Summary
This book argues that scientific complexity is fundamentally about how systems change over time, not their static structure. Prigogine introduces "dynamical complexity" as a novel concept that tracks the multiple ways a single system can evolve, making it a marker for how fruitful and difficult scientific inquiry into that system will be. The book synthesizes insights from various complexity measures under this banner, aiming to reliably differentiate complex from simple systems and enable cross-talk between sciences that previously seemed unrelated. It applies this framework to the global climate as a paradigmatic dynamically complex system, arguing that its high dynamical complexity demands strongly interdisciplinary inquiry and that failure to recognize this role has led to much criticism of climate science. The formalism of "effective complexity" is used to underwrite and make precise these intuitive judgments about complexity.
Key concepts
- Dynamical complexity — A novel concept defining complexity as a feature of active, changing, evolving systems that can be tracked in numerous different ways over time.
- Effective complexity — A formalism that underwrites and makes precise the intuitive formulation of dynamical complexity.
- Dynamically complex system — A system that admits sensible and useful consideration from a large variety of different perspectives, with chaos and non-linearity being properties of models rather than the systems themselves.
- Complex systems sciences — Sciences distinguished from simple systems sciences by the ascription of dynamical complexity, enabling fruitful cross-talk between previously unrelated branches.
From the book
Title: From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences by Ilya Prigogine← Lightning in a Bottle ( 2014 ) by Jonathan Lawhead → 2042358 Lightning in a Bottle 2014 Jonathan Lawhead Layout 2 Lightning in a Bottle Jonathan Lawhead Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2014 2014 To the extent possible under law, Jonathan Lawhead has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to Lightning in a Bottle. No rights reserved. ABSTRACT Lightning in a Bottle Jonathan Lawhead Climatology is a paradigmatic complex systems science. Understanding the global climate involves tackling problems in physics, chemistry, economics, and many other…
Popular questions readers ask
- The text introduces "Dynamical complexity" as a concept designed to bridge mathematical complexity theory with a general account of science. If you were explaining this concept to someone with no background, what specific problem does "dynamical complexity" aim to solve that existing definitions of complexity, primarily developed for information-theoretic objects, fail to address for physical and social systems?
- Climatology is presented as a "paradigmatic complex systems science" due to the interaction of many different components at varying temporal and spatial scales. How does this multifaceted interaction specifically challenge our ability to predict system changes over time, and in what ways does a "multidisciplinary and holistic" approach address these predictive challenges?
- The author notes that foundational questions include "How do we know that we can trust science?" when facing a complex system. If "Dynamical complexity" provides a physical interpretation of mathematical tools, how might this physical interpretation directly enhance our ability to build and justify trust in scientific models for complex systems like the climate, particularly concerning their predictions and explanations?
- The text mentions that existing definitions of 'complexity' are often developed for information-theoretic objects. How would you illustrate, using a simple, non-climatic example, the difference in understanding a system's "dynamical features" when viewed through an information-theoretic lens versus the "physical interpretation" offered by dynamical complexity?
- Considering that "Dynamical complexity provides a physical interpretation of the formal tools of mathematical complexity theory" and serves as a framework for understanding "theories, explanation, and lawhood," how might its application fundamentally alter our understanding of what constitutes a 'scientific explanation' for events or phenomena within a highly complex, multidisciplinary field like climatology?