantic will be completely different.

Is it possible to achieve this phenomenon with kind acts?  Twipplers encourage each other to plant seeds, compliment a stranger on their jeans “without sounding creepy,” and give gifts as a way to improve society at large.  Floyd chooses Busy Beaver Button Co. to make his custom Twipple magnets and buttons:

They’re fun to put around too. Less “aggressive” than paint, pens or stickers. They just lift off – how can anyone get cross at that?

Floyd leaves them at New York bars, distributes them to Twipplers, and sticks the them unsuspecting light poles (see photo).  Have you Twippled lately?

Join Twipple

Floyd Hayes’ Blog

www.BusyBeaver.net

In 1961, the scientist Edward Lorenz was using a computer model to predict the weather, when he took a shortcut and entered the decimal .506 instead of .506127.

A tiny difference… but the result was a completely different weather scenario.

From this experience Lorenz developed the scientific idea known as ‘the butterfly effect.’ This refers to the way in which small variations in the initial conditions of a system can produce large variations in its long term behavior.  System such as the weather appear chaotic simply because we cannot account for all the tiny factors that contribute to it.

The name ‘butterfly effect” comes from the idea that something as insignificant as the flap of a butterfly’s wings could potentially unleash a chain of events in the atmosphere that ultimately leads to the creation of a tornado.

When I heard about this it immediately resonated with a thought that I have had for some time: that even our small actions start resonate down through history. Small actions now may have huge consequences later on, and small actions thousands of years ago probably now affect us all.

I remember when I was a child, one holiday my family and I were driving home in our old Landrover, back in the days before seat-belts were compulsory in the back seats. We were on a main highway in the south Island of New Zealand, and the road was straight for some distance ahead. I only remember there being one other car on the road, and it was heading towards us in the distance. It seemed to be travelling very close to the centre-line -  and as it moved closer slowly it drifted over it – at first just a small amount, but then more and more, until it was right in front of us, completely on our side of the road. The rest happened so fast I can hardly remember it. A horn sounded, the car swerved, and the vehicles missed each other with no time to spare.

I can imagine the driver was probably travelling by himself, perhaps he dropped something and was looking for it, or maybe he was changing a cassette tape. A small action, but with potentially catastrophic consequences. I wonder how different things could have been? If the driver had not looked up in time and it had ended in a head-on collision, how different would things be now? Or what about in the future, with thousands of descendants gone? The significance of near-misses such as this can be quickly forgotten. We sometimes even laugh about them later – and perhaps it is just as well.

The most trivial of things can also determine where we study or work, where we live, or even who we marry. It is an idea that is explored in numerous movies, such as ‘back to the future,’ where Michael J. Fox, playing the role of Marty McFly, goes back in time in a Delorian and manages to save his father from being hit by a car. The problem, however, is that this is the accident that originally allowed his father to meet his mother, and as a result Marty begins to slowly fade out of existence until he can put things right. In the end Marty does manage to get his parents together, but when he arrives back in the present day he finds a very different reality waiting for him due to the small change in the circumstances of how his parents met.

I think most of us want to make a difference in this world, and the point I want to make is that it might not be as difficult as we think. We, of course, can’t predict what the long term outcome of our actions will be, but even in this chaotic world it seems reasonable to suggest that positive actions are most likely to produce positive results.  We simply don’t realise the impact we have through simple things like encouraging each other, or treating others as we want to be treated, but I want to suggest that their affect can be massive.

There is an advertisement – I can’t remember what it is for – where someone smiles at someone else, and the smile is contagious – it lives on as it passes from person to person around the city. Perhaps our actions are like this. They live on, they set off chain reactions, and they resonate down through history.

We might not think that we can change the world – but then again, if butterfly wings can cause tornado’s, perhaps through small actions we can.

"El aleteo de las alas de una mariposa se puede sentir al otro lado del mundo"- Probervio Chino

EL EFECTO MARIPOSA:
 

Como ya hemos visto el efecto mariposa es uno de los tipos de causa-efecto cuantitativo, y esta muy presente en la teoría del caos. Pero: ¿qué es? y ¿ de dónde surgío?

