Organised Chaos – Music Websites

I can NEVER find anything when everything is so neat and tidy. I prefer chaos@

same here when everything is neat i cant find anything i like it messy

title says it

Duration : 0:2:31

Read the rest of this entry »

Technorati Tags: baltimore ravens, best football highlights, big hits, chaz wenfield, colts, death on wings, eagles. ravens, ed reed, ed reed highlights, falcons, fred, joe flacco, joe flacco highlights, madden, matt stover, NFL, patriots, peyton manning, Ravens, ravens highlights, ray lewis, ray lewis big hits, redskins, steelers, super bowl, thejoeflaccoshow, todd heap, tom brady

My bookmarks have fallen into inexcusable chaos in the browser. Folders are all tangled up with links. When I view the bookmarks in file manager, everything is nicely organized. Is there a way that I can fix this without doing it the painful manual way and moving one at a time? Can I purge them from the browser and have it reload them? Thank you!

Try running a virus run a scan on IE and reloading faves

hope this helps

I do flatland in Hawaii.
You know Da Kind.

Duration : 0:4:15

Read the rest of this entry »

Technorati Tags: bike, flatland, garin

Can unaided physicodynamics self-organizing into a complex formal function?

How did metabolism emerge from chaos? Our biological functioning systems are organized, if they were not, we would be dead, in a disorganized state. How did they get so far from thermodynamic equilibrium? How do biological systems create itself out of chaos at? the same time delineate itself from the environment, and continue to create new biological functioning systems from scratch, considering bona fide self-organization is physically impossible, without an agent to make a chioce with intent? Since evolution does not steer toward? a goal, or rather a formal function, which is one of the requirements of organization, then how is it a valid explanation of the rise many integrated algorithmic processes that are observe in living things? What natural process can? write P.I. that yield a formal function? What natural process can write such highly prescriptive information? What natural process can account for cellular programming? What natural process can give rise to even the most simply metoblic function?

This is no different from the argument of design, which originated with Thomas Aquinas in the 1200’s, re-visited by Cicero and Voltaire, and most memorably in William Paley’s "watchmaker" argument in 1802, and continues to pass down through the generations to the "evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics" argument, right to the arguments of the modern day Intelligent Design movement, such as Michael Behe’s "irreducible complexity", William Dembski’s "specified complexity" argument.

The answer was given decisively in 1859, and has not changed.

The answer is natural selection.

The *ORIGINS* of metabolism are an avenue of existing research. But explanation for the amazing degree to which our "functioning systems are organized" to produce that metabolism is crystal clear. It is the constant, relentless accumulations of slight improvements on existing metabolic systems.

>"How did they get so far from thermodynamic equilibrium? "

The same way *ANY* thermodynamic system (from a snowflake, to a coral reef, to a developing embryo, to your refrigerator) moves away from thermodynamic equilibrium … by the expenditure of *energy*.

>"How do biological systems create itself out of chaos at? the same time delineate itself from the environment, and continue to create new biological functioning systems from scratch, considering bona fide self-organization is physically impossible, without an agent to make a chioce with intent?"

Sorry, but you don’t get to ask how Y can occur given X, without first validating X as an assumption. A snowflake is "bona-fide self-organization" without any agent making choice or intent … and therefore such self-organization is clearly NOT "physically impossible."

>"Since evolution does not steer toward? a goal, or rather a formal function, which is one of the requirements of organization …"

(Do you think we will not notice when you slip in these little assumptions as if they are universal laws?) On what basis is a formal function a "requirement of organization"?

To pick an even more trivial example than a snowflake. The arrangement of carbon atoms in a diamond is organization without the need for a "formal function", much less a "goal" or a goal-driven process. It is organization imposed by the *laws of physics* as they govern the geometry of carbon atoms.

"… how is it a valid explanation of the rise many integrated algorithmic processes that are observe in living things?"

Again, you are trying to *hide* your pre-conclusions in your terminology … like pre-supposing that these things are "algorithmic."

