Kay Ingild

Wishing you all the best!

Thank you for the response It does seem obvious, but I just wanted to rule out an alternative possibility: that only the *concepts* of shapes are being evoked, so the shape couldn't be carved or drawn because it never actually resolves as an object, just a series of shape-related concepts. As in, instead of "looking" at a sculpture of, say, a person, I thought you might be experiencing the concept of person-ness [edit: I mean "person-shaped-ness"]. But that does not seem to be the case

"It took two dozen people several hours to heal a tree." Could I ask how much effort it took to get the tree hurt in the first place? Would it be true to say that the fact of dozens of people working to heal the tree was enabled by those same dozens of people agreeing to act as though the tree had been hurt?

Oh, wow, and I haven't even started fixing the lopsidedness yet! I'm happy that you liked it. I should have some time on the weekend to tweak the image and see if I can get it into the proper format. Once that's done, I guess we can figure out how to proceed from there. Edit to add a [i]slightly[/i] revised image: [attachment=2646:book-tree-revised-small.png] Edit to add avatar versions of both original and revised images: [attachment=2648:book-tree-tiny.gif] [attachment=2649:book-tree-revised-tiny.gif] Er, did I do it right? Is the "MD" visible enough...?

Sorry for the huge delay; I've been swamped at work recently and don't have many brain cells left over for other things First, I've got to say that I was impressed at the amount of thought that you must have put into your choice of principles. I still only have a vague idea how mine might work together. Your essay inspired me to think about this at greater length. Mostly, though, I wanted to ask about the examples you outlined. I conceived (rightly or wrongly?) of your examples as simple circles: after being perturbed, the systems would self-correct and end up in the *same* equilibrium state as before. However, in all cases, it seemed to me at least *theoretically* possible to forestall or mitigate the disastrous self-correction events (turning the circle into a spiral). -Noticing that fires get harder and harder to contain over time, realizing the accumulation of undergrowth is the problem, instituting controlled burns (once again, controlled injections of chaos to maintain the system in a desired state...) or mechanical clearing of undergrowth. -Maintaining and monitoring the levees and environs, predicting river response to a range of conditions including disaster conditions and making sure the levees are built to withstand the worst, maybe even suffering through one disastrous flood and rebuilding the levees as necessary to avoid a future disaster of similar scale. -Noticing that resources are running low before a crisis starts, securing new sources via trade, strengthening economic ties so that other kingdoms are less likely to attack when their own resources fall low (either because it would hurt their own economic situation or because it would call down the wrath of multiple economically interdependent kingdoms on their head). *If* it were possible to make these or similar solutions work, could these then be considered new equilibrium states? I think so, as long as they can be sustained, which would depend on seeking feedback and adjusting constantly. But would you instead consider these to be *unstable* systems, *not* representing a true state of equilibrium, *because* they depend on adjustment/feedback?

Rumi, I see you deleted your posts... are you still interested in some feedback?

