Mike Smith Cosmos

Just a thought :- So it could be argued that the secrets lie, not so much in the explosion or in a great Big Bang? Or, it's just impossible to get at those secrets there . But in the 'control systems' that seem to 'feed back' in such a way as to 'sculpt' a system into an immensely accurate and fruitful performance. Perhaps these secrets are more easily accessible elsewhere? If that is the case , then , for instance , the secrets of quantum physics , and many other cosmological and other general scientific, mysteries, that we may be looking for generally or in the first seconds to the power (minus 43 of a second) as in the most ginormous explosion of energy ever (Big Bang ) , is not necessarily the best place to look? But rather , we could be looking at the control feedback systems, particularly for those hidden secrets. It may be possible that they can be ferreted out . These could be in existence all around us. Perhaps for the universe to grow into, however/whatever it is growing in to. Examining hidden feedback loops, in the same way we examine deeply buried DNA in genetic spirals . Possibly ? Ps ( Now he suggests it , after we spent all that money ! ) Mike

Perhaps that's why , elephants play with trees, and organisations play with whole tracts of land ? Mike

If one was to take Phototropism as an example . And see how the electronic model of control theory feedback works in nature :- Diagram of feedback control system Light input to the system , causes growth output in the plant . The control system is based around ' Auxin ' This works by :- Auxin distribution controls phototropism. . Sunlight strikes the plant at an angle. Auxin is concentrated on one side, that side is opposite to the side the sun is on , encouraging growth at an angle from the original stem. With Essay's Climate Diagram , one can see the complications in the diagram , but none the less the similar structure to the simplified Feedback diagram . -- ( Ed Earl' s ) -- Testing feedback instrument , illustrates how there is a wide range of differing feedback effects , which in turn produce different results in the Output of a control feedback system . This well illustrates that the output can be very different from what one might expect at the output , if the feedback was not there . Thus one could conclude under certain conditions the character of the feedback may provide more of an influence on the output than the main ( Process ) of the system itself . Similarly , -- ( Ajb' ) -- comment shows that there could be a feedback style effect , that could be an additional issue in field theory coming not from the main theory ' process ' but from the ' feeding back ' loop. I know in electronics , that often the main ' process ' can be a simple Amplification easily read from a component characteristic list , whereas the feedback loop calculations can come from some serious , complicated mathematical analysis of this feedback loop having possible solutions from 0 to infinity , applicable in a similar infinity number of possible configurations . Obviously in design , one wants to achieve a sought after response ( unless one was producing the chaos figures of Mandelbrot sets , as per -- ( Essay's ) -- illustrations of attractors and chaotic behaviour of systems , ) I which case ' the sky is the limit ' However , these comments do illustrate , the seat of influence can be found in :- BOTH the main PROCESS system AND the FEEDBACK loops . If not , on occasions , more , in the control arm of the system ( the feedback arms ) . This does offer a region of investigation for answers away from the main obvious processing route . For example in the CO 2 issue in climate change there are many feedback loops for carbon dioxide . Ranging from plants , to coral reefs , to limestone rock , to endless areas of our Eco system, so I am lead to believe . ( again as illustrated by Essay's , Diagram ) Mike

If I look back on my pre school life . I am nearly certain ,that play , imaginative play , set me on a path , that I have had all my life . To take things apart ! Very similar to you ARC . Once people knew I loved to take things to bits , under the dining room table , with a couple of bits of broken devices . I would cobble them together ( even if only by position ) . It would be a 'control desk on a space ship ' or some other fanciful thing. All that happened up through life , the devices got bigger and bigger and more real . Nowerdays , the things taken to bits are ideas , and other ephemeral things . And they continue to get bigger and bigger ! Mike