El efecto mariposa hace referencia a 3 conceptos muy importantes:

1.Una causa muy pequeña, por un proceso de amplificación, puede llegar a desencadenar una consecuencia muy grande.
2. Esta consecuencia no solo sería grande sino que tambien sería impredicible.
3. La situación sería de descontrol porque no solo no podremso evitar la causa, sino que tampoco podremos evitar la consecuencia.

Este planteamiento nació en 1960 cuando el meteorólogo y matemático, Edward Lorenz , intentaba crear unas ecuaciones simples que mediante un ordenador le ayudaran a predecir el clima atmosférico.
El Clima atmosférico se define por tres ecuaciones, que expresan como cambia a lo largo del tiempo la velocidad y la temperatura del aire, pero Lorenz dió con un fallo en su sistema al intruducir en la secuencia inicial una diferencia de por ejemplo 0′0000000001 en lugar de 0′0000000000, descubriendo que el resultado variaba en gran medida.
Por tanto si en una ciencia tan exacta como las matemáticas, una mínima variación en los datos iniciales, daba lugar a fuertes cambios, el resto de ciencias que se fundamentan en esta primera, como por ejemplo la meteorología, obtendrian  grandes catástrofes en funcion de pequeños cambios ambientales.

Por Tanto el Efecto Mariposa, es una de las consecuencias de un sistema caótico, pues una pequeña causa inicial tras sufrir un proceso de amplificación,  cambia no solo de forma compleja sino también impredecible, haciendo imposible efectuar predicciones más allá de un punto conocido como “horizonte de predicciones” 

DE LA TEORIA AL CINE:

Un buen ejemplo de todo lo resumido anteriormente es la película bajo el mismo nombre “El Efecto Mariposa”, del año 2004, dirigida por Eric Bress y J. Mackye Gruber, y protagonizada por Ashton Kutcher ( Colega dónde está mi coche). Si, es muy raro ver a este actor en un papel serio, y bueno no lo hace del todo mal, aunque no puedo evitar que me de risa solo de ver su rostro XDD.

SINOPSIS: SIN SPOILER:

La película trata de un niño (Evan Treborn) que tiene bloqueos mentales en los que olvida que es lo que ha ocurrido minutos atrás, y que le llevan a situaciones que el mismo desconoce como han llegado a ocurrir. Desde mi punto de vista esta es la mejor parte de la película, porque es en donde los directores crean un trhiller intrigante que muy pronto tiene todas sus respuestas.

Tras un trágico accidente en su pueblo, en el que están involucrados Evan y sus tres amigos, su madre decide que lo mejor es mudarse. Años después  se da cuenta de que las lagunas de cuando era niño ahora cobran un significado muy importante…

Opinion Personal

En resumen aborda el tema de la teoría del caos de forma llevadera y amena para los no iniciados en el tema, y sin duda, durante la primera media hora es muy intrigante. Y bueno para ser una película comercial tampoco se le puede pedir más XD.  A mi me gustó, aunque seguramente en cine independiente se le podría haber sacado mucho más partido.

TEORIA DEL CAOS:

La “Teoría del caos” o “Teoria de las estructuras disipativas” se asocia a estudios de la física y las matematicas. En contraposición con la teoria “determinista”  que  dice: que nada ocurre por el azar y que todo puede ser calculado si conocemos los valores iniciales. La Teoría del Caos afirma que el mundo no es previsible y determinado sino que es un “bucle” de equilibrio y desequilibrio. Es decir, que no puede ser previsible porque pasa tanto por estados estables y predecibles como por estados inestables y caóticos. Su ejemplo más famoso es “El Efecto Mariposa”.

