Why conversational equations and emergence (General)

by romansh , Sunday, March 30, 2014, 19:33 (3889 days ago) @ David Turell
edited by unknown, Sunday, March 30, 2014, 19:48


> > Romansh: I ask, because by the definition you used ... of a material construction but itself is immaterial, to my understanding a pattern would fit the definition.
> 
> That appears to be correct.
But for me this seems to be at least partially in conflict with when you replied to Tony.->>>>Tony: So, to answer your question, it depends on the pattern, and what the end result of the pattern is. Chemistry and biology have numerous example of emergent patterns that provide new and unexpected functionality.
>>>That fits my concept of emergence. A new unexpected functionality. Airplane parts don't look ilke they can fly. Put them togetehr and their design makes for flight. Design means expectation of the modality that appears. Looking at the way apes live, no one would expect evolved human beings to have the kind of consciousness they have, which maks it so unusual.
The way I understand it, Tony said not all patterns are emergent and you seem to agree.-A jet engine compressor was never meant to fly independently of the rest of the plane, so it is not surprising it does not fly. The fuselage and wings don't fly as well but they do glide and I fully expected them to glide. -An unexpected functionality is based on a faulty model. If we had been discussing unexpected antagonistic effects rather than synergic effects then we would not be having this discussion of emergence at all.