Perhaps because I read too much Asimov as a child and was unduly fascinated by psychohistory.
Perhaps because I was always going to be a historian until I dropped out to play with computers for a living.
Perhaps because my best friend is studying Computational Physics.
Perhaps because Crush is an historian and I am computerian and this way we have a project that combines our expertise and can be a testament to our love.
Perhaps because I have a first-edition copy of Wolfram's immense opus A New Kind of Science.
Perhaps because I have consumed too much Chlorpheniramine Maleate.
Regardless, I have been toying with some ideas.
Last week I attended the launch of a book dealing with Counter Factual or Virtual History:
"a way of examining the events of the past in order to form judgements about particular decisions made by individuals, or to evaluate circumstances that have occurred"These ideas instantly got me thinking: "What if you could simulate history"?
"a form of history which attempts to answer "what if" questions. It seeks to explore history and historical processes from the point of view of extrapolating a position in which certain key historical events did not happen or had an outcome which was different to that which did in fact occur"
If you could create a model of the geo/socio/eco/politico/culturo system, then you could simulate historical events ... and more importantly, you could play with the variables in the system in order to gain insight and understanding.
I am not saying this would be easy, of course, but I think it could be done.
The model would only ever be a gross approximation, but the best part about histroy is that you can create a model and see if it results in a replication of actual historical events. This means that a model can be tested against actual experimental data, so to speak. So if (for example), you take a set of starting conditions, input these into the model and simulate the rise of Nazi Germany or the development of Colonial Powers, or the Middle East, then the model can be verified against the "real world" and then theses initial conditions (simular to a potential in molecular simulation*) can be used to play with variations in the historical conditions to gain insight into "what if".
Playing with some ideas this week and I realised the hardest part of the project is really in the assumptions one makes about the way things work ... the more I have delved into various theories about 'stuff,' the more I have realised that this is a slippery slope into a dark dark hole. I think that staying on a a very 'applied' level is the only answer here. Stick on the systems level, deal with the empirical information, verified against 'fact' (which is of course another slippery slope).
So that's my latest hare-brained scheme ... ambitious?
And more:
Because of the problem of assumption, I was actually thinking that what is needed is a simulation modelling language with an ability to create macro-style scripts. People could then buiuld and extend the model to handle particular sets of assumptions. So a Marxist would add a class dynamic, for example. To this end I looked at Common Lisp. And freaked out.
Has to be way of handling this in a language that I know.
* I think. Charlie gibbers at me and I pretend to grok what the hell he is talking about.
15 comments:
Charlie jibbers at you too?
i reckon you should plug the book that gave you this charming idea.
My brain hurt just reading that, let alone trying to comprehend it. I am in awe of your smarts, sir. In awe and slightly nervous.
*backs away slowly so as not to spook the mad genius*
Can we still be friends if I tell you that Wolfram is a nasty piece of work and that the better ideas in that book were not his and anyway he refused to let any of it be peer reviewed, with which I also have issues?
Genius to have come up with Mathematica.
That's all I'll concede on that topic.
About the simulations, It sounds good but I need to think about it before I decide. Interesting problem...
yes, ambitious. but crush sounds really really smart.
I'm with richardwatts. I have a sudden urge to learn more about... stuff. Not sure what stuff, exactly, but there is clearly more knowledge needed here. By me, that is. You seem to have plenty of it over there.
Oh well.
*skips off to watch the OC*
elaine - sing it, sister - PEER REVIEW IS KEY.
i agree.
that's not all i have to say on the matter, either. but i'll leave that rant for another day.
oh, and toby, you are smart. and unreasonably good-looking. and i especially love your...hair.
and baby, today was bliss.
Ooooh! Check out the couple being all couple-ish!
Toby, how do you feel about a pre-Mogwai dinner at the Corner's front bar about 8pm Tuesday with me and Davethescot?
I have a very firm distrust of the academic system and peer review is one way (among many) of ensuring controversial ideas remain outside the system ... given the terribly track record of science and academia to dismiss new ways of thought because they are outside the dominant paradigm.
* Self-censors controversial and ill-thought rant about academia *
That said, at least peer review is a nod in the right direction.
Richard: Tuesday sounds wicked to me. KP is coming too.
I allow that to be true or partially true (the paradigm-propping of academia), also the realisation that, in specialised fields, peers are also competitors - if not for funding then for ideas.
Do you have other ideas of how research can be verified before being published in journals? There should be more thought this way...
I guess of particular concern with
A New Kind of Science is that along with no peer review, Wolfram self-published. Effectively meaning that this book and any ideas/thories etc. espoused within underwent no form of independent review or verification whatsoever -hence its 'contraversial' tag - and so, is no more trustworthy than The Celestine Prophesy.
And... are you telling me that the EB(not so)M will be absent this week?
elaine, it's exactly like windschuttle's fabrication of aboriginal history. no peer review, no original research - just trawling through the footnotes of others and adding some hyperbolic [racist] claptrap. and the publisher was...macleay press, windschuttle's own company.
i think toby's right that good ideas are kept out of the public sphere, but it's not academics doing the gatekeeping. it's concentrated [low-quality] media and a general anti-intellectualism in society that stifles free thinking. academics are just as hard hit by this as organic intellectuals.
oh! i didn't tell you...i got a ticket to mogwai - i am truly the last of the great turncoats [and should never be trusted].
try playing a board game called 'Diplomacy'.
You can recreate the world from 1914 on.
Post a Comment