Chaos

Product Information

Lewis, Michael (1989). "Review of Chaos: Making a New Science". Human Development. 32 (3/4): 241–244. ISSN 0018-716X. JSTOR 26767401. A discovery about cotton prices. A refugee from Bourbaki. Transmission errors and jagged shores. New dimensions. The monsters of fractal geometry. Quakes in the schizosphere. From clouds to blood vessels. The trash cans of science. “To see the world in a grain of sand.”

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. 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. His first book, Chaos: Making a New Science, reported the development of the new science of chaos and complexity. It made the Butterfly Effect a household term, introduced the Mandelbrot Set and fractal geometry to a broad audience, and sparked popular interest in the subject, influencing such diverse writers as Tom Stoppard ( Arcadia) and Michael Crichton ( Jurassic Park). [12] [13] The Pipeline [ edit ] 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. All-in-all it reads like pop-science with constant over-the-top enthusiasm in place of a clear, concise, solid explanation of what chaos is.

Here’s three reasons why we loved reading this novel: 1. We love to learn; these ideas were fascinating and grounded in science. 2. It gave us a new way of thinking about the world. 3. It made us think about our world and the graduate space differently An enhanced ebook edition was released by Open Road Media in 2011, adding embedded video and hyperlinked notes. [6] Reception [ edit ] Balachandran, Balakumar; Hogan, John (June 1999). "Featured Review: So You Have Been Asked to Give a Lecture Course on the Applications of Nonlinear Dynamics..." SIAM Review. 41 (2): 375–382. ISSN 0036-1445. JSTOR 2653080.

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. 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. One of the coolest things we learned from the book is that early talent recruitment, training and development form a dynamic system, just like the weather or an ant colony. We can apply the lessons from other dynamic systems, from economic markets to the human immune system, to get a better understanding of what really goes on when hundreds of graduates search through hundreds of employers for internships, placements and jobs. Simple and determined (in every detail) systems can behave in an extremely complicated way, apparently random and almost unpredictable. In my little understanding of the science, I suppose the degrees of freedom I could understand here is perhaps a sibling to the topics of uncertainty principle and paradox of observations.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?

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. 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. Here’s the key message: Meteorologist Edward Lorenz became the intellectual father of chaos theory after discovering the unpredictability of weather. This seminal classic (considered by many here at TST to be a staple read) explores how complex systems like the weather, technology, and economic markets are all essentially a variation of the same thing, and how we can learn lots of different things from that one thing. It’s pretty deep.

Success!

Michalski, Jerry (January 31, 1994). "Pipeline: Not Just Another Pretty Face" (PDF). Release 1.0. pp.9–11 . Retrieved March 23, 2009. Artigiani, Robert (Winter 1990). "Review of Chaos: Making A New Science". Naval War College Review. 43 (1): 133–136. ISSN 0028-1484. JSTOR 44638368. 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.

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. I know this implication of butterfly effect in popular culture is often erroneous. Because it's almost always impossible to know what factors actually tipped off a particular system. But there are always chances that changes in initial condition might accumulate into something different. Or they may not - maybe things happen inevitably. However, we have no way to learn! Loevinger, Lee (Summer 1988). "Review of Chaos: Making a New Science". Jurimetrics. 28 (4): 505–509. ISSN 0897-1277. JSTOR 29762101. 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. And the car accident scene from "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldoHL...Rohde, David (21 December 1997). "Plane Crash Kills Son of Best-Selling Author". The New York Times.