CAUSA-EFECTO:

Las relaciones “causa-efecto” pueden dividirse de dos formas:

1. Cualitativas:
             a. Unidireccionales: A causa B, B causa C, etc…
             b. Independientes: A y B son idependientes entre si. Es decir no existe ni causa ni efecto
             c. Vinculos Circulares ( en bucle): A causa B, y B a su vez causa A, es decir, efecto y causa influyen mutuamente

2. Cuantitativas:
             a. Razonablemente proporcionales:  peq. causa –> peq. consecuencia,  grandes causas –> grandes consec.
             b. Una gran causa produce un efecto pequeño.
             c. Una pequeña causa produce un efecto muy grande. Esta es la responsable del “Efecto mariposa”.
                   Hay  muchos ejemplos de pequeñas causas que generan un efcto muy gande, a continuación se  mencionaran  unas cuantas: 
                    C.1. Efecto palanca: un pequeño movimiento de polea o palanca puede generar grandes efectos  sin el gran esfuerzo que requeriria.
                    C.2.Efecto gota: Una simple gota puede significar la diferencia entre una bañera llena o un desastre. 
                    C.3.Efecto interacción experimental:  la combinacion de fármacos aunq sea en pocas cantidades   puede producir un gran efecto en el organismo
                    C.4.La conversión masa-energía: Una pequeña masa puede desencadenar una gran cantidad de energia
                    C.5. El Efecto Mariposa

On a bien vieilli!

Quelques anciens de Notre-Dame-de-Pontmain

C’est-tu pas une belle gang, ça? Nous étions quelques anciens de l’école primaire Notre-Dame-de-Pontmain de Laval à bruncher ensemble en ce dimanche, 26 octobre 2008. Une journée à marquer d’une pierre blanche.

via Facebook | Photos de Notre-Dame-de-Pontmain

Il y a quelque-chose de profond dans le fait de revoir des amis d’enfance. Vraiment. C’est un peu difficile à verbaliser, mais ça se comprend bien.

Il y a un peu plus d’un an, je me demandais ce que mes amis étaient devenus. Je cherchais alors à contacter quelques personnes pour les inviter à mon anniversaire de mariage. C’est d’ailleurs en préparant cet anniversaire que j’ai parcouru des réseaux d’anciens. Suite à cet anniversaire, j’ai manifesté ma fierté d’avoir des amis si fascinants. Aujourd’hui, je souhaite de nouveau célébrer l’amitié.

Pour un papillon social, c’est pas très surprenant. J’aime entrer en contact avec les gens, que je les aie connus plus tôt ou non. Que voulez-vous, j’aime le monde. Tel que mentionné dans un billet précédent, je me suis autrefois senti ostracisé. Je sais pas s’il y a une causalité entre mon identité comme papillon social et mon enfance, mais je trouve que c’est un pattern intéressant: le type porté vers les autres, qui passe une enfance plutôt solitaire, devient un papillon social à l’âge adulte. L’image de la «chenille sociale» est assez forte aussi!

Outre la publication de cette photo, ce qui me motive à écrire ce billet c’est Facebook. Si si! Parce que ce petit groupe d’anciens poursuit la discussion. Parce qu’on se «retrouve», dans un sens très profond, grâce à Facebook. Et parce que j’ai revisité ma liste d’amis sur Facebook et je suis encore plus fier.

Voyez-vous, je créais une «liste d’amis» sur Facebook, pour ces anciens du primaire. Cette fonction de liste d’amis sur Facebook est un peu limitée mais elle peut être utile si, comme tout semble l’indiquer, notre groupe d’anciens décide d’organiser d’autres événements. Pour organiser le brunch, j’ai fait parvenir une invitation à tous les membres du groupe Facebook des anciens de notre école alors que j’aurais mieux fait de cibler ceux de ma «cohorte». C’est un petit détail pratique, mais ça m’a permis de réfléchir.

