Psychohistory and Chaos
Antony M Hammitt
been working with artificial neural networks in order to predict
chaotic dynamical systems, such as population dynamics. The gist
of the research is, although a system is chaotic, that doesn't
mean that it isn't predictable.
Right now, we're in the very infancy of ANNs, in 20-50,000 years
we'll either be able to use them to predict very large systems
or we'll have found something else to take their place. So, if
Hari wanted to predict a large chaotic system, I have no trouble
believing that he could get it done.
Tony
Bill Clinton is a Romulan, or a Pakled
They should make the Draft retroactive and send Clinton to Veitnam
--Mort Walker, Beetle Baily
Mark Schnitzius
>Right now, we're in the very infancy of ANNs, in 20-50,000 years
>we'll either be able to use them to predict very large systems
>or we'll have found something else to take their place. So, if
>Hari wanted to predict a large chaotic system, I have no trouble
>believing that he could get it done.
I have no problem with his predicting large chaotic system. It's
just that, if memory serves, there was a particular leader who was
in charge of the whole schmeer, whose decisions affected many, many
different planets. Unless they could predict human behavior accurately
(and even if they can) I don't buy it.
--
Mark
Joseph M. Fisher
: ant...@IASTATE.EDU (Antony M Hammitt) writes:
: >Right now, we're in the very infancy of ANNs, in 20-50,000 years
: >we'll either be able to use them to predict very large systems
: >or we'll have found something else to take their place. So, if
: >Hari wanted to predict a large chaotic system, I have no trouble
: >believing that he could get it done.
I agree. I'm just a 17-year-old freshman and all I know about chaos and
ANNs is what I've gleaned from the Foundation series and Jurassic Park and
a few simplified explanations in science magazines. But chaos as a
general principle explains the behavior of natural systems, so given time
to advance with ANNs we should be able to predict the direction of large
human systems as well. There is a definite pattern to human behavior.
That's how advertisers make their money and why wars get started even
though we know everybody loses.
: I have no problem with his predicting large chaotic system. It's
: just that, if memory serves, there was a particular leader who was
: in charge of the whole schmeer, whose decisions affected many, many
: different planets. Unless they could predict human behavior accurately
: (and even if they can) I don't buy it.
: --
: Mark
The problem with the idea that a human system can be directed is its
assumption that a single person or even a group of people can't radically
change the direction of a society. In reality, this does happen. I don't
want to drag religion into this, but Jesus Christ undoubtedly had a
profound effect on the course of history, whether you look at him from a
religious or historical angle. Also, even in the Foundation series, Hari
by himself enacted a major change.
Perhaps Asimov makes reference to this phenomenon when in "Prelude to
Foundation" he refers to a robot that acted as a sort of savior for one
world and destroyed another. I read it awhile ago, though, and I haven't
touched the robot series at all, so I don't want to make any definite
statements.
Overall, the idea seems to work in Hari's advanced world. Even in this
one, advertisers make money even though people like me ignore them. But
we can't make the probability of a successful prediction 100%. It's not
likely, but a Jesus or a Hari can always show up.
Joseph Fisher
Opinionated Amateur Writer, for lack of a title or quote
Washington and Lee University