Chaos

Product Information

Psinet to Sell Consumer Internet Division". The New York Times. July 2, 1996 . Retrieved March 23, 2009. Glazier, James; Gunaratne, Gemunu (February 1988). "Chaos: Making a New Science". Physics Today. 41 (2): 79. Bibcode: 1988PhT....41b..79G. doi: 10.1063/1.2811320. ISSN 0031-9228. Graduate seeks job ↔ employer seeks graduate. Seems simple enough, right? But research shows that some employers struggle to attract just a few graduates, while others are flooded with applications. How does a process that should be straightforward become so complicated? And, more importantly, what approach should you be taking? Frenkel, Karen A. (1 February 2007). "Why Aren't More Women Physicists?". Scientific American. 296 (2): 90–92. Bibcode: 2007SciAm.296b..90F. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0207-90 . Retrieved 11 July 2017.

Shlesinger, Michael F. (March 1988). "Book review: Chaos: Making a new science". Journal of Statistical Physics. 50 (5–6): 1285–1286. Bibcode: 1988JSP....50.1285S. doi: 10.1007/BF01019170. ISSN 0022-4715. S2CID 122110686. Hilborn, Robert C. (November 1988). "Chaos, Making a New Science". American Journal of Physics. 56 (11): 1053–1054. Bibcode: 1988AmJPh..56.1053G. doi: 10.1119/1.15345. ISSN 0002-9505. We found that things we might never have thought to compare, like the human immune system, financial markets, and early talent recruitment, are actually strikingly similar. So the next time you’re trend-spotting, try applying a chaotic scientific lense. You might find that things have more in common than you’d expect. They’d no idea how fragile, unstable, and chaotic physical systems like the Earth’s weather really are. It took a mathematically-minded meteorologist to demonstrate this. Rohde, David (21 December 1997). "Plane Crash Kills Son of Best-Selling Author". The New York Times.

Royal Society Prize for Science Books. Shortlisted Entries". Chaos. The Royal Society . Retrieved 3 June 2011. I found this to be a startling revelation. It certainly goes against my engineering mindset, where things work the way they do, first time, every time, and randomness is really caused by some error or external force you don't quite understand. Chaos theory proposes that randomness is inherent in nature, and even the most carefully controlled conditions may result in unexpected results. Simple and determined (in every detail) systems can behave in an extremely complicated way, apparently random and almost unpredictable. Lewis, Michael (1989). "Review of Chaos: Making a New Science". Human Development. 32 (3/4): 241–244. ISSN 0018-716X. JSTOR 26767401.

Michalski, Jerry (January 31, 1994). "Pipeline: Not Just Another Pretty Face" (PDF). Release 1.0. pp.9–11 . Retrieved March 23, 2009. The smallest variations in the way you start something can have huge effects on how it turns out later down the line. It’s a bit like missing your regular train by a minute, which means you miss your connection, and so you end up being fifteen minutes late instead of just one. The smallest differences in your campus strategies, application processes, on-boarding, and development approaches can have enormous effects on the future of your graduate talent pool and organisation as a whole.Chaos: Making a New Science was the first popular book about chaos theory. It describes the Mandelbrot set, Julia sets, and Lorenz attractors without using complicated mathematics. It portrays the efforts of dozens of scientists whose separate work contributed to the developing field. The text remains in print and is widely used as an introduction to the topic for the mathematical layperson. The book approaches the history of chaos theory chronologically, starting with Edward Norton Lorenz and the butterfly effect, through Mitchell Feigenbaum, and ending with more modern applications. In fairness, there was a long gap where I put this book down after having read the first half, so I recognize that I lost the continuity of the narrative. And maybe, just maybe (highly doubtful!!)I'm just not smart enough to get it. Still, a whole lot more could have been done to illustrate the application and implications of the subject. I also didn't care for the tone of the brief profiles of the various physicists and mathematicians - it felt like name-dropping to me.

In each field, also, the initial work was most often either resisted or ignored. Precisely because chaos was popping up all over, with just a few people in each of many different scientific fields, it was easy for scientists in any field to notice a paper or presentation, note the fact that is was completely different from the methods, logic, math that had relevance for their own work, that much of the work was in fact being done in other fields--and dismiss it. For new doctoral students, there were no mentors in chaos theory, no jobs, no journals devoted to chaos theory. It completely upended ideas about how the natural world worked. It was heady, exciting--and much harder to explain than to demonstrate. Much of what the first generation of chaos scientists did is incredibly easy to demonstrate with a laptop computer today--but most of these chaos pioneers were working with handheld calculators, mainframe computers with dump terminals and limited and unreliable access for something so peripheral to the institution's perceived mission, computers whose only output device was a plotter. Meisel, Martin (Spring 1988). "Review of Chaos: Making a New Science". The Wilson Quarterly. 12 (2): 138–140. ISSN 0363-3276. JSTOR 40257307. Devaney, Robert L. (November 1989). "Review of Chaos: Making a New Science". The College Mathematics Journal. 20 (5): 458–459. doi: 10.2307/2686940. ISSN 0746-8342. JSTOR 2686940.

Become a Member

My big grievance with this book is it falls too short. His narrative is compelling, yes, the stories are interesting, sure, but he doesn't grab the central characters as well as a new journalist like John McPhee does. He floats too far above the actual science and complexity. He shows you pictures and dances around the pools of chaos and clouds of complexity, but never actually puts the reader INTO the churning water or shoots the reader into energized, cumuliform heaps.

A problem for God. Transitions in the laboratory. Rotating cylinders and a turning point. David Ruelle’s idea for turbulence. Loops in phase space. Mille-feuilles and sausage. An astronomer’s mapping. “Fireworks or galaxies.”New beliefs, new definitions. The Second Law, the snowflake puzzle, and loaded dice. Opportunity and necessity. Bolch, Ben W. (January 1989). "Review of Chaos: Making a New Science". Southern Economic Journal. 55 (3): 779–780. doi: 10.2307/1059589. ISSN 0038-4038. JSTOR 1059589. For examples, consider a jellyfish and the ink dropping in water. Although one is a living being and the other is not, about shapes, they are quite similar. The lightening paths and the shapes of some trees are also such examples. The universal rules have some features breaking the common sense.