11 November 2023

On Simplicity: Simple Rules

"Of course we have still to face the question why these analogies between different mechanisms - these similarities of relation-structure - should exist. To see common principles and simple rules running through such complexity is at first perplexing though intriguing. When, however, we find that the apparently complex objects around us are combinations of a few almost indestructible units, such as electrons, it becomes less perplexing." (Kenneth Craik, "The Nature of Explanation", 1943)

"Simple rules can have complex consequences. This simple rule has such a wealth of implications that it is worth examining in detail. It is the far from self-evident guiding principle of reductionism and of most modern investigations into cosmic complexity. Reductionism will not be truly successful until physicists and cosmologists demonstrate that the large-scale phenomena of the world arise from fundamental physics alone. This lofty goal is still out of reach. There is uncertainty not only in how physics generates the structures of our world but also in what the truly fundamental rules of physics are. (William Poundstone, "The Recursive Universe", 1985)

"As glimpsed by physicists, Nature's rules are simple, but also intricate: Different rules are subtly related to each other. The intricate relations between the rules produce interesting effects in many physical situations. [...] Nature's design is not only simple, but minimally so, in the sense that were the design any simpler, the universe would be a much duller place." (Anthony Zee, "Fearful Symmetry: The Search for Beauty in Modern Physics", 1986)

"All reality is a game. Physics at its most fundamental, the very fabric of our universe, results directly from the interaction of certain fairly simple rules, and chance; the same description may be applied to the best, most elegant and both intellectually and aesthetically satisfying games. By being unknowable, by resulting from events which, at the sub-atomic level, cannot be fully predicted, the future remains malleable, and retains the possibility of change, the hope of coming to prevail; victory, to use an unfashionable word. In this, the future is a game; time is one of its rules." (Iain Banks, "The Player of Games", 1988)

"One reason nature pleases us is its endless use of a few simple principles: the cube-square law; fractals; spirals; the way that waves, wheels, trig functions, and harmonic oscillators are alike; the importance of ratios between small primes; bilateral symmetry; Fibonacci series, golden sections, quantization, strange attractors, path-dependency, all the things that show up in places where you don’t expect them [...] these rules work with and against each other ceaselessly at all levels, so that out of their intrinsic simplicity comes the rich complexity of the world around us. That tension - between the simple rules that describe the world and the complex world we see - is itself both simple in execution and immensely complex in effect. Thus exactly the levels, mixtures, and relations of complexity that seem to be hardwired into the pleasure centers of the human brain - or are they, perhaps, intrinsic to intelligence and perception, pleasant to anything that can see, think, create? - are the ones found in the world around us." (John Barnes, "Mother of Storms", 1994)

"With the growing interest in complex adaptive systems, artificial life, swarms and simulated societies, the concept of 'collective intelligence' is coming more and more to the fore. The basic idea is that a group of individuals (e. g. people, insects, robots, or software agents) can be smart in a way that none of its members is. Complex, apparently intelligent behavior may emerge from the synergy created by simple interactions between individuals that follow simple rules." (Francis Heylighen, "Collective Intelligence and its Implementation on the Web", 1999)

"Through self-organization, the behavior of the group emerges from the collective interactions of all the individuals. In fact, a major recurring theme in swarm intelligence (and of complexity science in general) is that even if individuals follow simple rules, the resulting group behavior can be surprisingly complex - and remarkably effective. And, to a large extent, flexibility and robustness result from self-organization." (Eric Bonabeau & Christopher Meyer, "Swarm Intelligence: A Whole New Way to Think About Business", Harvard Business Review, 2001)

"Chaos theory revealed that simple nonlinear systems could behave in extremely complicated ways, and showed us how to understand them with pictures instead of equations. Complexity theory taught us that many simple units interacting according to simple rules could generate unexpected order. But where complexity theory has largely failed is in explaining where the order comes from, in a deep mathematical sense, and in tying the theory to real phenomena in a convincing way. For these reasons, it has had little impact on the thinking of most mathematicians and scientists." (Steven Strogatz, "Sync: The Emerging Science of Spontaneous Order", 2003)

"[a complex system is] a system in which large networks of components with no central control and simple rules of operation give rise to complex collective behavior, sophisticated information processing, and adaptation via learning or evolution." (Melanie Mitchell, "Complexity: A Guided Tour", 2009)

"[...] the Game of Life, in which a few simple rules executed repeatedly can generate a surprising degree of complexity. Recall that the game treats squares, or pixels, as simply on or off (filled or blank) and the update rules are given in terms of the state of the nearest neighbours. The theory of networks is closely analogous. An electrical network, for example, consists of a collection of switches with wires connecting them. Switches can be on or off, and simple rules determine whether a given switch is flipped, according to the signals coming down the wires from the neighbouring switches. The whole network, which is easy to model on a computer, can be put in a specific starting state and then updated step by step, just like a cellular automaton. The ensuing patterns of activity depend both on the wiring diagram (the topology of the network) and the starting state. The theory of networks can be developed quite generally as a mathematical exercise: the switches are called ‘nodes’ and the wires are called ‘edges’. From very simple network rules, rich and complex activity can follow." (Paul Davies, "The Demon in the Machine: How Hidden Webs of Information Are Solving the Mystery of Life", 2019)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

On Hypothesis Testing III

  "A little thought reveals a fact widely understood among statisticians: The null hypothesis, taken literally (and that’s the only way...