Parce qu’en créant cette liste d’amis, je me suis rendu compte à quel point j’ai une idée assez précise de ce qui me lie à chacun de mes contacts sur Facebook. Dans ce cas-ci, j’ai rapidement pu sélectionner ceux que j’ai rencontrés au primaire, ceux que j’ai connus au secondaire et ceux avec qui je suis allé au Cégep. Parmi les autres, il y a des blogueurs, des musiciens, des spécialistes de la bière et/ou du café, des collègues du milieu académique, quelques amis de mes amis, quelques anciens étudiants et quelques personnes qui ont manifesté un intérêt spécifique à mon égard. Pour le reste, ce sont des gens que j’ai rencontré en-ligne ou hors-ligne, généralement dans un contexte spécifique. Sur 471 contacts que j’ai sur Facebook à l’heure actuelle, moins d’une trentaine (27, pour être précis) que je n’étais pas en mesure d’identifier immédiatement. Parmi eux, peut-être trois ou quatre par rapport auxquels persiste une certaine ambiguïté. Et plusieurs personnes qui font partie de mon réseau direct mais que je n’ai pas rencontré très directement. En d’autres termes, des gens avec qui j’ai des liens moins étroits mais dont la présence dans mon réseau social est «pleine de sens», surtout si on pense aux fameux «liens faibles» (“weak ties”). D’ailleurs, ces liens faibles constituent une part importante de ce que j’ai tendance à appeler «l’effet du papillon social», par référence à l’effet papillon d’Edward Lorenz. Pour mémoire (selon TF1):

Prévisibilité : est-ce que le battement des ailes d’un papillon au Brésil peut déclencher une tornade au Texas?

Enfin… J’inclue surtout cette citation pour conserver quelques notes au sujet de cet effet. C’est une sorte de digression assez égoïste.

Toujours est-il que… Nous disions donc… Ah… Oui!

«Retrouver» mes amis, mes connaissances, mes liens, ça fait battre mes ailes de papillon social.

Flap flap!

Now my well read, University of Chicago graduating, philosophy/great books reading fans I am not going to write about the mathematical chaos theory (or for that matter the Butterfly Effect: “Does the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?”…you should know that Edward Lorenz died this May..for extra credit who was Lorenz?)  Anyway, I am referring to the chaotic system which is my brain function appearing to be randomly flitting from one subject to another. 

I am taking the day off from politics.  Finally the MSM (main stream media) has called McPalin out for lying (recall I did it in my post on Wednesday, Krugman of the Times didn’t get it until Friday, I am so ahead of the curve).  Plus today the Times finally called Mrs. Palin out for book banning…again I did that on Wednesday.  Unfortunately the Nobama campaign refuses to seize on any this, instead making ads about how great his ideas are.  Hey Nobama, guess what?!?  No one cares!  Hit McPalin back.  The Press isn’t going to win this one for you like they did in the primary.  Plus does anyone go to Nobama rallies anymore?  It seems he speaks to crowds of about 100 in schools and libraries.  Shades of Gore and Kerry.  YIKES!

So now I’m going to randomly shift gears and talk about some baby stuff that you guys think we like, but we really question:

Bob the Builder v. Handy Manny:  Here is my question: why does the white guy (Bob) have an engineering degree and can build whatever needs to be done but the Hispanic guy (Manny, presumably short for Manuel) is merely a handyman?  I mean you guys make this up.  Can someone please explain it to me?… like I’m a 5 week old.

WARNING: DETOUR FROM BABY LAND:  Movies:  Michael Clayton:  Saw it for the first time last night.  Clooney, superb.  Great script and direction by Tony Gilroy (also did the last 2 Bourne movies and appears in Clayton as the cab driver in the last scene).  The most important thing to me?  Clayton’s son in the movie named…you guessed it…Henry!

Teletubbies:  What the eff are these guys…gay or straight?  Who cares!  They are downright weird…I mean what is that language they speak.  I mean I can’t speak English, but at least I can read and write it.  The creator of that show must have been on some crack smokin, E induced mushroom haze to have come up with that.  Imagine all these guys at the pitch meeting for PBS sitting around a table making those crazy noises and showing artwork of ling-ling or whatever that purple bastard’s name is!

