News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Niels Bohr’s Argument for the Irreducibility of Biology t... by aaronblohowiak on Sunday September 30, 2018 @01:57PM (#18107336)
Monism is on the retreat in many, many fields “lately”. We still haven’t really understood all the implications of post Newtonian determinism, and thermodynamics isn’t super useful here either because most of the systems we care about are “open”.. also, models (even those with high predictive power locally) don’t compose in a way that allows for predictive power of emergent phenomena. A hierarchical mutual-causality framework (a la Ascendency) will likely get us where we need to go to understand things more better. This is all being actively discussed in philosophy of science circles, iirc

Edit: am just a hobbyist at this stuff, I’m probably wrong ;)

Re:Niels Bohr’s Argument for the Irreducibility of Biology t... by bordercases on Sunday September 30, 2018 @05:27PM (#18108523)
HN is surprisingly slow when it comes to 21st Century PhilSci. It didn't stop with Feynman.
Re:Niels Bohr’s Argument for the Irreducibility of Biology t... by dwaltrip on Monday October 01, 2018 @01:22AM (#18110216)
Any good resources to read about this?
Re:Niels Bohr’s Argument for the Irreducibility of Biology t... by aaronblohowiak on Monday October 01, 2018 @09:39AM (#18112380)
I came to learn about it through Ecology: The Ascendant Perspective, which is a very fun read in general. If you want harder to read stuff, you could go to Popper or more contemporary, Eric Hochstein.
Re:Niels Bohr’s Argument for the Irreducibility of Biology t... by dwaltrip on Tuesday October 02, 2018 @11:02AM (#18122317)
Thanks!