Random network connectivity can be delayed, but with explosive results, new study finds
http://www.physorg.com/print156087603.html

and this will give you an idea of how i abstract and see what you can do with things. its a talent, as i have not found that others find the behavior boring or common when they see it.

In the classic model of random networks, after a certain number of connections are made, overall connectivity begins to rise in a steep curve (ER). A new model that delays this transition results in overall connectivity occurring almost instantaneously at a critical moment, shown in this graph by the upward turn of the flat red line (PR). Credit: Raissa D’Souza/UC Davis
In the classic model of random network formation, known as the Erdös-Rényi model, connections are added from among a large collection of points one at a time by randomly selecting a pair of points to connect. Two points are considered to be in the same group if it is possible to go from one to another along a continuous line of connections. A group remains very small until the number of connections reaches at least half the number of points. After that, the growth of the largest group follows a steep upward curve.
D’Souza, along with co-investigators Dimitris Achlioptas at UC Santa Cruz and Joel Spencer at New York University, wanted to explore how a network would change if there were an element of choice injected into its formation. In their mathematical model, they considered two random connections in each step, and selected only one. To make their choice, they multiplied the number of points in the group linked to one end of a connection by the number of points linked to its other end. And in each case, they chose the connection that yielded the lower product.
As they expected, this process delayed the onset of super-connectivity. But the team’s analysis provided strong evidence for a new phenomenon: when a system is suppressed like this, it builds up a kind of pressure. “This algorithm yields a very violent transition,” Achlioptas said, “reaching a critical moment at which the probability that two points are connected jumps from essentially zero to more than 50 percent instantaneously.”

and here is a comment i sent to a friend in which i talk with… (but he has little time to discuss, so a lot of the cool stuff just fritters away back into the ether like a super wave on the ocean that appears at a convergence of waves, then as they pass through each other disappears from whence it came appearing to have no origin).

This has a lot of bearing on the math I have been trying to get across.
Cells are a network, and this network has a dividing plane, but it also has a linking plane. The dividing plane creates the structure for building larger, and then there is a linking plane that insures that even if things develop in another lineage that they can converge.

(that would mean all this disincentive to work is a means of keeping as few as possible from reaching a point where their pumps are primed. Rather than they not know that its not zero sum, they know that it IS not zero sum, and so there is no defense through acquisition or collection, only defense by preventing others from climbing the hills. The whole planet COULD share in wealth and good living, just as everyone in the US does. it doesn’t come at the expense of others, which is the secret, for if we believe it does, we will work to prevent anyone new from climbing the hill that is so unfair, rather than everyone get together and climb the hill and share the view with those who would stand alone).
This is some really cool stuff… but we will see whether it actually gets applied to the things that it relates to.
The information scientists are not immune to the same problems that the biologists have, they just express it differently.
This was why so many of our esteemed creating people were like me (not that I am like them in success), in that they did not learn one high vertical truth. they didn’t seek one view.
Unlike our current culture that strives to have one answer and one view, and one perspective and oh how that sounds nice
But that is nothing but the stagnation of a rock… it’s a hell that sounds nice when presented but horrible once experienced
[ask the women failing and miserable “trying to have it all”, ignoring their biology ripping their hair out and more (just as one example of many)]
But if you learn all these different disciplines you then rise above them. you are no longer in the glass house afraid to throw stones, you are outside the glass house and have a place to throw them, and a place to enter and contemplate one way, and ability to leave that perspective and go to another and see it from that way.
With more roads and destinations you are no longer fooled that there is only one reality, only one glass house, only one “truth”… there are many views, and they all converge on one truth called reality…
Rashomon resonates because that is a deep nature to how reality is…

” Ideology trumps logic again, but it is our money that is being wasted by these fools.”

Its almost like Obama is playing politics with science!

Probably only if Congress lifts it’s late 90s ban on embryo destroying research…

I’m no scientist, but I remember a book that is well executed for the popular audience: Genome: Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters (1999), by Matt Ridley (former Science Editor of the Economist who ended us as non-executive chairman at Norther Rock!).

http://www.amazon.com/Genome-Autobiography-Species-Chapters-P-S/dp/0060894083/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236827970&sr=1-1

I’m sure that some of it is out-of-date or disproved by now, but I remember his explanations of telomeres, the nature of cancer, evolutionary battles between the X and Y chromosomes that determine gender, and the idea that RNA is the ancestor of DNA and uses DNA to reproduce itself. That’s not what I remember from high school biology. Very cool stuff.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/us/politics/07stem.html?_r=1&scp=9&sq=Stem%20Cell%20Research%20Ban%20Obama&st=cse

“To separate science and politics” huh? Any fool can see that federal funding of specific scientific research is clearly connecting politics with science! It’s no wonder that the NYTimes is going under when either they are idiots or they treat their readership like idiots!

Actually, not using federal funds on stem-cell research is effectively separating politics and science.

