Curt Doolittle

Theme: Science

  • Jason, Disagree partly. Yes they are working within a euclidian space (and the i

    Jason,

    Disagree partly.

    Yes they are working within a euclidian space (and the is a reason for that beyond the scope of a few tweets), but mathematics must always reduce a model. If we look at where physics has ‘gone wrong’ it’s precisely (beginning not only with Einstein-Bohr but with Cantor as well) that they are using math as a model, rather than a model which they attempt to reduce to a mathematical expression.

    Einstein used pictures as analogies and platonized time and space. Borh said ‘just calculate’, because he couldn’t conceive of a *discrete* operational model to generalize into a “continuous* mathematical model.

    Brower and Bridgman, less so Hilbert, and others tried to repair the ‘re-mystification’ of physics. Or what Hayek called the ‘new mysticism’.

    Joscha Bach (@Plinz ) , as a good German (Continental), tends to mix models and metaphors in order to continue the german tradition of unifying experience and causality, when he communicates his thoughts.

    But if you get past that ‘literary license’ the degree to which JB is insightful and correct is profound – and IMO he is also, as a good German, too humble and dutiful to assert those ideas with the same conviction as the quality of those ideas merits.

    Reply addressees: @TheRealVerbz @Plinz

    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-06 19:52:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699510821246713856

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699425998272434428

  • Joscha Bach (@Plinz) is the only other person I know of that understands the fun

    Joscha Bach (@Plinz) is the only other person I know of that understands the fundamental problems of the shift in scientific epistemology. And despite my efforts at reduction into a universally commensurable language, he still manages to do a better job of getting the point… https://twitter.com/Plinz/status/1699395779327295532

    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-06 19:40:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699507888278884610

  • Yes. “Genomic inference of a severe human bottleneck during the Early to Middle

    Yes.
    “Genomic inference of a severe human bottleneck during the Early to Middle Pleistocene transition”

    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-06 19:20:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699502793365614974

    Reply addressees: @FarajRashi93307

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699502031663136934

  • Not sure how you’re making that claim when they paper is closed access and I’m t

    Not sure how you’re making that claim when they paper is closed access and I’m taking my read from a post here on twitter that includes the graphs that illustrate the math. 😉

    I’ve been following this question for twenty years, and the number was generally around 10k, which is a reasonable. The minimum of 1500 looks about right to me. I just didn’t realize it lasted for 100k years.

    But it certainly explains the gaping hole in the fossil record. And it informs us as to why we made such progress in the past 1m years.

    Reply addressees: @FarajRashi93307

    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-06 18:39:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699492459527413760

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699491124526674335

  • If you study physics, economics, and neuroscience – at least at the operational

    If you study physics, economics, and neuroscience – at least at the operational rather than biochemical level, you will have a rather complete understanding of the spectrum of models that constitute our observable universe. Knowing the limits of mathematics, computation, simulation, and sets(language) doesn’t hurt either. Because at that point you know the four sciences: physical, behavioral, logical, and the logical outcome of the evolutionary: continuous recursive disambiguation at all scales by the conversion of entropy into stable relations we call persistence.

    Reply addressees: @skdh @PavlosProkopeas

    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-06 00:10:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699213545106223104

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1698987982898774111

  • Economics is a science but mathematics is limited in description of it. This is

    Economics is a science but mathematics is limited in description of it. This is the fundamental difference between economics and physics. Because physical laws are rigidly consistent, firmly deterministic, continuous and invariant, and behavioral laws are only loosely categorically consistent, loosely deterministic, discrete and variant – for the simple reason that humans have memory, predict from it, with new information respond to changes in information (stimuli). Hydrogen and oxygen can’t wake up in the morning and decide they don’t want to make water.
    In retrospect we can explain economic phenomena, and loosely predict the general direction for a short time in the future, and because all economics eventually reduces to questions of demographics, we can produce some limits on our estimations – but explaining is not the same as predicting.
    And unfortunately science has presumed prediction rather than explanation as the qualification for science, rather than the gradual discovery of fundamental law and their plasticity in response to change.

    Reply addressees: @Leon1969 @skdh

    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-06 00:07:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699212664197554176

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1698945772891382088

  • RT @curtdoolittle: @Hail__To_You I have, but none of these theories are mutually

    RT @curtdoolittle: @Hail__To_You I have, but none of these theories are mutually exclusive. There was gene flow among hominids all over the…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-05 17:31:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699113085187788928

  • An assertion without evidence. We are confident in the causes of neotenic expres

    An assertion without evidence.
    We are confident in the causes of neotenic expression and the results in domestication syndrome. We are not yet sure how this regulation of migration of stem cells from the neural tube is reduced, for the simple reason of the complexity of regulation of gene expression in real-time.
    That confidence is expressed in ethnic (race) rates of gestation, maturation, impulsivity, intelligence allocation, minor variations in personality, life span, and phenotypic expression. All those traits share in common reduction in rate and depth of sexual maturation, in exchange for longer plasticity of development, greater self-regulation, and longer life spans. The question, about personality for example, where minor differences (+/- .01-.02 in populations make a large difference in social behavior). Or say, for intelligence, (deltas of 15, 15, 6) are profound, again, when in large numbers. Even the difference in impulse control is substantial at scale.
    The fact that the science has to be ‘carefully’ published (see Robert Reich’s group controversy) does not diminish the fact that the leading genetic research organizations are cautiously warning us that we must accept that there are substantial and meaningful differences between the races, sexes, and classes.
    The fact that you would seek to lie about it in order to preserve the pseudoscientific postwar movement to suppress sex class ethnic and race differences, is a measure of either your susceptibility, failure of due diligence, or lack of morality.

    Reply addressees: @nthg2see @BTC_i_Hodl @Mbali_2466 @_TOLANI_

    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-05 16:31:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699097971218952194

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1699089672218026441

  • BTW: “Fallacy of appeal to credentialism.” IOW: Do you ask the doctor, a general

    BTW: “Fallacy of appeal to credentialism.”

    IOW: Do you ask the doctor, a general practitioner, about the experimental vaccine, or do you ask the scientists who constructed it, or do you ask the scientists who ran the field trials? Or do you ask one of the top three people in the field of virology (that’s all that ever exists in any field) for his opinion after reviewing all of the evidence?

    One of the lessons we learn in economics is that knowledge is not commutable. In other words there are probably two or three people who specialize in some economic niche who will give you the correct answer to a query, where nearly all of the remaining economists will give you the wrong answer. This is why X economists or X scientists agree is a nonsense argument.

    The difference is some economists know it. Some physicists know it. But not a lot of other people know it.

    Reply addressees: @scrumble_eggs @lauferlaw @elonmusk @alx

    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-05 04:51:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1698921843820843008

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1698879138277597200

  • I have, but none of these theories are mutually exclusive. There was gene flow a

    I have, but none of these theories are mutually exclusive. There was gene flow among hominids all over the place. That doesn’t alter the fact that we have very clear evidence of the locations and sequences of the expansion of “anatomically modern humans” first and “fully modern humans” (with the full ‘toolkit’). The only thing I’m not sure of is the recent data that forces us to consider whether the east asian south-to-north migration or west-to-east migration had the greater influence. It looks to me like the west to east but that could be wrong. Everything else fits.
    So think of the gene flow out of Africa as the dominant sent of surviving genes, and neoteny (the value of social behavior) the universal direction of all evolutionary speciation.

    Reply addressees: @Hail__To_You

    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-04 19:15:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1698776860472078336

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1698771536738480473