My name is misspelled... It's Kay Ing[b]il[/b]d, not Ing[b]li[/b]d -.-

"Ever wondered why there is a sun?" My first response was, That's simple. There's a sun because, first, the laws of physics; second, because there are beings dependent on it who are intelligent enough to ascribe meanings to it beyond those of other stars and thus call it a "sun"; third, because of random chance that the laws of physics ended up the way they did, that a particular star arose in a particular location and acquired a particular kind of planet at a particular distance from the star, that life arose, and furthermore that intelligent life arose. So I wanted to say that it all comes down to random chance, contingency. Then I thought a bit more. Maybe the important part of the question was "ever wondered why" there is a sun. So my second response was, Not until now. I may have when I was very young, but I don't remember doing so. If I did, I would probably have been placated with a vaguely sciencey answer. I guess it takes a different kind of mind to wonder such things, one that doesn't just accept the word of those in authority, provisionally or not. I wondered about the kinds of people who WOULD think in this way; wondered about origin myths and the kinds of people who might have come up with them; wondered about the gap between a child's mind and an adult's mind; wondered whether I could train my mind to think in this fashion. Then I thought, my second response can't possibly be the kind of answer you're looking for. That would be treating the question like a trick question. So I turned back to what seemed like the most natural starting point to me, and wondered whether there might be regularities in the structure of space-time that would make stars likely to happen. I mean, there sure seem to be plenty of stars. But not knowing much of anything about astrophysics, I gave up with that line of enquiry. I tried out another idea: what if there is a sun because the creator of the universe decided it should exist? Presumably then there would be a sun, providing heat/light/energy, because we, either as life in general or as humans in particular, being a significant element in creation for whatever reason, need it. But then why do we need heat/light/energy, and also why was this energy provided in the form of a distant gigantic ball of matter undergoing fusion? This scenario would open many other possibilities for answers, too, metaphoric and symbolic reasons, possibly important to the creator, as to why the sun exists, why it is the way it is. Answers I'm not really qualified to go looking for, as I'm not used to thinking in terms of metaphors and symbols. Perhaps the warmth of the sun would represent the tangible presence of the creator, like the body heat of another person standing next to us; perhaps the reason for the light of the sun is that it allows us to see and know and thus marvel at creation… ugh. I'm not very good at this. Apparently according to a quick Google search the sun also represents an eye, possibly the eye of the creator. I'm... really not good at this stuff. Back to physics, then. Why are there stars? Because there's matter, there's gravity that pulled matter together… Why is there matter? Why is there something instead of nothing? I don't know where to go from here. I'd have to say my final answer is that I have no answer. All I have are questions.

The idea of adding chaos to stabilize a system made me think of vibrating shoe insoles that can help seniors keep their balance when standing (I had a vague memory of reading about this and found more information at http://www.sciencenetlinks.com/sci_update.php?DocID=195). In order to stand upright, we rely on constant feedback. Being unable to sense the feedback (because of decreasing sensitivity with advancing age) makes it harder to compensate for tilting and keep our balance. Injecting "noise" in the form of a vibrating insole helps the feedback pass the sensory threshold so balance can be maintained. With this particular example, it seems to me that the *feedback*, that *sensing* the feedback and then using the information gained, is what allows balance to happen. Does this generalize beyond this example? (I'm not at all sure it would... I'm just thinking out loud here.) But *if* it does generalize, and if as already stated "nothing" and "everything" counterbalance each other, then where would the necessary feedback come from, and what would it consist of, and how would it be "sensed"? Wouldn't this require some point of contact or method of influence? How could "nothing" influence or contact anything? Would this require something like minds that can conceive of nonexistent things? But the "feedback" idea may only apply to some kinds of systems so it may not be at all relevant here.

That worked perfectly. Thank you very much!

When I first joined, my personal page/public URL/online profile showed some of my creatures, my papers, I think my stats, etc. But now it's completely blank. I'm not sure exactly what I did (it was months ago) but I think I clicked on the "personal page" link to the right, which called up an editing screen, then I hit "cancel" and everything disappeared. I might have done something else (quite possibly I deliberately deleted everything, not realizing I couldn't get it back); there might have been an error message at some point; I'm not sure. Is there a way for me to get the original version of the page back? Some "reset" button I haven't noticed yet?

When I first saw that figure, I had an unpleasant reaction to it: "That's not me. That doesn't represent me." Now I'm more used to it and can ignore it (it helps that it's covered in armour), but I still dislike it. One of the items in the shop means you get to see the figure a lot more often, and I resisted buying that item for a long time. I'd turn it off if I could. If the fight screen figure were a little more shapeless, or ghostly, or featureless, I think I'd be a bit happier but I'm not sure.

I'd like to join! I think I'd be better at testing than at quest-making. If I can successfully do your quest you'll know it's toooo easy

Thank you all! Ravenstrider, which parts do you think need most improvement? The base of the trunk being too thick, especially the root in front; the right edge of the trunk wobbling too much; the attachment points of the branches being slightly wonky; the lack of foliage in the upper right, making the tree look lopsided; the too-dark spots in the middle of the leaves... Are those what you meant? Or was there something else? The bark is just scribbles, I know, but if the image ever ends up being used as an avatar I think it would be too small for that to be noticeable, so that's one thing I think I can get away with leaving as is. Handy Pockets, don't worry, erasers were invented for a purpose, and criticism leads to improvement By the way, Ravenstrider, I'm envious of your second picture. I wanted to draw something along those lines but couldn't figure out how to make it work.

I liked the idea of the open book... Here's my attempt: [attachment=2594:book-tree-small.png]