More TV:  Sprout Channel:  Don’t get me started.  Like Teletubbies on ‘roids.  Remember boys and girls, just say no to performance enhancing HGH.

Finally:  CLOWNS!!!!  Why do you guys thing we like this and aren’t actually, completely and utterly terrified by them.  First of all they are fully grown adults wearing weird ass make-up, stupid hair, funny shoes and a bulbus nose.  They make us CRY!  They don’t really speak, some have horns…which again are scary and they make weird balloon sculptures.  I mean these creatures are really really creepy.  Yet you guys in your zeal to impress us hire these weirdos to entertain at our parties and then wonder why we all go into some crazy crying tizzy fit.  Yet by continually hiring them, you are helping to support and maintain the clown economy.  I think my friend over at e*trade said it best:

That’s all for now.  I have to go watch my man Brett go beat up on the Brady-less Pats.  GO JETS!

Chaos theory …everyone who watched the movie Dasavatharam would have heard this word. The storyline of the movie is this theory. What is Chaos Theory ?? ..just continue reading to get some details on that ….

Chaos theory attempts to explain the fact that complex and unpredictable results can and will occur in systems that are sensitive to their initial conditions.

A common example of this is known as the Butterfly Effect. It states that, in theory, the flutter of a butterfly’s wings in China could, in fact, actually effect weather patterns in New York City, thousands of miles away. In other words, it is possible that a very small occurrence can produce unpredictable and sometimes drastic results by triggering a series of increasingly significant events.

Butterfly Effect - a plot of Lorenz attractor

Some more details here ….

It was Edward Lorenz, a meteorologist who first discovered evidence supporting chaos theory in 1960.This effect came to be known as the butterfly effect. The amount of difference in the starting points of the two curves is so small that it is comparable to a butterfly flapping its wings.

The flapping of a single butterfly’s wing today produces a tiny change in the state of the atmosphere. Over a period of time, what the atmosphere actually does diverges from what it would have done. So, in a month’s time, a tornado that would have devastated the Indonesian coast doesn’t happen. Or maybe one that wasn’t going to happen, does. (Ian Stewart, Does God Play Dice? The Mathematics of Chaos, )

This phenomenon, common to chaos theory, is also known as sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Just a small change in the initial conditions can drastically change the long-term behavior of a system.

Chaos has already had a lasting effect on science, yet there is much still left to be discovered. Many scientists believe that twentieth century science will be known for only three theories: relativity, quantum mechanics, and chaos. Aspects of chaos show up everywhere around the world, from the currents of the ocean and the flow of blood through fractal blood vessels to the branches of trees and the effects of turbulence.

Chaos has inescapably become part of modern science. As chaos changed from a little-known theory to a full science of its own, it has received widespread publicity. Chaos theory has changed the direction of science: in the eyes of the general public, physics is no longer simply the study of subatomic particles in a billion-dollar particle accelerator, but the study of chaotic systems and how they work.

..from all the info I got about the Chaos theory, I can say that it is interesting. I always agree with the saying  ” Life has reasons and Logics”. Every ‘happening’ in this world has a reason.   “Life is beautiful“….always.

“Efeito borboleta é um termo que se refere às condições iniciais dentro da teoria do caos. Este efeito foi analisado pela primeira vez em 1963 por Edward Lorenz. Segundo a cultura popular, a teoria apresentada, o bater de asas de uma simples borboleta poderia influenciar o curso natural das coisas e, assim, talvez provocar um tufão do outro lado do mundo…”

Fontes: haha.nu , Metacafe , Connect2Earth , Wikipédia , NewScientistTech

Parafrasando Paul Valéry, l’architettura è stata istituita, e la propria specificità è stata fissata in un’epoca ben distinta dalla nostra, e da uomini il cui potere d’azione sulla materia era insignificante rispetto alla nostra. Ed Ancora:

[...] lo stupefacente aumento dei nostri mezzi, la loro duttilità e la loro precisione, le idee e le abitudini che essi introducono garantiscono cambiamenti imminenti e molto profondi dell’industria del Bello. [...] C’è da aspettarsi che novità di una simile portata trasformino tutta la tecnica artistica, e che così agiscano sulla stessa invenzione fino magari a modificare meravigliosamente la nozione stessa di arte.

