system dynamics

What came first Design (Gene – DNA – Chromosomes) or Building Material (Protein) :- Architecture Paradox

Below is the Reply to a Question what came first DNA or Protein? One seem not to exist without the other. This a paradox.

System is combination of questions (problem domain) and answers (solution domain) – why, how, what, when, where. Also, it alludes to transformation – lets say driven by entropy. So, system dynamics.

A. DNA precedes Protein – possible

B. Relation between Gene, DNA, Chromosome and what it does to Protein

C. Paradox of DNA vs Protein – leads into Intelligent Design Discussion

D. Method to bring our mind to study them and arrive at more hypothesis, postulates or just appreciate the grandeur we live in.

A. Paper presented at NIH – discusses the possibility of DNA preceding protein.

DNA before proteins? Recent discoveries in nucleic acid catalysis strengthen the case.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19215202

B. Think Architecture Talk Language. I think we are struggling to represent complex concept structurally – typical architecture problem discussed with constraints of linearity in language.

a. Instruction Set
Chromosome is a molecule containing DNA cell
DNA cell is made up of gene segment
gene has basic unit code or stroke on piano
chromosome describes the script or note on piano = set of strokes
{Chromosome [(DNA(GENE)]} = information = coded tune for set of functions to emerge
I think chromosomes also knows how to orchestrate the choreography that finally realizes the living organism.

b. Construction Material
Protein is the building block. It gets instruction from set of chromosomes and it builds creating complex forms from simple building blocks. Complex forms are uniquely created with different functional capability.

More complex living organism, more complex sets of chromosomes. Simpler organisms have smaller number of sets of chromosomes. Humans have 23 pairs, that is 46 chromosomes

DNA, Chromosomes and Gene
http://www.dnatutorial.com/DNAChromosomes.shtml

Discussion on DNA – Protein
http://www.nobelprize.org/educational/medicine/dna/

C. Paradox of DNA vs Protein leading into discussion about Intelligent Design discussed below

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/which-came-first-dna-or-protein/

D. My own spin – studying Implicate Order and System Dynamics; proposed by David Bohm

Design (DNA) was created either by a designer or by an “emergence process – emergent architecture”. Also, it could be affected by both causality or acausality.

Chromosomes (DNA) is the implicate order – by generative process it creates the explicate order (everything external) in rich diversity. It is such an architecture, where the ontology of which has containment of the process of creation (notes, tunes, choreography and orchestration)

Complex subjects or ideas needs to be investigated employing integrative tools. To understand the how vs what paradox, we have applied ideas from what we have understood of the world from following disciplines – biology, chemistry, physics and economics + maths. It is the fight for resource (economics), which brings in modes of life form emergence from its simpler forms to complex forms. The fight for resource is both inter and intra. Fiscal Cliff is the fight amongst ourselves. Rich and Poor’ who should own the resource and who should benefit. It is fight for control and eventually our life.

Implicate order, studied within the notion of system driven by entropy discusses energy and need for achieving stability via entropic journey creating order and chaos. This creates various social structures with varying stresses. Order and Chaos are English words to describe the state of entropy as it dynamically exists in a continuum – System Dynamics. This is very well discussed in the video below.

Very beautiful video to see if a different perspective on thermodynamics helps our understanding of complexity and even more of life itself.

password “montana”

The unique form that living organism takes; probably could be described combining macro & micro physics (quantum dynamics) and chemistry. Applying Pauli’s Exclusion Principle – different energy pattern affect composition, so we have a periodic table.

Advertisements

Bailout is (was) an Attempt to Saddle a Dead Horse

A Metaphor for Proffering a Dead System as a Solution

A Metaphor for Proffering a Dead System as a Solution – Pls Buy Picture from Devian Art

2013

Fast-forward Forbes reports dismal growth in small business sector

http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2013/03/13/wall-streets-hollow-boom-with-small-business-and-startups-lagging-employment-wont-pick-up/

2013 March – from above link 

<<Since big companies largely have recovered, and government employment has grown, at least at the federal level, clearly the real problem lies with the poor performance of smaller, and most critically newer, firms. In the past, young businesses bailed out the economy and spurred innovation. Yet today fewer than 8% of U.S. companies are five years old or younger, down from between 12% and 13% in the early 1980s, another period following a deep recession.>>

