System synergies: Chaotic or predictable?

I should probably point out that the mathematical terminology information field theory is not (rpt not) what I am referring to when I use the term, information fields, which I equate to Morphic fields and Morphic resonance. 

Information field theory (IFT) is a Bayesian statistical field theory relating to signal reconstruction, cosmography, and other related areas.[1][2] IFT summarizes the information available on a physical field using Bayesian probabilities. It uses computational techniques developed for quantum field theory and statistical field theory to handle the infinite number of degrees of freedom of a field and to derive algorithms for the calculation of field expectation values. For example, the posterior expectation value of a field generated by a known Gaussian process and measured by a linear device with known Gaussian noisestatistics is given by a generalized Wiener filter applied to the measured data. IFT extends such known filter formula to situations with nonlinear physics, nonlinear devices, non-Gaussian field or noise statistics, dependence of the noise statistics on the field values, and partly unknown parameters of measurement. For this it uses Feynman diagrams, renormalisation flow equations, and other methods from mathematical physics.[3]

I should probably point out that the mathematical terminology information field theory is not (rpt not) what I am referring to when I use the term, information fields, which I equate to Morphic fields and Morphic resonance.

Tell them Jim, tell em! Tell em about the Morphic fields! http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina43.htm

kosst_amojan
The true test of a theory is whether it has explanatory and predictive powers in reality which are verifiable through experiment. No thought Sheldrake has ever produced measures up to that standard. Who cares if his dopey ideas match up with a mathematical theory? Mathematical theories only matter if they describe reality, and LOTS of mathematical theories and concepts are merely philosophical puzzles with no application in reality at all. It proves nothing.

>>>>>Not sure what you’re trying to say but Morphic fields are not the same thing as mathematical field theory. It’s not a mathematical theory. It’s a biology theory. Before you can attack a theory you kind of have to know what it is you’re attacking, yes? Of course if you want to attack blindly.... 😎 

Besides, Morphic resonance was proven in a contest. 😬

Hey, millercarbon, thanks for posting the link. That’s mighty decent if ya! Here’s an excerpt from my opus on Morphic Fields for Audiophiles,

“So, let's start with the hypothesis that information itself produces detrimental information fields and that those things, the electronic devices, that bring that information into the house, that are essentially the LINKS to the OUTSIDE WORLD OF INFORMATION, are also detrimental to the sound. Thus, TVs, computers, cell phones, as well as LPs, CDs, DVDs, Blu Ray discs, cassettes, I.e., all music and video media, produce detrimental info fields. i won't even get into books, magazines, newspapers, bank statements, telephone books and bar codes. So while it's nice to collect these CDs and records and have them all nicely arranged on the shelf the more you have the worse the sound gets. Sorry to be the one to break it to you. You're just not aware of the degradation of the sound because it happens over a long period of time - and even if you were clued into the degradation who would suspect the CDs, right? Who would suspect information fields? I mean, really. But I digress.”