La citazione, che apre il saggio di walter Benjamin, L’opera d’arte nell’epoca della sua riproducibilità tecnica, dal punto di vista contemporaneo appare ampiamente condivisibile. Ciò che colpirà estremamente Benjamin all’inizio del novecento, ciò che garantisce cambiamenti, furono le nuove possibilità offerte da un lato dall’affinamento di tecniche già esistenti, come ad esempio tutta la tecnica che ruota attorno la produzione grafica, e questo Wassily Kandisky lo sapeva bene, e, soprattutto, dall’altro, l’elaborazione di nuove tecnologie da cui derivarono nuove tecniche, come ad esempio la fotografia ed il cinematografo. Dunque, se cent’anni fa era la riproducibilità la grande innovazione, oggi qual’è l’aspetto che più dovrebbe fomentare la nostra creatività? I concetti di rete e di globalizzazione da soli non bastano, perchè esse non sono altro che potentissime tecnologie di riproduzione, benchè non sto certo negando che da una nuova quantità non nasca una diversa qualità. Quali sono dunque i nuovi strumenti messi a disposizione dei progettisti? Probabilmente qualcosa che ha a che fare con la rappresentazione. Quì occorre far appello ad una sfumatura: infatti, se è vero che internet, come distributore e moltiplicatore di dati non è altro che un’ampliamento di un concetto già esistente, è altrettanto vero che lo sviluppo di calcolatori sempre più potenti, e soprattutto, sempre più versatili, su cui si sono progettati software ad hoc come se fossero abiti, ha permesso di sviluppare un qualcosa di veramente nuovo: l’autogenerazione delle forme.

La strada che porta alle forma passa dal disegno al processo, in cui non è più il prodotto finito ad essere determinato, ma di una serie parametri iniziali che, ripercorrendo l’effetto farfalla di Edward Lorenz, finiscono per concretizzare l’impensabile. L’ideazione della matrice da cui si sviluppa e prende forma l’opera diventa l’atto creativo. La possibilità tanto auspicata da Wolf Prix, fondatore insieme a Helmut Swiczinsky e Michael Holzer dei Coop Himmelb(l)au, di poter affrontare una progettazione ad occhi chiusi, o quasi, sembra non essere più pura retorica. Ci si avvicina anche alle premonizioni utopiche di un architetto come John M. Johansen, dove l’edificio veniva progettato non più nei suoi dettagli, ma nella sua morfabilità, ossia il processo di crescita. Dunque la stessa pertinenza della definizione di progetto architettonico viene messo in causa, in quanto non sono più le altezze dei solai od il disegno della facciata ad essere le scelte da fare di un progetto, ma la sua matrice formale, modificata da imput che possono anche variare nel tempo, modificando l’assetto del tutto, probabilmente anche la struttura, e volendo procedendo anche retroattivamente. Si entra in campi per cui per poter accedere è necessario abbandonare l’architettura. Benvenuti nel Trans.

Edward Lorenz passed away last Wednesday. He was a meteorologist that introduced the world to numerical weather prediction back in the 1960’s. He discovered deterministic chaos and in doing so, revolutionized the way science dealt with natural processes.

I highly recommend the book “Chaos“, written by James Gleick, as a down-to-earth explanation of nonlinear mathematics. This book was instrumental in stoking my curiosity of the natural world and trying to understand explanations of the things we experience every day.

I have done simple numerical experiments much like the one Dr. Lorenz performed in 1961, the results of which were published in his seminal paper, Deterministic Nonperiodic Flow. It remains fascinating to this day that extremely minute changes in initial conditions can have such a large effect on future system states.

