h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

A network of agents sending messages to one another and somehow building something amazingly complex out of chaos...
Does this remind you of anything?
Am I alone in thinking that this entry sounds like a perfect description of h2g2?

No you're not, and it doesn't just apply to H2G2. What is a community/culture/society if not the emergent property of lots of locally interacting communicators?

It certainly seems to explain the behaviour of my socks.

Hey- isn'y this just chaos theory? If it is it was first thought of by a guy looking at weather patterns, and is closely linked to quantum. No one knows how quantum works but I'm sure its got nothing to do with socks.

I know how quantum works, and it's everything to do with socks.

Chaos theory and complexity theory are the same thing. Chaos theory is not the fashionable thing to call it nowadays, and what do you mean JUST chaos theory? Chaos theory is the best thing in the world! It's better than falafel with a really fresh tomato!

It most certainly relates to socks!

Except the socks are denying everything. This is all part of a series of relatively simple plots (on the part of the socks) which were combined into a very complex conspiracy to cover up the chaos with a more socially acceptable term.

Wise up, before it's too late.

Either that or go barefoot.

Actually there are some differences between Complexity Theory and Chaos Theory. You could look at it that Complexity Theory deals with the origin of things, where Choas Theory deals in the same manner with the future of things.

There is, of course, an overlap in these two. Chaos Theory is regarded in some circles as a subset of Complexity Theory. Particularly by my socks, who are somewhat snobish about the Math involved.

It would seem the theory is that it takes two simplicities to make for even the beginnings of a complexity. In order to fascilitate discussion of Complexity Theory, do we first need to determine the nature of the basic source of Complexity, i.e. Simplicity? Sounds simple, but gets awfully boring very quickly... really, really simple things are... well, simple. Like geometrical dots, they tend to have no features that distinguish them; a state of existence that just barely makes it past nothingness.

It follows that if two nothingnesses get together, they tend to make a somewhat larger nothingness or beget one or more other nothingnesses that have nothing to recommend them. "Hi. I'm nothinginess, begotten of nothingness." "Great, kid. What does your Dad do?" "Er, nothing."

That's not too complicated is it? I've got nothing to add right now.

So- complex behavour derives from simple structure, and sinple behaviour derives from complex struture, right? And if you think your sock sare lost then they will be. And if you measure your socks with a sock detector, then there they will be.

> Chaos Theory is regarded in some circles as a subset of Complexity Theory.

It goes a little something like this: There's a range of behaviour for dynamical systems ranging from static to completely random (chaotic). This range is not a continuum, though, for there is a switch between the two that takes place over a small area - a phase transition. "Complex" order lies on this phase transition.

|Stasis----------------->|Complexity|Chaos--------------------------->|

The labels "Chaos Theory" and "Complexity Theory" have both been used to describe the whole thing. Complexity is less misleading IMO, as it focuses on the interesting bit (stasis is boring and randomness is not very useful).

So Dad remains a nothing until he gets to the "Phase Transition" then suddenly all that nothing qualifies for a promotion to something, and becomes suddenly complex.

Simple.

When did "nothing" come into it? Complexity deals with systems and you can't make a system out of nothing.

what about the big bang?

(although that said, my own belief is that the big bang is what happened when the previously unreached potential of everything that has happened since inflicted itself on the nothingness that had been before.)

There really is nothing very much to complexity. For really extremely complicated stuff, you can't beat nothingnesses.
When we say 'nothing' we are of course referring to 'something' rather than to 'total absolute insensible lack of existence and the ability to observe it too because it never was there in the first place, and hey! neither are you' So the nothing which get together with other nothings has an immeasurably tiny state of existence (about the size of the germ of an idea) with the potential to become the most complicated thing in the Universe.
Of course, there is the counter argument which states that "The Universe does not exist but is actually the dregs in a teacup just drunk by a mythical Chinese gentleman who immediately meditated himself out of existence." But, confronted with the most complicated then in the Universe (the report on 'Why people keep hurting each other' from a UNO sub-sub-committee's sub-committee), most commentators tend to agree that Nothing can get Jolly Complicated.

Just to keep things simple:
The "get" in the last sentence of the first paragraph of my previous entry should have an "s" on its tail and the "then" in the last sentence of the second paragraph is a disguised "thing".
There. Now that's really simple, isn't it?

OK, you were being silly.

but what about the big bang, Si?

What about it?

Well, silly is as silly does, as my Mammy used to say.

But "silly" is clearly a technical term when applied to Complexity. Even more so when the HitchHikersGuide contains such an exposition of the complexity of Nothingness as can be found within these sites. Being "silly" involves such meandering complexity that it beggars any ability to define it. For example, one might be silly with enormous coplexity, profundity, wit, devious logical extrusion, and flowery expostulation, but one might just as well be silly with a short pithy opinion - such as "Oh, I see you're being silly." It would be unwise to under-rate silliness and disregard it's powerful complexity. In addition, without silliness would there BE a HitchHikersGuideToTheGalaxy?

If you say so.