Thank you rb for this move to clarity
and to Roger, who made a first attempt by introducing into this distinction
between three classes:
rb tells us that we should think of those as processes and not of their
outcome. I'll try to do that.
First of all I would like to say that what all humans deal with, is
representation. For me the existence of the world and of myself are
ontological. We cannot do much about this, we believe in the real, I believe
I exist, I believe you exist, a priori I believe that objects I see, exist,
even if I try to verify there are not hallucination by talking to some
other. The fact that I can give some attribute to what exists is exactly the
phenomenon of representation. We need representation to communicate about
what exist. But representation is a complex construction based on
-cultural aspects including knowledge science art and also many practices.
We cannot restart representation from scratch.
-personal past and present experience
-some anticipation of the future.
Science is also a type of representation and include some cultural aspects,
that makes it specific. Basically the attempt to create morphisms between
what we believe is real and a "sharable" representation. This ability to
share a representation is cultural and is based on the possibility given to
anyone to destroy it, by exhibiting some link to an experience, that infers
some contradiction with the representation.
I worked as an engineer in numerical simulation for 20 years. I did many
types of calculations, all related to the continuum mechanics field. For me,
simulation is on the prospective aspect. Making a model assumes
- a proven theory (I should say not contradicted) representing some portion
of the nature
- some applied mathematics theory
- a validation process (real experiment are simulated)
- the consistency of the outcome with the implemented theory
From there we try to make some analog to a thought experiment put into the
calculation world, this in order to observe what would happen. We can check
the consistency of the outcome, but we cannot prove the prediction, because
generally simulation is done where we have no possibility to make an
experiment (or enough experiments). So simulation is a type of
representation that emphasizes the anticipation. Emulation would be the
simulation of what is already known. To me representation includes
simulation that includes emulation.
Well the model is here to help us make new decisions, to take actions (we
already made many decision in making the model). What is interesting is the
fact that besides this form this anticipation leading to an act, we stored
in a compact form many aspects of knowledge. In a way, when we look to
simulations made in the past (e.g. prehistorical cave drawings), the
anticipation is no more our concern and we see the desire and the knowledge.
Somehow this became art.
2010/2/2 r buiani <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> thank you all for these inspiring thoughts, and thanks for the distinction
> between emulation, simulation and representation. .
> I thought there was something missing in this discussion and I think the
> last interventions provided a key to understanding the subject more
> thoroughly. the discussion addressed simulation in general through
> conceptual definitions and discourses that explain its mechanisms. I am
> glad we are now moving to more specific cases and to a "taxonomy" of
> simulated objects (sorry if I keep using the word simulation, but in this
> discussion we had a tendency to use it as an umbrella term, rather than a
> specific one, which brings me to my points)
> 1) general definitions tend to gloss over the distinctions between various
> types of simulations or simulated phenomena (there is a great difference
> between a "simulation" used to communicate or to understand a specific
> phenomenon (e.g. a microscopic organism, a coded piece of information) and
> "simulation" that acts as a metonymic, or metaphoric device (a brand, or a
> virtual world)
> 2) we tend to focus on the product, and not in the processes that lead to
> such product (e.g. the process that leads to a --or different types of--
> visualization products as opposed to the process that leads to simulation in
> everyday life or in film)
> 3) we tend to define simulation a linear progression and an ubiquitous
> phenomenon (that is, as an avoidable process that involves the entire sphere
> of knowledge)
> I think that the above points (and probably more, but these are the one
> that immediately come to mind) benefit our understanding of simulation but
> also hinder cross-disciplinary understanding and promote secrecy and some
> sort of suspicion (or misunderstanding) towards the producers of and the
> processes behind the production of simulated objects. for instance, the
> distinction between emulation, simulation and representation are indeed very
> useful, but how do you transmit these distinction to someone who keeps
> thinking that they are all and the same thing?
> as a person deeply invested in cross-disciplinary communication, science
> communication and in collaborative processes I am interested in these
> issues and how they could be (ever) circumvented.
> On Feb 2, 2010, at 1:15 AM, Avi Rosen wrote:
> The gene
>> contained a Morse- encoded verse from the biblical Book of Genesis. The
>> verse reads: "Let man have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the
>> fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth."
>> This verse implies humanity's domination over nature. Morse code
>> the dawn of the information age - the genesis of global time and space
>> compression. The Genesis gene was incorporated into bacteria, which were
>> shown in the gallery. Web surfers could control ultraviolet illumination
>> the gallery, causing biological mutations in the bacteria containing the
>> Genesis verse.
>> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of ramon
>> Sent: ב 01 פברואר 2010 16:57
>> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS
>> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] simulation vs emulation vs
>> i would say that in these terms its representation or emulation, clearly
>> simulation, the pixels in the image are placed by some kind of graphic
>> routine directed by a program but none of this is simulating any
>> processes. like a graphic of a blooming flower which can be very detailed
>> but is never based on cellular behaviour integrated to the flower level,
>> graphic on dna does not consider the interaction between pixels or nuclear
> --- On Mon, 2/1/10, roger malina <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> thanks for the example of molecular dynamics-
>>> i guess i would distinguish three sub categories
>>> - representation/ eg a walt dysney cartoon that elicits
>>> human response like
>>> the physical phenomenon but the animation does not encode
>>> any physics
>>> - emulation- where the representation behaves like the
>>> physical phenomenon
>>> but does not encode the same physical assumptions ( eg a
>>> computer can
>>> emulate old software but runs on new computer chips and
>>> emulates the way the
>>> old chips behaved)
>>> - simulation- where the software system encodes the best
>>> scientific laws
>>> available to enable a system to behave like the real
>>> phenomenon= many
>>> artificial life systems try to do this
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to.
> In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
> password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the
> unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.