So I will turn this around on you. If you claim that such processes as protein synthesis are "algorithmic" (where the ribosome is executing the "algorithm" contained in a piece of tRNA as a set of "prescriptive information" for how to build a certain protein), then this opens up almost infinite possibilities for slight *CHANGES AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ALGORITHM* over time. The ribosome does not have to change; the DNA/RNA encoding medium does not have to change … but the *algorithm* itself can change without limits. As long as that change produces an improvement (no matter how slight) to the resulting protein, the algorithm not only CAN get better and more complex over time … it HAS TO.

>"What natural process can? write P.I. that yield a formal function? What natural process can write such highly prescriptive information? What natural process can account for cellular programming? What natural process can give rise to even the most simply metoblic function?"

Again, you are just repeating the same question over and over using many different terminologies … so I don’t feel like repeating the answer.

I’ll just summarize.

1. It is confusing metaphor for nature when you refer to these things as algorithms, P.I. (prescriptive information), formal functions, or "programming". We like to use the language of computer programming and formal function theory when discussing these biological systems … but it is still like likening the camera to an eye and then saying that since a camera is "formally designed", then so is the eye. It is the Fallacy of False Analogy.

2. What natural selection *DOES* explain … and explains it beautifully … is how simple systems (regardless of whether you call them ‘algorithms’, or ‘programs’, or ‘P.I’) can become complex ones.

—– {to John’s rebuttal} —-

>"How does natural selection cause <insert *LONG* run-on sentence here>? You have not answered any of his questions."

I DID answer his questions, but now you introduce new ones. I can address each of them separately … but not in the format of this page.

>"Please expound on your assertion. How did the first protometabolism emerge from chaos?"

You are not READING what I wrote! I specifically said that natural selection explains the degree of complexity of modern metabolic systems … NOT the first (proto) metabolism. I said that was an "avenue of existing research."

In other words, I am up front that *I don’t know* what started the first "protometabolism" … but what "crystal clear" is what produced modern metabolism from simpler ones … namely natural selection (incremental improvements on earlier systems).

If you’re going to "rebut" me … at least READ WHAT I WROTE.

>"Laws are not capable of cybernetic programming."

Since that is precisely what we are debating, you don’t get to declare it true by fiat.

>"Are you alright? When did anyone say a formal function is a requirement of organization?"

Hmm … that was my interpretation of the sentence I quoted immediately before: "… evolution does not steer toward? a goal, or rather a formal function, which is one of the requirements of organization …"

>"The arrangement of carbon atom in diamonds does not do anything useful. No programming for a potential function takes place, no algorithms are optimized,"

I didn’t use diamonds as an example of something "useful" but as something highly organized.

But fair enough … I glossed over the difference between order and organization (which implies a system, but does NOT imply "usefulness"). I don’t have the space to address this adequately here.

>"Please explain to me how genetic algorithms are optimized by a purely natural process?"

Simple. Multiple algorithms offered (mutations). Improvements to function get to reproduce more (natural selection). Diminishments don’t. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

>"Natural selection does not create anything."

No. Mutations create. Nature selects. (Hence natural selection.)

—- {response to John #2: (how many people am I debating?)} —-

>"Bona fide self-organization, on the other hand, is the ordering of physical elements in such a way that yield a formal function requiring choice with intent."

Can you give an example of something from nature that meets your definition of being "organized", but not "self-organized"? I.e. how do you establish "choice with intent" without a priori assuming something capable of making choices or having intent?

—- {edit: to John #2} —–

I am asking for an example of "organization" in nature that meets your criterion of "choice with intent."

It’s a bit unfair to say that "self-organization" is impossible, if you can’t give an example of "organization" that meets your definition *at all* (including a description of how you test for "choice with intent").

Let me be clear. I think your definition is a Trojan horse … sneaking the assumption of "choice with intent" into your definition of "organization" so that you can then claim that "organization" is evidence of "choice with intent." That is circular.

For example, is a cell "organized" by your definition (as opposed to say a swarm of locusts or a forest fire), and if so, on what basis do you conclude that it is the result of "choice with intent" other than the fact that you call it "organized"?

—- {edit} —-

>"The human body."

Thanks. Now where is the "choice with intent"?

>"Without chioce with intent organization cannot take place. What part of this do you not understand"

The part where you demonstrate that this is true, instead of just declaring it to be true, over and over.

>"All living things reveal organization. Do you disagree?"

I don’t agree to anything until I know what definition of "organization" I am agreeing to.

