--Mikelkuras 07:31, 12 January 2007 (PST)
MiLK here (2007.01.12):
George, please send an email to the address on my paper (firstname.lastname@example.org) if you can so that I can give you a better email address to use. Thanks.
M Kuras here: (2007.01.11)
I too am not able to attend physically. But I do plan to attend as possible remotely.
You and I have two of the four papers to be discussed in one of the sessions. Of those, I find yours to be closest to my own in perspective. I share many of your concerns.
I would hope that we can find a way to collaborate beyond this symposium.
--George McC 05:33, 8 January 2007 (PST)
I am really disappointed that I won't be able to attend the symposium - however my intention is to try to provide some comments on as many of the papers that I am listed to discuss as I can. I look forward to some feedback on what I have provided - it is unfinished due to the fact that I was unable to drum up the support of my business for attending, but I do think that it contains some issues that will have to be addressed.
It is perhaps pertinent that this week on the systems dynamics mailing list there is discussion on how to increase the use/impact of SD - I note that Sarah has contributed to that thread. The difficulties are not dissimilar to (or unrelated to) those that complexity science also face.
Looking forward to some 'virtual interaction'.
Having been through a number of papers there are certain themes that come through - as would be expected. There are some that I haven't yet found (forgive me if I have missed them I haven't gone through all the papers in detail) and that I would have expected to gain some airing within this community.
I'll just make brief mention here of three - they are not intended to be the only omissions, they are simply some aspects of how SE needs to deal with complexity that I consider important:
- the first is touched upon a little by some of the papers and it is the different dimensions/domains of the systems that we deal with. Sarah uses three as her examples - INCOSE, systems engineering processes and the national air traffic control system. This is one type of distinction, but I haven't seen anything discussing in any depth the interaction of these different types of system (again an example of what I mean is Sarah's mention of the DAU). A slightly different view of things is that taken by Kent Palmer - for those not familiar with Kent's work you may need to read a few of his papers on that site.
- the second is to do with system representation and specifically the work of Robert Rosen in this regard.
- finally, and I am cheating slightly here, two quite different techniques/tools for addressing some aspects of complex systems engineering - one, system dynamics, is coming at it from the systems perspective and the other, OpEMCSS, comes at it from the engineering perspective.
To be honest I feel a bit mean pointing out anything missing when there is such a wealth of good material. However, I think it is vitally important to apply complex systems thinking to researching complex systems so it is necessary to consider many different perspectives.