There’s no clear indication that federal financing is necessary for scientific experiments. There are plenty of charities and private benefactors/companies that would love to discover stem-cell therapies and would fund scientific research into that field.

Ironically, Obama’s comments apply to his predecessor’s policies but not his own.

For the record, I am not opposed to stem-cell research. I would actually welcome it because my mother has type I diabetes. But considering the ethical considerations, I would prefer it to be privately funded.

thank you… and thanks to all the others that said something nice..

i am trying to be succint… but i am passionate, love people, want to share, and dont realize others have hard times with it… (well dont relize at what point that starts really).

i was so worried that i railed on… without feedback that is truthful… its hard to know where your standing… after all, if i choose to listen to lee and mitsu, i am nuts… i if i choose to listen to a hanger on, i am great… and each side can make you feel that way too…

succint… that was the nicest compliment i have received in a while.. especially when worried as to diong justice to neo’s permissiveness in her home.

Not really as there are no real examples of this in the bio papers… not that I am an expert that has surveyed them all (an impossibility).

Most of my work is in applied mathematics in software. And most of the literature on feed forward is more related to control systems, like in factories, and in software things.

There is a lot of ‘wrong’ views that are out there… and this is besides the political games or in some ways abstractly because of them. Like the nature nurture argument. It’s a completely false useless point…. to think that the data given to a spreadsheet is what defnies the spread sheet, is ridiculous. but when you talk of people, then what they take in and store and act on, like data in a spread sheet. Takes on meaning that has no meaning.

However among the not so bright, it’s seems like an easy way to make a contribution and be rewarded… we took 200k and ran some studies, and we found that protocagnatasis aureous is 63% nature, and 37% nurture… and then go on to show how you got that, and delve into process, and ignore meaningful conclusion. In other way it’s a high faluting way to get people who could be smart, but are crippled, to waste resources doing busy work. because they believe ni the labor concept of value…the more busy work you do, the more valuable what it is you must be doing.

In order to start delving into my work, since it isn’t published and the doctor I am working with is a socialist who thinks he is being taken care of (but anyone who gives up on their own interests in favor of their keepers will eventually someday find out that they weren’t kept, they were used. And their failure to act accordingly in the deal, sentenced them to the future they have, not what could have been. The ‘winners’ will have more children, will have more familial success, and your line will become anemic. Darwins survival concepts basically say that a creature who doesn’t know its own interests, and works for others interests putting their own on hold, is really a bad contribution to the future.

First start with networks. Not the real kind but the types. and don’t worry as to how information moves within them. that way you can start to see that different networks have different structures and those structures lead to imposing preferential rules and things over others. (try to remain neutral in that you don’t care what the rules are, but the fact that the structure imposes them, and not all structures are the same).

To an IE (information engineer), each of these things have properties to them. to a biologist, unless they reinvent the insight of the information people, when looking at biological information systems… everything will have to wait till they get these structures and say… oh.. X imposes Y and forbids Z and Z’

The other thing is to try to get away from the blue print model.. its wrong. period. there is little in it to save it at all.. and it will be decades before they realize it (I have no illusions that I will make a dent in things. probably not, and later people will look and say, look at that… wow.. which is more the case than not).

Feed forward networks, and related things like random number generators, use the current step to create some input for the next step.

Here is how basic it is… yet the biologists were tauight something else (but not directly… I don’t think they actually teach it, its just the terms everyone uses to be understood, and after a while they were taken too seriously, and so are hard to change. this is different than injecting false information… )

We (humans) grow from one cell (fusion of two), to an end result of some 60 trillion cells. Once glance at twins matching finger prints will tell you that EVERY cell has a position to take up.

And so to understand that, we took a model we understood that can create end results in which every part has a defined place. it was natural to do so.

But for me, I wanted to grow solutions. And so kept hitting walls… a big one being that how do you integrate changes into a blue print model that does not overturn the whole thing like central planning making arbitrary changes?

Anyone who has ever seen the wonderful movie (cant remember the title) where a couple buy a house, and they try to move to the country, and it becomes this white elephant as seeming innocuous things, force the complete restructuring of the whole place. the best classical scene of this is when the architect tries to figure out why it was 10k for moving some flag stones. What happened was the constructuion workers did the job right, and the request is easy to make witout knowing what it entails (hint hint to obama). That is I want a flagstone here, a drain and a nice table to work on my plants… ended up rerouting the plumbing, the electrical, the drain… support joists, and so on… there was no need to question the person paying, is there? service with a smile..

In fact the blueprint model is what opens up the argument that god had to make things whole (while the whole argyumetn is a waste. God could have also made natural selection. The argument presupposes that god isnt any smarter than the person making the assertion!!!)

It also doesn’t explain how it expands. And so forth… the problem is huge, and so large no one is paying attention to it yet. they will, because as time goes by, the model will fail.

[edited for length by neo-neocon]

You may want to hold onto that line as a repeater for the next few years.