Sure, if the response is such that it is necessary . However , it might well be that only a couple of responses happen per discipline . In which case , I would think it more meaningful , in the mean time, rather than fragment the subject , to continue in this thread . Strange has kindly introduced an example where , feedback seems to stabilise a black hole in a certain accretion of matter . I would presume, ( negative feedback ) . Also plumes ascending from the poles , being so immense could have an element of ( positive feedback ) so as to generate that sort of energy / explosion. However , my knowledge of this cosmic activity is insufficient to be in any way sure? There are plenty of other evidences of stability and explosive forces , however , that does not necessary mean that feedback is responsible . The sort of feedback I am used to in electronics is one of mid range energies . Namely signals that enter a device . Power or signal levels are amplified. A proportion of the amplified signal is ' Returned ' to the input having some form of process enacted on it . This returned signal if it has the effect of reducing amplification is considered Negative and will act as a control and stability . Should the signal return be additive it is considered Positive and will have the effect of a run away explosion of amplification . With this electronic model . At a first pass it becomes clear why settlement and control is evidence of Negative Feedback And explosive amounts of signal or energy points to Positive feedback . HOWEVER when the return path is itself a complicated or complex function , things are NOT so ,cut and dried. In fact , there is available , every variation imaginable, using further electronics in the return path, . ( hence my comment of a very comprehensive tool. ), however, this is where the maths goes into orbit, loopy or A.W.O.L. But keeping it simple it would be interesting to see any examples , others have come across , in differing disciplines . The simple ones are likely to have survived in the main , I would have thought. The difficult or complicated examples probably fall into the category of mutation. I am grateful for the black hole example by Strange . Maybe. - Ophiolite - has an example , Although geology examples may be harder to pin down . However there are examples of explosive Volcanic erupting . As well as millions of years of stabilised time periods where one type of species dominated ( eg Devonian, Cretaceous, dinosaurs in the Jurassic period ) whether these just happen or they stabilise , to be dominated by one species , I am not sure ? .I do not , for a moment mean to pass disrespectful , aspersions as regards professionals who know far more of their subject than I ever will. I am in fact asking such experts or professionals for possible examples of where it is possibly feedback showing itself . As all have expressed . It is all over the place . That is fine , I , we and everybody , is saying a similar story . My point is NOT whether it exists but , how is it showing itself . And because it is harder to spot than plain " cause and effect" , have the professionals any examples , that may be enlightening, if only to me and maybe others. I remember the first time I heard ' El Nineo ' explained with its effect on world wide weather , I found it intriguing. I think that is an example of feedback ( I think ) . .One or two more like that one , would be great ! ------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Mike Ps Animals Do it.

. I love your description. Is this picture , what you are describing ? I would like to tease out in descriptive terms , how the feedback comes into play? I can hear an echo of it there in your description . Do you have any ,other possible comments , how the control and stability ( negative fb) or the explosive and powerful nature ( positive fb) , come in to play . It sounds to me , that one of the periods of negative feedback are with the stable time of accretion ? Perhaps the collapse toward a black hole has an element of positive feedback ? Your comment :- Quote There are, I am sure, many other examples. So is the purpose of this thread to gather and understand such examples unquote Yes , I would love to hear of other examples ( of feedback ) in astronomy/cosmology . And indeed in other disciplines. Mike

. I am sorry . I thought that is what I just did in post # 11. I will try and make it more succinct and scientific. Main point -: " Feedback ( negative and positive ) has been proven extremely scientifically , beyond doubt, by its widespread use in Electronics, which is fully explained by mathematics. ( Electronics has been my life's occupation , so I know what I have just said about feedback in Electronics , as fact). Thus , I would have thought that, it behoves all sciences to look for such feedback mechanisms in other scientific disciplines as it is 'likely ' to be fundamental there also . Such as Astronomy, Biology, Earth Science , Engineering, and other disciplines. " Footnote to main point :- " They may already be doing this . Great . Keep going . We are talking about :- Control and stability ,on the one hand ( negative feedback ) . Immense dispersion and power on the other hand . ( positive feedback ) . Not terribly controlled or stable! " This is my point . I am sorry if I have not made that clear as that being the main thrust of this thread . Mike