The New York Times article I link to above has another good tidbit: Henri Poincaré showed that the gravitational dance of as few as three heavenly bodies was hopelessly complex to calculate, even though the underlying equations of motion seemed simple.

I was fortunate enough to attend a symposium honoring Dr. Lorenz a few years back. I was stunned to learn I was sitting in the same room, only a couple of rows back, from this great man. Hearing from a long line of former students and colleagues, learning how Dr. Lorenz sparked their subsequently successful careers, was very moving.

I’ll leave you with the Lorenz strange attractor. Rest in peace, Dr. Lorenz.

Mi è dispiaciuto.

Ho letto sul giornale che è morto Edward Lorenz, il papà della teoria del caos.

Qualcuno si ricorda che se ne parla anche in Jurassic Park?!

Metereologo del MITico MIT Massachussetts Institute of Technology. Nel 1960 creò un semplicissimo ed essenziale modello della metreologia. Era una semplice serie numerica che rappresentava l’intensità e la direzione del vento. La particolarità del modello era che, pur essendo semplicissimo, ripeteva andamenti simili ma sempre diversi. Qualcosa di molto simile all’andamento dei fenomeni naturali.

Un girno accadde un fatto che segnerà la vita di Lorenz. Provò a introdurre nel suo modello i numeri estratti da una serie stampata qualche giorno prima. E lì verificò qualcosa di totalmente inatteso. La serie numerica che ne uscì, invece di riprodurre fedelmente quella stampata nella simulazione precedente, iniziò a divergere, prima impercettibilmente, poi sempre con maggiore evidenza, per prodursi poi in ondeggiamenti, simili alla serie originale, ma di intensità diversa.

Come poteva accadere che immettendo in un modello matematico, nello stesso modello matemetico, dei valori da questo prodotti, il modello proseguiva producendo valori diversi rispetto a quelli della simulazione precedente.

Sarebbe come dire  2+2= 4 +2 = 6+2 = 8  ma partendo da 4 + 2 e aggingendo 2 al risultato si arriva a un numero diverso da 8. Impossibile!

E infatti, Lorenz si accorse che questo paradosso era il frutto di un’approssimazione nei dati presentati nella stampa.

Se la serie calcolata fosse stata 2 + 2,5 = 4,5 + 2,5 = 7 + 2,5 = 9,5  la stampante avrebbe restituito i valori 4  e 7 ma immettendo nel modello il valore 4 si otteneva 4 +2,5 = 6,5 +2,5 = 9.

Naturalmente l’equazione di Lorenz era più complessa e l’approssimazione più piccola, pochi decimali. Ma la particolare configurazione dell’equazione creava enormi differenze dopo poche iterazioni.

Che signinficato pratico ha questa vicenda?

Se molti fenomeni naturali sono ben descritti da equazioni del tipo di quella utilizzata da Lorenz, è sufficiente un piccolissima influenza, quasi impercettibile, un non nulla,  per provocare enormi variazioni nei fenomeni osservati.

Questo spiega, fra l’altro, la difficoltà, tutt’ora presente, nel formulare previsioni metreologiche di medio e lungo periodo.

Ma in questa storia c’è un altro lato interessante.

Questa osservazione fu fatta da Lorenz nel ‘61 e pubblicata la prima volta nel ‘63. Rimase quasi del tutto inosservata fino alla metà degli anni ‘70, quando Lorenz decise di presentarla in modo molto più suggestivo. Il titolo della sua relazione era:

“Può il battito d’ali d’una farfalla scatenare un tornado in Texas?”

Da allora la sua scoperta ebbe una risonanza mondiale, e Lorenz diventò il profeta della teoria del caos. La teoria espanse i propri confini dalla metreologia fino a diventare quasi una filosofia, un modo di interpretare la realtà, una visione del mondo.

Questo dimostra che il modo in cui un argomento viene presentato conta e conta parecchio.

