Reexamining “Free Energy Rate Density” as a Complexity Metric

Ken Solis
{"title":"Reexamining “Free Energy Rate Density” as a Complexity Metric","authors":"Ken Solis","doi":"10.22339/jbh.v7i1.7102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cosmic Evolution, by Eric J. Chaisson is arguably one of the original “core” texts of big history. Despite being published over 20 years ago, it is still relevant for its explanation of the cosmological and thermodynamic underpinnings of the evolution of complex systems over the span of time. It was also a pioneering work because it proposed that we can quantify the degree of complexity of systems by determining the quantity of the “free energy rate density” or FERD (abbreviated as “Ωm” in Cosmic Evolution) that flows through a system. Although Chaisson advises that his correlations of FERD to complexity degree is subject to various limitations and generalizations, careful analysis of the arguments and examples used to support FERD indicates that it is even less likely to be as reliable and quantifiable than he purports for at least the following reasons:1. The author offers a relatively short list of criteria for a system to qualify being “complex” that in turn results in the inclusion of systems that are not classified as complex by usual criteria. 2. Free energy rate density is not compared against other complexity metrics and subsequently seems to serve as its own “gold standard.” The lack of comparisons results in a tautological argument and sometimes questionable conclusions.3. The argument for FERD sometimes deviates from the hypothesis that FERD is a good way to measure the degree of a system’s complexity to a claim that it also measures complex functions and structures as well. 4. The FERD that he reports are often actually for the total energy flow through a system. Hence, a much more efficient complexity might only appear to be less complex. 5. Complex systems have many variables that can confound attempts to make reliable and precise generalizations, including good metrics for their degree.","PeriodicalId":326067,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Big History","volume":" 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Big History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22339/jbh.v7i1.7102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cosmic Evolution, by Eric J. Chaisson is arguably one of the original “core” texts of big history. Despite being published over 20 years ago, it is still relevant for its explanation of the cosmological and thermodynamic underpinnings of the evolution of complex systems over the span of time. It was also a pioneering work because it proposed that we can quantify the degree of complexity of systems by determining the quantity of the “free energy rate density” or FERD (abbreviated as “Ωm” in Cosmic Evolution) that flows through a system. Although Chaisson advises that his correlations of FERD to complexity degree is subject to various limitations and generalizations, careful analysis of the arguments and examples used to support FERD indicates that it is even less likely to be as reliable and quantifiable than he purports for at least the following reasons:1. The author offers a relatively short list of criteria for a system to qualify being “complex” that in turn results in the inclusion of systems that are not classified as complex by usual criteria. 2. Free energy rate density is not compared against other complexity metrics and subsequently seems to serve as its own “gold standard.” The lack of comparisons results in a tautological argument and sometimes questionable conclusions.3. The argument for FERD sometimes deviates from the hypothesis that FERD is a good way to measure the degree of a system’s complexity to a claim that it also measures complex functions and structures as well. 4. The FERD that he reports are often actually for the total energy flow through a system. Hence, a much more efficient complexity might only appear to be less complex. 5. Complex systems have many variables that can confound attempts to make reliable and precise generalizations, including good metrics for their degree.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重新审视 "自由能率密度 "这一复杂性指标
埃里克-J-柴森(Eric J. Chaisson)所著的《宇宙进化论》可以说是大历史的原始 "核心 "文本之一。尽管已经出版了 20 多年,但它对复杂系统随时间演变的宇宙学和热力学基础的解释仍然具有现实意义。它也是一部开创性的著作,因为它提出我们可以通过确定流经系统的 "自由能率密度 "或 FERD(在《宇宙演化》中缩写为 "Ωm")的数量来量化系统的复杂程度。尽管柴森表示,他将 FERD 与复杂度的相关性进行了各种限制和概括,但仔细分析用来支持 FERD 的论据和例子可以发现,FERD 的可靠性和可量化性甚至不如他所声称的那么高,原因至少有以下几点:1. 作者为一个系统是否符合 "复杂 "的标准提供了一个相对较短的清单,这反过来又导致将一些按照通常标准无法归类为复杂的系统包括在内。2.自由能率密度没有与其他复杂性指标进行比较,因此似乎成为了自己的 "黄金标准"。3. 自由能速率密度的论证有时会偏离 "自由能速率密度是衡量系统复杂性程度的好方法 "这一假设,转而声称自由能速率密度也能衡量复杂的功能和结构。4.4. 他所报告的 FERD 实际上通常是指通过系统的总能量流。因此,效率更高的复杂性可能只是看起来没那么复杂。5.5. 复杂系统有许多变量,这些变量可能会扰乱可靠而精确的概括,包括对其复杂程度的良好度量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evolution = Exchange Explanation of Time Dilation of High Redshift Quasars, Surface Brightness, and Cosmic Microwave Background with the Stress Cosmology The General Law of Being, Article 3: The Ultimate Cause of Evolution Two Theoretical Perspectives to Explain Big History: Fred Spier & Pedro Ortiz Cabanillas Structural Change in Big Economic History
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1