Well I was meaning the feedback aspect of Lovelocks hypothesis , which did make a lot think . Yes you are right about scientists knowing what feedback IS . And particularly engineers , as you say , with electronics . I agree . What I am suggesting is :- it is not the first thing in people's minds , or scientists for that matter , or anybody else to think :- " I wonder how FEEDBACK is making " this or that work " . Anybodies First thought is " What causes that to happen ? " cause and effect , it's fairly natural . Not " I wonder what sort of convoluted feedback nests make ' such and such '. happen . We all go for the easy option. " what caused that to happen ? That's what I was trying to get at with my previous ' gibberish ' Eg I put the water in the soil and it makes things grow big and tall. Not . If I put water in the soil , it will penetrate to a level of soil which will dissolve minerals so as to make the liquid in the soil be so concentrated as to cause reverse osmosis to suck the moisture of the plant and it wilts and does not thrive ! ...then there are no plants dying any more , so no concentrated solution builds up, so there is no longer any reverse osmosis , so plants thrive again and so a feedback system has reset the environment ( or something similar to that effect........ Hope that is not more gibberish .. What I am trying to say , we normally take the easy thinking option. .. Namely ... ( this causes that ) . --------------------------------------- -----------------------------/------------------------ --------------------- Thus :- It may be already seen in this discussion , that feedback is generally accepted as a scientific principle , by the scientific community and is fairly well widespread . And therefor useful as a possible tool in research ? (1) That , negative feedback brings control and stability : thus with things to do with life and the environment , where stability and control is a ' must ' , we could look for feedback loops of a negative feedback variety in the environment , and in life itself . ? (2) That positive feedback brings colossal gain , and accelerated explosions : thus we could look for applications of positive feedback in applications of a need for power, explosions , massive gain. Possibly areas incorporating positive feedback , are astronomic in type . Possibly:- Big Bang, supernova, black holes, expanding universe , star birth , the sun , Jupiter, space travel, ..... May be areas where positive feedback can possibly be found ? Mike

. (A) I am not sure , reaction forces , can be included in the context of " Feedback " , although I agree it may have a similar result. I was thinking more in terms of a 'signal or active force ' that can be taken hold of , processed in some way or other , and returned as an active input to the system under consideration, of a similar nature . So really applying to active systems . (B) Again , I am not sure all scientists see the climate as a total feedback system . It took James Lovelock a lifetime to convince the world , his ' Gia ' hypothesis as climate being part of a total system . ( C) I agree this sentence is clumsy and awkward . I thought that after I wrote it . I am not sure , I know what a phrase is , that describes a mathematical sequence WITHOUT any feedback. I am trying to describe a forward moving sequence . Eg a. ( the cause ) originates b processes may be c. d and e are further processes and f, is the consequence, resultant (effect, ) or whatever happens as a result of a, originating. ( with no portion of f feeding back to a, ) Contrarily a feedback system does feedback a portion of f to a . I am not so sure that scientists and non scientists , will naturally think about ( negative and positive feedback ) as a solution or ingredient. The reason I suggest this , is because it is slightly counter intuitive . The intuitive is " more in makes more happen " . Whereas feedback works in a round about way . Mike

I was raising the question , " Could it be that some things we find hard to understand , as regards their operation, may have a feedback system involved. " . As explained in previous posts of this thread that :- ' feedback can bring into effect , counter intuitive outcomes, which are not always obvious , and could be different to calculate , because of complexity of nesting feedback loops. ' Armed with this quest , it could be that research into a difficult subject, ' like Climate ' and other difficult to understand subjects , that are not in an immediate " Cause and effect linear connection " ( Eg I do this , and that happens ) . Mike Neither ! Neutral . ( at this stage ,anyway , things could go either way ) Mike

