Matteo Smerlak: Difference between revisions
From Santa Fe Institute Events Wiki
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Complex Systems Summer School 2013}} | {{Complex Systems Summer School 2013}} | ||
I'm a theoretical physicist, with interests ranging from general relativity to quantum mechanics and non-equilibrium statistical mechanics. I'd say the common theme in my research projects is "relativity"—the realization that something is actually much more observer-dependent that I had imagined. I find this idea enormously beautiful, and tend to look for it everywhere. Did you know that your red T-shirt will be blue to me if I run into your arms? | I'm a theoretical physicist, with interests ranging from general relativity to quantum mechanics and non-equilibrium statistical mechanics. I'd say the common theme in my research projects is "relativity"—the realization that something is actually much more observer-dependent that I had imagined. I find this idea enormously beautiful, and tend to look for it everywhere. Did you know that your red T-shirt will be blue to me if I run (very fast) into your arms? | ||
A couple of random ideas: | A couple of random ideas: | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
- One interesting connection between physics and evolution I've come across is the "fluctuation theorem". This mathematical property of stochastic processes turns out to provide a common explanation to the second law of thermodynamics (increase of entropy) and Darwinian evolution (increase of fitness). I've blogged about this on John Baez's "Azimuth" [http://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2012/10/08/the-mathematical-origin-of-irreversibility/]. I'd love to know how you react to this surprising connection, and what outlook you see. | - One interesting connection between physics and evolution I've come across is the "fluctuation theorem". This mathematical property of stochastic processes turns out to provide a common explanation to the second law of thermodynamics (increase of entropy) and Darwinian evolution (increase of fitness). I've blogged about this on John Baez's "Azimuth" [http://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2012/10/08/the-mathematical-origin-of-irreversibility/]. I'd love to know how you react to this surprising connection, and what outlook you see. | ||
- The result which really got me excited about complex systems is West's and Bettencourt's "scaling law of cities". As far as I can tell, it's really the first "law of cities". Does it tell us whether cities—like animals—have a maximal size? | - The result which really got me excited about complex systems is West's and Bettencourt's "scaling law of cities" [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852329/]. As far as I can tell, it's really the first "law of cities". Does it tell us whether cities—like animals—have a maximal size? | ||
Latest revision as of 15:51, 4 June 2013
| Complex Systems Summer School 2013 |
I'm a theoretical physicist, with interests ranging from general relativity to quantum mechanics and non-equilibrium statistical mechanics. I'd say the common theme in my research projects is "relativity"—the realization that something is actually much more observer-dependent that I had imagined. I find this idea enormously beautiful, and tend to look for it everywhere. Did you know that your red T-shirt will be blue to me if I run (very fast) into your arms?
A couple of random ideas:
- One interesting connection between physics and evolution I've come across is the "fluctuation theorem". This mathematical property of stochastic processes turns out to provide a common explanation to the second law of thermodynamics (increase of entropy) and Darwinian evolution (increase of fitness). I've blogged about this on John Baez's "Azimuth" [1]. I'd love to know how you react to this surprising connection, and what outlook you see.
- The result which really got me excited about complex systems is West's and Bettencourt's "scaling law of cities" [2]. As far as I can tell, it's really the first "law of cities". Does it tell us whether cities—like animals—have a maximal size?