>"You don’t know what organization means? Interesting. "

I know of no definition of "organization" that REQUIRES "choice with intent."

>"Choice with intent is not part of the definition. It is a requirement."

Fair enough. Then please enlighten me … WHY is this a requirement?

>"Because of observation. We have never observed any physicodynamic process organize physical elements into complex formal functioning systems."

I think we have. But I’ll agree to re-examine this.

I will also check out Abel’s work.

(But I have to end here as I am out of space.)

Or anything is a Big hoax, one big lie God does not exsist and all religious books are fairy tales.. Jews say Messiah did not come yet
the prophecys have not been fullfilled, Muslims say you need to convert to Allah live a obedient life and no other religion is going to inherit the Kingdom of God.

So does one Universal Truth exsist? is everyone living a big lie out of tradition and a cultural belief…. This is why Atheism is grwoing because they say ALL ORGANIZED RELIGION is the cause of chaos in the world….

Lastly the reason I say Jesus is a means to an end is because the only thing he demanded was that people would love each other like themselves and that world is FALLEN it is not GOD’s perfect creation and that one day ALL SIN would end and he is the way to attain perfect life. He did not demand people convert give up thier culture and tradition but we are all going to DIE everyone and what is important your final destination …
That’s all Thanks for answers…

2 Timothy 4:3 to 5
No prophecy’s come true ? What about the prophecy that Israel would be rebuilt ? That’s just one for a starter

The second challenge in the Synergy T&T #1 Dance Crew. Micheal Jackson

Duration : 0:2:46

Read the rest of this entry »

Technorati Tags: Chaos, Organized

My bedroom is fairly small and all four walls are a different length; 11′11x 7′x 10′x 10′2” to be exact. It’s meant to act as a bedroom/office/studio housing my Macs,art supplies, drafting table, desk, and bed. Any suggestions and making it work without too much clutter? I enjoy Organized Chaos, but right now it’s just chaos.Help.Please and Thanks.

Mac.

Hi plenty of shelves and maybe a filling cabinet, you can get slim tall ones as you are limited on space!

Would it be possible to have a table that folds flat to the wall, so that when you are not using it you will have more space(and you would have to clear things off of it and tidy up!!)

if you have room under your bed, buy some storage boxes, you don’t have to have a deep space as they are available in all depths!

I’m looking for one word, scientific or pseudo-scientific, that will give the idea of particles, possibly in solution, but at any rate diffused, random, suddenly and spontaneously arranging themselves into concert and order, into an organized, functional relationship with each other. "Form" is too vague and doesn’t convey the possibility of activity. "Arrange" and "coordinate" don’t convey the previous chaos. "Aggregate" is close, but not really organized enough and still doesn’t convey the creation of a function. I’m looking for something that would describe what happened if a number of gnats in a box, in a split second, went from randomly buzzing about to having acquired a hive mind and arrayed themselves into a marching band.

This sounds like the opposite of entropy, which is VERY loosely defined as disorder or randomness.

On the Wikipedia site,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy

they have some excellent terms for the antonym of entropy (look way down near the bottom in the "Entropy and life" section)….

Negentropy – a shorthand colloquial phrase for negative entropy.

Ectropy – a measure of the tendency of a dynamical system to do useful work and grow more organized (this sounds VERY much like what you’re looking for)

Syntropy – a tendency towards order and symmetrical combinations and designs of ever more advantageous and orderly patterns.

Extropy – a metaphorical term defining the extent of a living or organizational system’s intelligence, functional order, vitality, energy, life, experience, and capacity and drive for improvement and growth. (also close to what you want)

We progress through the ages to make things a better way of life for our selves.

But some problems that we have are still unresolved, like…
Cancer, autism, aging or child abuse.

But we have to work out these problems being organizing our thought processes so that we can become very efficient in the way we do things.

What I can’t understand is how to be more efficient and organized when your trying to solve a problem that effects that ability to become efficient and organized.

It just isn’t practical, so how would you suggest it should be done?

Snow Man
We are here to progress in a general sense (our and other people)

yes but in a philosophical sense we wouldn’t be in chaos if we were organized…. would we?

Practical insertion of time management and prioritizing the what needs to be done now and done later to be in sync with your own needs, wants and desires.