"Ale" <AlejandroCelani@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eobal1$ng9$1@darwin.ediacara.org...
Thanks for the info.That very relationated with the texts that I read,
and much better.
I like to find any book with the implication of dynamic estrategies in
the seleccion process like "The case of the bees...." I donīt
now...any example, because i belive that can to rise new things from
this topic, and very applicable to ample range of situations. For
example, redefine the objectives of genetic species improvement, as
electing the species that best for example learn of the environment.
Ale, for me it is always enjoyable to turn an idea over and around, and
examine it from every angle.
Sometimes it seems to me that some of us tend to view things, even in
science, from a view much like a single frame from a motion picture
file. To do so is to get a clear picture... yet a picture that does not
represent the way things behave in a dynamic.
Some *system dynamics* (such as, for example, the mechanical workings
of a reciprocating engine) repeat cycles that vary almost negligibly,
while
some other *system dynamics* vary abundantly (such as the U. S. stock
market, or the global cyclings of the balance of trade).
As with many things in science and nature, sometimes it is difficult to
draw a sharp line which circumvents a dynamic. In the case of the
above-mentioned reciprocating engine, casual observation tends to view
a particular engine as having very distinct boundaries between what is a
part of the "system" involved, and what is not. The casual viewer can
see that there is what is the object (the engine) and what is not the
object
(everything else). However, the "system" whereby any particular
reciprocating
engine *functions* requires some intervention, such as the putting in of
fuel. Also (as per one definition of the so-called thermodynamic "law" of
entropy) no reciprocating engine converts 100 % of the fuel put into it
into the torque it generates. Some of that energy is dissipated in the
form
of heat. Some of that energy goes into degradation (wear and tear on all
the engine's parts, when it operates. And, in a very real sense, an
engine
will deteriorate over time whether it is operated, and well-maintained or
it is not.
Thus, the understanding of a given reciprocating engine entails more than
what one sees at a glance: its dependency upon the insertion of fuel
(for,
say, one that is gasoline dependent), its friction, its limited life in
the
universe as being operated or as not being operated. The wholeness of
the system, thus, has certain immediate and proximate interrelationships
with MORE than just the physical engine. And here I may seem to wax
philosophical, when I say that *ULTIMATELY* a given reciprocating
engine impacts, and is impacted by, all other matter with which it shares
the universe.
Just as is conventional in *applied mathematics* one can treat a "system,"
such as a reciprocating engine as only what of its *system* features are
of useful value to the user, or only what is within the user's ability and
utility of control. That is -- we do not need trace out the full extent
of
a system beyond what is practical.
In designing an engine, if it has any round physical parts in it, we must
use Pi. Yet we can never measure Pi precisely, even if we take forever to
calculate it, for it is an infinite series. If we can benefit from
controlling
tolerances among the engine parts to within, say, 5/1000 of an inch, and
this degree of accuracy proves more beneficial than just 6/1000 of an
inch, then, in calculating the dimensions of parts where that is an
important
difference, we calculate, and build parts to such tolerances. (These
figures
are just off the top of the head, and not necessarily applicable to a real
engine. But the principle of "false accuracy" and "more than practical
tolerance controls" are examples of how humans neither can -- nor
practically should -- calculate things out to further extents than is
practical. And, likewise, a system (such as a reciprocating engine) need
not be deemed to be any more than it need be deemed.
And for a non-engineer, it is a useful idea of what a reciprocating engine
system "is" to simply look at one, and view the object as embodying the
entirety of the "system."
One of the progressive themes in the physical sciences is that our human
capabilities of measuring and utilizing things, has entailed ever finer
measurements. Once ships were built using cubits (the length of the
builder's forearm). Space probes, today, must be measured in some of
their parts down to microscopic tolerances.
Nowadays, with channeling tunneling, we can determine such things as
crystal structures of compounds at the molecular level. And,
interestingly,
I think, microbes are being harnessed to do things, such as putting
coatings
on electronic parts, at thicknesses no tool known to mankind could
control.
We are living in a marvelously curious and amazing era, you and I. And I
hope civilization will not be reduced to ashes before we see some marvels
currently beyond our imaginations.
g
