Rob,
Ahh, now you're talking.  I too have been long fascinated by the dynamics
of complex systems, especially emergent behavior.  Hollands "Hidden Order"
is a great source of ideas and approaches for complex software systems.
Anyone up for implementing ECHO in Squeak?  Also, Kauffman's previous work
"At Home in the Universe" contains an excellent but simple experiment to
describe his NK models (the buttons and string example) that would make a
great interactive essay.  Almost 5 years ago, Steve Burbeck and I
implemented something akin to his random boolean networks in Squeak as part
of our research into Self Configuring Systems at IBM.  It's truly amazing
how quickly such system's lock into the "frozen" or "highly ordered"
regime, even starting from a completely (pseudo)random network of
interacting nodes with random goals.  Very counterintuitive.  This research
has led us to develop techniques for harnessing and steering emergent
behavior in the service of some very ambitious research goals, namely
human-like cognition in machines.  Yes, in Squeak.  Most of the details are
all under wraps of course and we expect a number of years of work ahead to
achieve the goal, but some of the progress we are making is very promising.
Think feedback loops, lots of them, intersecting each other, then go and
contemplate a whirlpool vortex in your local creek or bathtub for awhile.
Sorry, flush toilets won't do, on either side of the equator. ;-)

While I'm on the subject of complex adaptive systems (CAS) and Squeak, has
anyone spent any cycles considering the irreversibility of a Squeak image?
Ilya Prigogine, Nobel laureate in chemistry, wrote an excellent if
difficult book on complexity and irreversibility called "Order out of
Chaos", back in 1989, but it seems to be out of print.  I haven't read his
latest work, "The End of Certainty : Time, Chaos, and the New Laws of
Nature" by Isabelle Stengers and Ilya Prigogine, but it seems to be on the
same track.  His preoccupation with the so called "Arrow of Time" could be
very enlightening if applied to software development, especially in the
dynamical social context of the Squeak community.

FYI, I recently found an excellent online introduction to Chaos and
Complexity in a rather unorthodox place, http://www.cna.org/isaac/lw1.pdf.
Warning, its a bit of a fat download for the narrowbanded.

Regards,
Sam

Sam S. Adams, IBM Distinguished Engineer, IBM Research
tie line 444-0736, outside 919-254-0736, email: ssadams at us.ibm.com
<<Hebrews 11:6, Proverbs 3:5-6, Romans 1:16-17, I Corinthians 1:10>>



                                                                                                                                        
                    "Withers,                                                                                                           
                    Robert"              To:     "'squeak at cs.uiuc.edu'" <squeak at cs.uiuc.edu>                                            
                    <rwithers at qual       cc:                                                                                            
                    laby.com>            Subject:     RE: Squeakland Evolution project thingy                                           
                                                                                                                                        
                    05/31/2001                                                                                                          
                    11:46 AM                                                                                                            
                    Please respond                                                                                                      
                    to squeak                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                        



Sam, Sorry about that.  You're absolutely right; we shouldn't go into the
faith issues.

I meant to question technical merits of evolution, as opposed to other
mechanisms describing organic system formation, with the goal of doing
simulations in Squeak.  I am intrigued by a system capable of negotiating
distributed meta-services with feedback mechanisms to drive configuration
and activity.  John Holland developed the original "Selectrons" system that
used a blackboard and a bucket brigade feedback mechanism.  He was
simulating thought processes.

Rob

PS.  is there an essay on comparative religion from an Islamic perspective
about?  That would be interesting!

-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Adams [mailto:ssadams at us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:06 AM
To: squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: Squeakland Evolution project thingy


After carefully reading the many recent posts on this topic, I would like
to strongly suggest that those on the list who want to discuss matters of
faith, and that includes the faith in evolution, chaos, complexity, or God,
please take them to another forum.  As I understand it, the Squeak
community is one based on a common interest in using and advancing certain
software technologies, not personal ideologies (scientific, religious, or
otherwise).  It is one thing to discuss astrophysical simulation (at any
scale) or generative variation/selection (evolutionary) algorithms, but
this "we, the enlightened of science" vs "they, the endarkened of faith"
kind of discussion presumes a uniformity of belief on this list  and
presses a defacto statement of faith on its membership.  I do not think any
of us either believe this uniformity exists or want this result, so please
have some consideration for those of your Squeak "brethren"(and "sistren"
!) who may not share your ideology or wish to discuss it on this list.

Do we really want this already very full list to be cluttered with such
things?  If you quote Dawkins or Kaufman (both of which I read), not for
technical reference but in defense of your ideology, how would you react if
others quote Jesus, Paul, or selections from Ecclesiastes (which I also
read, and believe) with equal force in defence of theirs?
Innapropriate for the list?  "Go and do likewise" - Jesus

As for the *content* of applications that some member of the list *uses*
Squeak to create, I do not believe the list should stand in judgement as an
open forum.  What anyone posts on BobsSuperSwiki, like any swiki, is their
own responsibility, unless of course the swiki master sets and enforces
limits.  This should be true for the 8 year old in an open school, the
members of SqC or anyone else.  How would you react to a long discussion on
the list of the literary and spiritual merits of an interactive essay on
the book of Philippians or, say, an interactive essay on comparative
religion from an Islamic perspective?  But would that essay be allowed on
the SuperSwiki as an example use of Squeak technology?

My point is this.  If we succeed in creating a truly wonderful environment
for dynamic and interactive media, and succeed in getting many in the world
to use it, they will create there own content without our permission or
ideological agreement.  As a technologist, that is what I expect and that's
good enough for me.  As a christian, I choose to take my stand on matters
of faith in other forums.  Go and do likewise.

Sam S. Adams, IBM Distinguished Engineer, IBM Research
tie line 444-0736, outside 919-254-0736, email: ssadams at us.ibm.com
<<Hebrews 11:6, Proverbs 3:5-6, Romans 1:16-17, I Corinthians 1:10>>