We could introduce the idea of simple but different feedback type. Say Positive feedback . This is where the output of a system is returned ,in part , to the input of the system . Not in a subtractive ( negative ) way , but in a additive ( positive ) way . Namely Positive feedback. This has the opposite effect , to some extent , to ' negative feedback ' . If this was an audio amplifier, the amplifier would re- amplify the existing amplified signal. Phenomenal gain will be achieved , the signal will be deafening . In addition it is likely to be out of control , namely unstable. This you may have heard when a sound system microphone ,picks up its already amplified sound . A high level , screech , going from tone to tone . This is uncontrolled positive feedback . Controlled positive feedback can produce accelerated effects. Explosive in nature. Already from this simplistic approach to feedback we may be able to see why certain things happen , some in nature , clearly under control. Other things happen where explosive expansion is required. The world wide climate system probably has a taste of both sorts of feedback ( 'negative feedback ', stable ,controlled , 'positive feedback ' powerful, storm like , uncontrolled ). Similarly , I am sure these will crop up in the universe as a whole , both very large and very small and many-things in between. What also becomes clear ,is that simple ' cause and effect ' is likely to be tempered with various feedback systems , giving different predictions and results , rather than linear ' cause and effect' . Of course , this may end up in compounded loops , one within the other , and of different type. It is evident that the whole system can get very complex , and the maths complicated . Mike

The negative feedback signal ( in other words the message sent to the input ) has a characteristic shape , when plotted against time . ( see below) . Whatever the subject under control ( by feedback ) , say the amplification of sound or music . Control of motor speed of rotation , balance of water temperature in a hot water system or a sea ocean . The feedback usually follows a response curve as below . In other words , it takes a finite time for the feedback message to get through ( Rise time) , it often overshoots it's intended effect , ( over shoot ) it then settles down after a bit of action and reaction. ( ringing ) . Measure this against some feedback you may give verbally to someone ( which you offer genuinely trying to help , but they consider as criticism ), they may react at first, you say , well I did not mean it like that , and with a little back and forth , the feedback settles down . ( hopefully , or you get a black eye ) . ( the maths for this feed back ( considered against a time backdrop) , is available , but is a bit daunting. ) Mike

. Three examples of Feedback , which could be brought to the fore , as they are in common usage and relate easily to science are :- (A) Electronic Circuits .,(B) Mechanical Machines . , © Climate on a world scale ------------------------- . , -----------------------------., ------------------------------- A) an electronic amplifier , could be a Valve, transistor , or other amplifying circuit . Here devises were/are called on to take a small signal and increase its level to a higher more useful value . Say a few milli volts to a few Volts , or a few milli amps to a fraction of an amp. The signals are usually A.c( alternating current ) . A factor of amplification can run from say times 5 ( x5 ) to times 2000( x2000) , all from a single device , say a valve or a transistor. When I first was taught this , I thought ' wow' this is amazing , almost something for nothing . Say 1 volt alternating signal to say 500 volts by one stage . This was caused by affecting the flow of electrons ( current) in a valve or transistor via an intermediate electrode ( grid or base) . However there was a downside , it was not reliable , not stable . By feeding a part of the output signal BACK into the input the reliability went up Astronomically, but the multiplying gain went down dramatically ( say to x 2 or x30 , no longer x500 ) . ( The feedback signal has to be subtractive to give stability, hence the expression ' Negative Feedback ' ) .( Positive feedback is another story ! ) So lesson number one Feedback can bring stability , reliability , control at the expense of GAIN . It could be argued that similar principles apply across all feedback systems . B) Machines in both the early engines had spinning wheels which regulated the speed of rotation , nowadays sensors and controllers or regulators . C) It has become the centre of much discussion recently as to feedback systems being present in the worlds climate systems . Mike

In science , possibly one of the most varied , yet most flexible tools . It's prominence in the current 'Electronic age ' gives us insight as well a mechanism to examine our surroundings .' " FEEDBACK " However it finds its place , widely spread , in Nature, Industry , Management as well as Electronics. Can we learn interesting points and insights , from the action of Feedback " ? There appear to be a range of differing effects , with different types and styles of feedback ( say , positive, negative, damped, loose, levels of, etc ) Are there uses for understanding these differing effects. Namely , in understanding scientific observations , in the universe at both the very large , and very small scales, and In between ? Wikipedia link to Feedback -: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feedback Also feedback types :- Listed under internal link to . Feedback(disambiguation). . . Mike