A proposito dell’effetto farfalla guarda questo video )

http://video.libero.it/app/play?id=92e46c5f81602f9aae72012fea232182

Grazie Lorenz

In a Mass at Washington’s Nationals Park on Thursday, Pope Benedict said that, despite the pedophilia scandal, American Catholics should still love their priests. The pope added that, when loving priests, American Catholics should remember to clarify that the loving was consensual.

On Wednesday, a crowd at the White House sang “Happy Birthday” to Pope Benedict. While the Pontiff enjoyed the song, he told aides he would have preferred it if people had sung “Fergalicious.”

In an interview this week, Barack Obama said that as president, he would “immediately review” potential crimes of the Bush administration. John McCain responded that he would not only review the crimes, he would continue to commit them.

Revising his stance on global warming, President Bush will propose a new target for stopping the growth of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions by 2025. To help achieve this goal, the president will no longer ask foreign dignitaries to pull his finger.

On Monday Iraqi troops rescued a CBS correspondent who had been kidnapped in Basra two months ago. The rescue operation was launched after the rejection of CBS’s demand that in exchange for the correspondent the kidnappers take Katie Couric.

A U.S. Supreme Court decision Wednesday upholding the use of lethal injection may result in the resumption of executions in California before the end of the year. As a precaution, authorities have ordered all death row inmates to hold off writing their Christmas lists.

American Airlines pilots picketed in nine US cities and London on Tuesday, blaming the company’s management for delays and poor service. The protests were scheduled to start at 9 am but didn’t get going until 10:30.

Priscilla Presley was voted off of “Dancing with the Stars” on Tuesday’s show. Presley was so upset by the news that she almost changed her facial expression.

Gwyneth Paltrow told Vogue magazine that she suffered from post partum depression following the birth of her son two years ago. Doctors then advised Paltrow that she just may have been depressed from listening to husband Chris Martin’s albums.

Prosecutors are recommending that Wesley Snipes serves three years in prison following his conviction on charges of tax evasion. Snipes faces one year for failing to file a return, and two years for making “To Wong Foo, Thanks For Everything, Julie Newmar.”

Martha Stewart’s dog Paw Paw, a familiar face on her television show and in her magazine, has died of renal failure at the age of 12. Paw Paw’s death makes Stewart the family’s sole surviving bitch.

The winner of this year’s Acme World Oyster Eating Contest in New Orleans set a new world record by consuming 420 oysters in 10 minutes. He then set another world record by throwing up 420 oysters in 10 seconds.

According to experts, sending nude photos over cell phone cameras has become normal courtship behavior in teenage dating circles. Health experts worry that this could spark an outbreak of textually transmitted diseases.

On Tuesday a cougar was shot dead by Chicago police on the city’s north side. Police only shot the cougar after they failed to get rid of it by changing its name to “Mellencamp.”

In a radical new operation, surgeons in San Diego have successfully removed a man’s appendix through his mouth. After the surgery, the man immediately requested a new dentist.

MIT professor Edward Lorenz, who developed the concept of the Butterfly Effect, died Wednesday at age 90 at his home in Massachusetts. Lorenz died after an ant in Africa stepped on a pebble.

CBS announcer Bobby Clampett apologized this week after referring to Chinese golfer Liang Wen-Chong as “the chinaman” during last Sunday’s Masters broadcast. In his defense, Clampett pointed out that he only resorted to the epithet after Liang put pee-pee in his Coke.

Scientists say the earth makes a constant sound undetectable to the human ear, which they call the earth’s hum. Scientists add that the earth hums because it doesn’t know the words.

Houston Astros shortstop Miguel Tejada admitted last week that he’s actually 33 years old, two years older than listed in his records. However, Tejada’s MySpace profile still says he’s 19.

And finally, legendary Disney animator Ollie Johnson died Monday at age ninety-five. In lieu of flowers, friends are encouraged to send sympathy cards containing hidden messages about sex.