Chaos

Product Information

Balazs, Nandor (March 1989). "Review of Chaos: Making a New Science". The Quarterly Review of Biology. 64 (1): 112–113. doi: 10.1086/416224. ISSN 0033-5770. JSTOR 2831779. Rohde, David (21 December 1997). "Plane Crash Kills Son of Best-Selling Author". The New York Times. Neat, huh? I'm totally stoked by these bad boys. Of course, we're all, yeah, we use those equations all the time now and it's old hat, but not so long ago, they were totally in left field and none of the big boys wanted to play with them. When I walk along the streets on a fine day, I see clouds and trees and the boundaries formed by blue skies and mountains. And also, I see buildings. After I read this book, I enjoy walking even more. The images of man-made structures are composed of regular shapes like lines, rectangles, and circles. But the images of nature seem to be fundamentally different. The shapes of nature are irregular and far more diverse, and are also more beautiful. The waves at the sea shore and the sounds of seagull purify and heal my mind. What makes nature so special that man cannot imitate it perfectly? Chaos theory can give an answer for the question. It claims the following: 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.

Neither cellular networks nor the physical internet would exist today without Shannon’s insights. It can be argued that Shannon was not a hundred years ahead of his time like Babbage or Einstein, but it can also be argued that Shannon’s findings have transformed the world more than any individual in history. Odd as that sounds it is probably true. Loevinger, Lee (Summer 1988). "Review of Chaos: Making a New Science". Jurimetrics. 28 (4): 505–509. ISSN 0897-1277. JSTOR 29762101.Untitled (NYC98FA047 crash narrative)". National Transportation Safety Board. US Government. Archived from the original on 17 October 2014 . Retrieved 12 October 2014. A new start at Los Alamos. The renormalization group. Decoding color. The rise of numerical experimentation. Mitchell Feigenbaum’s breakthrough. A universal theory. The rejection letters. Meeting in Como. Clouds and paintings.

Michalski, Jerry (January 31, 1994). "Pipeline: Not Just Another Pretty Face" (PDF). Release 1.0. pp.9–11 . Retrieved March 23, 2009. Moreover, if we try to analyze the complex system using geometry, then we come to encounter fractal geometry, not ordinary Euclidean geometry in which main objects are lines, rectangles, and circles. Shapes in fractal geometry again resemble shapes in natural phenomenon like clouds, trees, sea shore, etc. Chaos theory is really charming. I enjoyed reading this book thoroughly. However, I do not think it will satisfy everyone who is considering reading it. I know many of my librarian colleagues and my classmates from the School of Information probably have this on their to-read lists. Many of them are probably more interested in contemporary issues of information management, such as information retrieval, social network analysis and human-computer interaction. This book touches some of those issues, and indeed many others, but this book is primarily about the history of information theory. The subtitle of the book is "A History, A Theory, A Flood," but the Flood part is only discussed in the final chapters. The rest of it is devoted to the theory and history. 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.Look. In the distance. Do you see the light? The lantern in the tower, the fire signal; it has lit. However, apart from all these philosophical implications about life, I really wanted to learn a bit of science behind chaos theory. This is my 2nd attempt at this book almost 2 years later and the book is still uninteresting as it was before. I believe this is one of the most "overrated" books out there. The book is hugely popular, always comes at first when you are looking for recommendations about chaos theory books. So, first time I really had doubts about myself. I thought maybe I am not doing justice to this book. I still had my doubts this time. So, I spent substantial amount of my time behind this book. And I think I have done enough and cannot do anything more for this book.