.....and Cause and Effect.. without the real damage , that real life involves. Eg . A vehicle ( dinky lorry ) can hit another ( say dinky car ) . They begin to feel the dismay ( their vehicle has been hit or tipped over, or scratched paint, ) without some real life consequence so not the personal physical hurt . Which could be argued ,is a good way to learn? Mike

.I must say , that I am inclined to agree with you Arc , about the imaginative story surrounding the Toy. When at this 5-10 year age I met a friend most week ends to continue our story ,around the cars , lorries , and buses of the Dinky toy range . We would scratch out the roads and garages in the 'unmade up ' road we lived on . If I was a mind I could dig my memory to bring to life the stories. I have other things to think about , so that is unlikely . However this idea of toys , acting as a stepping stone to reality ,is interesting . Mike

O.k. Yes well I agree with the o.p. When I was a little boy, and we had ' Dinky Toys ' . ( cars, lorries ,buses, trucks , etc...) We could go outside and scrape in the earth , a whole traffic system . With lorries, buses, and practice living life " but in miniature. As a model , but in our imagination , we were , there in a sort of imaginary-reality in miniature. I am sure ,in some way , it shaped part of my life. Dinky Toy Mike

Toy Models . I am pretty certain , many designers , fetch out toys from their children's toy box, or go down to the local toy shop , when first considering a New creative idea ( perhaps for a potential new product ) , before ever a prototype is made. The concept can be easily tested or visualised , and often rejected at this very early stage in a products viability. Perhaps it looks ridiculous of just will not stand up , and is immediately rejected. On the other hand , a glimmer of hope may show itself , and a model prototype then commissioned . Mike

DNA . The blueprint of all living things . On land and in the Ocean requires water to function. So the Ocean need not be a poor cousin , but rather a fundamental for life . Mike

I went with the Grandchildren, yesterday to Star wars. I bought a regular pot of Popcorn .. I could hardly carry it, it was so large , as was the coca cola . I was issued with 3D glasses. I sat in this gigantic viewing cinema .. Lights dimmed... The first space ship came in from the side , our seats physically rumbled , they must have a sound system connected to a mechanical transducer, and quadraphonic sound . Then the 3 D caught the spaceship coming in through the cinema side wall! ( I guess somehow they made the 3d go much larger than the screen ) I was hooked . I can't remember the story line , but ' by Heck ' , I sure enjoyed this ' Space based roller coaster 'experience '. ....... I came out of the cinema in a state of ' Shock and Awe ' , in fact ,my head and being , is still full of all the experiences of those hours of ' larger than life adventure ' ... Perhaps I am easily pleased, and just a Kid at heart. Mike

It's great to hear your comments. From you as an individual ! James Lovelock spent a great deal of effort trying to persuade , that the system works as a whole , in his Hypothesis . Recently David Waltham ( University of London lecturer 2008- 2012 ) in his Book " Lucky Planet " ( Isbn 978-184831656-0 ) , supported in comments by Richard Fortey of Trilobite Fame . Both feeling that the photosynthetic mechanisms Carbon Dioxide - Oxygen and of oxygen - Carbon Dioxide systems have a key roll to play in our Planets , Health. As do , also on this site . ( Otheolite and Essay ). Obviously , this latest Conference , shows that there is a growing concern , world wide to what is happening . ( but that may be coming a bit late ) . The climate seems to be giving England and the USA , a bit of a battering as we speak . I have , just put sand bags at my door , just ," in case" we get it down here in S.W . England as we did a year or two ago. We had an ancient Stone Bridge washed away in the Village where I live, in fact , I saw it washed away , as I was on my way to an Art Group . Yesterday the media showed similar happenings in Northern England . Mike

