to NECSI from Stan Salthe, re: self-organization
on 10/31/01 6:51 PM, Stanley N. Salthe at ssalthe at binghamton.edu wrote:
>>SS: Yes, I think you have it. No system has endless possibilities. There
>>would have to be a limit on growth of the system, set by various boundary
>>conditions -- viscosity, depth of liquid, etc., etc. That is the case, as
>>Guy implies, for all natural systems. I think the punch line to my idea
>>was to be that all of them end in senescent condition, awaiting
>>recycling. For Benard cells senescence involves dissolution into
>>turbulence.
>GH: Intuitively, I like the notion that all self-organizing systems
>senesce, but I have trouble seeing how this happens in simple physical
>systems like Benard cells. What is it about a single Benard cell that
>changes during its "lifetime", and which makes it more vulnerable to
>"dissolution into turbulence" later in its existence compared with its
>"younger" (more vigorous?) condition.
SS: Ah, yes. Well to begin, with the Benard cell as we know it is
already senesced (stable, minimal energy throughput, etc). The immature
phase of this experiment was the early, short transitional phase, when the
cells divide, fuse, interact, grow, jostle and juggle to get to the
situation when they are usually photographed. I like the hurricane
example, where the various developmental stages are more easily descried.
Here the senescent phase is usually ignored because at that point -- where
the storm falls apart into muliple smaller storms -- it is not so
dangerous. These multiple remnants are soon absorbed into weather patterns
with greater gross energy througput -- the fate of most natural systems in
senescence. This would happen to the Benard cells too if they were not
supported by the experimental setup. I know of no material dynamic system
that does not senesce. Can you think of any?
STAN
|