My name is Randal Lee Reetz
I am an independent science theorist. For almost five decades now, I've been working to formalize a general model of evolutionary change that is independent of biology or any other specific domain, and that explains change at a foundational level.
Science First
First and foremost I am an advocate for the intellectual rigor demanded by science, specifically, its central though not often sited insistence that its practitioners step back from our own wants and fears, our self-interested biases, in order that we may be better able to get to and understand what actually is. Teachers of science often refer to the centrality to science of the "Scientific Method", but they don't often engage discussions that go to the deeper "Why?" question that "the method" is but an answer to. That deeper why (of science) question goes to the heart of what science is, separates science from all other human activities and pursuits, and informs all of the best practices work flows of which "the method" is an example.
What makes science unique? Its acknowledgment that an observer, any observer, all observers, all entities, are self interested and or locally limited and that they can't help but have a tendency to see what they want or fear reality to be instead of what reality actually is. Science then demands that observers identify and then endeavor to build active systems as filters for the noise of their various biases. That is it. That humility that admission of the noise we bring to all observations, is what makes science unique and why science has been so uniquely effective a tool for the investigation and understanding of reality.
Hacking Through the Layers
Science observes (measures), and then science builds models (hypotheses, theory, abstraction, formalism) to explain the observed. Those explanations allow predictions that can be tested against further observations/measurements. The stack of formalisms that results, the stack of explanations of physical reality that science produces can itself become unruly and repetitive. So science works constantly to identify redundancy in theory, seeks constantly to identify those hunks of the scientific tome where the theory is identical and only appears different as a result of the differences between the domains from which the theory was abstracted. Often, when such redundancies are identified, a more general and foundational formalism is built which supports the explanation of the emergence, structure, and dynamics of the various domains which were previously thought to be novel and independent.
My goal has always been to dig down to and to identify the base process that unifies and explains all emergence, all structure, all behavior. This goal is informed by the idea that knowledge can and must be constantly made more accurate and more easily consumed and processed. To understand this universe is to understand the grand process. That process of course is dissipation, is the steady and unrelenting encroachment of disorder we know of as entropy. The result of any change in any system is always an increase in the disorder of the whole universe. Once this is understood and accepted, the only posible conclusion is that the universe, this or any possible universe, is headed towards a state in which everything is as disordered as is possible. This process is the one rule by which the game we call "the universe" is played. That rule ultimately defines everything that happens and important to any understanding of change, that rule defines what Darwin called "fitness". Change in such a system can't help but to get better at and better (to select for) at reflecting the rules of the universe it is occurring within. Evolution then, at its base, is nothing but a system that selects for those structures that better understand the rules of play. The rules of play are 1. this is a universe heading for heat death, 2. survival of a structure is dependent on the fidelity of that structure to the rules of play, and 3. competition ultimately favors those structures that find the shortest path from all here and now's to the one then and there that is heat death.
Darwin in Context
Good old "Chucky D." did a bang up job defining evolution within the domain of biology. His theory is, in general, dead on correct. However, the emphasis he put on individual survival within the context of local environmental constraints, though entirely accurate, hides the larger arch that is the evolutionary process. Darwin explained the "how"of evolution, within the domain of biology, which is a great starting point, a great foundation from which I can explore and define the general and foundational "why" of evolution, independent of domain.
I am an independent science theorist. For almost five decades now, I've been working to formalize a general model of evolutionary change that is independent of biology or any other specific domain, and that explains change at a foundational level.
Science First
First and foremost I am an advocate for the intellectual rigor demanded by science, specifically, its central though not often sited insistence that its practitioners step back from our own wants and fears, our self-interested biases, in order that we may be better able to get to and understand what actually is. Teachers of science often refer to the centrality to science of the "Scientific Method", but they don't often engage discussions that go to the deeper "Why?" question that "the method" is but an answer to. That deeper why (of science) question goes to the heart of what science is, separates science from all other human activities and pursuits, and informs all of the best practices work flows of which "the method" is an example.
What makes science unique? Its acknowledgment that an observer, any observer, all observers, all entities, are self interested and or locally limited and that they can't help but have a tendency to see what they want or fear reality to be instead of what reality actually is. Science then demands that observers identify and then endeavor to build active systems as filters for the noise of their various biases. That is it. That humility that admission of the noise we bring to all observations, is what makes science unique and why science has been so uniquely effective a tool for the investigation and understanding of reality.
Hacking Through the Layers
Science observes (measures), and then science builds models (hypotheses, theory, abstraction, formalism) to explain the observed. Those explanations allow predictions that can be tested against further observations/measurements. The stack of formalisms that results, the stack of explanations of physical reality that science produces can itself become unruly and repetitive. So science works constantly to identify redundancy in theory, seeks constantly to identify those hunks of the scientific tome where the theory is identical and only appears different as a result of the differences between the domains from which the theory was abstracted. Often, when such redundancies are identified, a more general and foundational formalism is built which supports the explanation of the emergence, structure, and dynamics of the various domains which were previously thought to be novel and independent.
My goal has always been to dig down to and to identify the base process that unifies and explains all emergence, all structure, all behavior. This goal is informed by the idea that knowledge can and must be constantly made more accurate and more easily consumed and processed. To understand this universe is to understand the grand process. That process of course is dissipation, is the steady and unrelenting encroachment of disorder we know of as entropy. The result of any change in any system is always an increase in the disorder of the whole universe. Once this is understood and accepted, the only posible conclusion is that the universe, this or any possible universe, is headed towards a state in which everything is as disordered as is possible. This process is the one rule by which the game we call "the universe" is played. That rule ultimately defines everything that happens and important to any understanding of change, that rule defines what Darwin called "fitness". Change in such a system can't help but to get better at and better (to select for) at reflecting the rules of the universe it is occurring within. Evolution then, at its base, is nothing but a system that selects for those structures that better understand the rules of play. The rules of play are 1. this is a universe heading for heat death, 2. survival of a structure is dependent on the fidelity of that structure to the rules of play, and 3. competition ultimately favors those structures that find the shortest path from all here and now's to the one then and there that is heat death.
Darwin in Context
Good old "Chucky D." did a bang up job defining evolution within the domain of biology. His theory is, in general, dead on correct. However, the emphasis he put on individual survival within the context of local environmental constraints, though entirely accurate, hides the larger arch that is the evolutionary process. Darwin explained the "how"of evolution, within the domain of biology, which is a great starting point, a great foundation from which I can explore and define the general and foundational "why" of evolution, independent of domain.
Comments
Post a Comment