I understand the two issues you raise here. And have the Dictionary definitions to hand , and will post . Each ( Function and Form ) both have 9 or 10 definitions . ( I will post ) . The other point ( about evidence ...of attitude) . Some of this is born out, to some extent, within this thread. However external evidence , is to some extent what this thread is all about , a discussion of the historic and current attitude , to the relationship between function and form . I am rushing off to see the Grandchildren ' running around like idiots ' this Christmas Day . However I will leave an abbreviation of the Dictionary Definitions of Function and Form . ----- abbreviated definition ---------- Function is the description of a ' Things Purpose, and the way it builds one thing on another to fulfil that Purpose ' Form is the way a ' Thing or Condition ' appears to Human observation ' ---------------------------------------------- In scientific terms these extremes seem illustrated by ' Isaac Newtons ' Calculus ' at Function . And Einstein's relativity as seen by an observer. From my perspective in scientific terms , for what it is worth. I see either end of the Function - Form spectrum , is in some respect : " Bottom up .. ". Function . To " Top Down ." .. Form Mike

. Not at all! . I do understand maths , quite deeply., in fact deeper than you might give me credit for. But It makes my head hurt though , for some reason or another. However, that is not the point. The model that springs to mind , is that of the human being! Maths is like the skeleton. Necessarily fairly rigid , strong , essential to hold many of the essential parts ( though not all) ,of the human body together , into some semblance of being! Our internal organs , need space to operate, otherwise the heart would be unable to beat, the digestive tract unable to process and digest food . The arms and legs unable to swing about and do, the things we do . The nerve pulses need to be free to flow . The brain waves and impulses totally free to seek out creative thought . And quite where this conscious feeling ,I have right now floats " I am not sure " but ' by heck' I am glad to have the freedom of 'form' to stand erect as a 'homo errectus " to exist, wonder, appreciate, look in awe . I am conscious of being a " Form " and being in the " Form " end of the spectrum of being . ( Perhaps when the arthritis kicks in , I feel the function end . ) . So , Maths is good , Skeletons are good , but Human Consciousness is Fantastic . As a life Form ( Space, Shape, Colour, Feelings, Play, Emotion, Love, Wonder and Awe .....etc) If we were to accept that science consists as this entire spectrum of endeavour from one end to the other and use is , in its entirety, in our research , who knows we may discover answers that might otherwise be missed. There has been an attitude that the ' stuff' that really matters is in the 'Function ' end of the spectrum , and the other end ' Form ' is the region of Poets, Artists, Romancers , Play, ' Wooly thinkers ' . Thus if we were to use this proposed model say in looking at the problem of 'quantum gravity ' and other science research , who knows , we might release a ' genii out of the bottle ' or many ' genii out of bottles'??? Mike

Well I am perfectly happy that the functional end , has many firm conventional scientific principles, they may not all be exhaustive , but sufficiently rigorous to keep everybody happy. It's as it moves toward the " Form". end of the spectrum . There is no need to drop science itself out of the picture . But it might be necessary to drop the rigour. * as we move in to more shape, feeling , colourful, ephemeral, then Yes the Vague starts to creep in the human emotion starts to engage , the ' give me space' comes up on the priority list . Conventional scientists start getting twitchy . As the " Form " appears ' note only appears to take over from conventional science' . This happened with chaos theory , but then they found , 'attractors ' . Yes the , " vague " is there . There has to be space, there has to be more freedom of movement , there has to be a degree of human feelings and emotions , intuition, wonder and awe, all of which are anathema to strict logicians . Mike * if a piston changed its length by a few fractions of an inch , the engine would fail . functionally . If a flowers yellow petal changed its length by a whole inch , it might even look more beautiful . form

A small interjection . I would like to think that Science can include the entire spectrum . From ridged , precise , Functional phenomenon , right through to the far out reaches of Form, where more of the esoteric phenomenon exist eg ( Shape, Colour, Wonder, Space and Awe . Etc ) When I go for a walk in the park , I look around and I think ! There is not a lot , some yes , but not a lot , that I feel immediately suggests and could achieve being a complete detailed scientific description to, including principles, that I could put a mathematical formula toward its function. Maybe some . But then I notice an awful lot that I could put Form to , with a whole range of feelings , emotion, wonder , shape , colour , appreciation, awe. If I was in the middle of a city, I think this would be quite the other way . Interesting ! Mike