Also I am tempted to add that big business in their own motivation for fortune increase are also cause for demise of many small businesses. The coveting democracy and capitalism often times corroborate  at the cost of destroying free enterprise, while advancing their own schemes, as we have seen in awesome Movie Tucker – The Man and His Dreams

2008

Elusive Enterprise Darwinism (Nov 2008)

By saddling a dead horse the system cannot be changed. Resurrection is not change and it is best left to those who are above humans. The system pertaining to human will ever remain in the bondage of life and death. And, this system is governed by entropy. By merely doling out money to dying mechanisms newer mechanism do not appear. Only when a non-working system dies by a process of generative transformation newer system emerge. Bailout has the hazard of creating cancerous areas in the system. Studying programmed cell death it is evident that nature has desired that divine ‘death by design’ a willing suicide be a necessary intervention for regulating organism’s life-cycle. As the older mechanism dies it imparts newer properties and characteristics to the emerging mechanism. In the newer mechanisms the older parts that prove not to be useful to the newer function become the vestigial organs and they die. If the older mechanism is forced to perform in the newer paradigm requiring completely newer set of rules, they create stress within the existing structure and eventually the system will implode.

Some of the bail out money could have been directly be invested in the lower denomination who are suffering, while allowing for some of the institutions to undergo its natural decay. It must be borne in mind what bailout means to different sectors. Manufacturing sector and such employs more blue collar workers, while the Service sector employs more white collar workers. Among the two, it is the blue collar who are more in denial and it is these people who work tireless to render the system more economic.

Rising Like a Phoenix

Rising Like a Phoenix

What has to rise is not the dysfunctional economic system, but the existing mass with newer modes of making a living and a just-ful process of compensation. All most all the corporates have turned into a feudalistic system giving rise to machiavellian personalities that is useful to only handful of the masses. The hedge funds etc were to be used as instruments to an investment that would protect one from the future fluctuations.  Instead, it was deviously turned into instruments to be used for investing in abstract and complicated risks.

Change is difficult and needs bold moves from the masses. In the past land reform occurred and the feudalistic system was removed by passing land reform act ‘ land for the tiller’.  Moving forward, more such systemic development needs to occur especially newer economic system has to be planned that accelerates the micro-finance  distributing small and quick money that promotes small businesses.  What is needed is a syndication mechanism that promotes development at the grass root level. Furthermore, stringent rules have to be put into place that governs individual contracting. The existing laws are full of holes that exploits the vulnerable individual contractors. In this 21st century any notion of emancipation is a far fetched concept. But certainly there will be CHANGE as it has always happened. It is an entropic property of the system in which dwells both order and disorder. When change happens it will be a ‘step function’ – ferocious, fast and ruthless.

Refer Following Article Why Demise of Ill Conceived Business Should Fall:-

http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/haque/2009/03/heres_why_we_should_let.html

Economics: – The Enterprise, Autonomy for an Enterprising Individual, Sovereignty and Road to Fiefdom

Article by – Srinidhi Boray

Anti- Thesis to John Galt from Atlas Shrugged. Was  John Galt part of Wall Street meltdown? Nope. Could he work towards Health for All through Collective efforts. Nope. He, then can be Apple, that which has no real systemic benefit to mankind’s alleviation, although is the wealthiest (2012). Nope, maybe …probably…in such hesitation….men….mind….and machine..of what higher cause can they ever serve. Many such perplexing questions has been pondered timeles !!!

Also, much misunderstood and much flouted are habeas corpus and one’s prerogatives in the context of an individual, enterprise (collection of individuals) and sovereignity.

An enterprise presumes that it has a behavior. Meaning there is an input of resources, it is processed and then there is an output. All these works against the competition for a commercial company and for the government against the shrinking budget. Overall the behavior of the enterprise is measured by outcome, which is a cumulative and analytical result of the input, the process and the output. All these together perform under the system. Lets call it Sovereignty. It is the sovereignty which introduces the policy and the logic for the system to behave in a certain way. Mostly guided by the socioeconomic criteria.

In the past century there have been two starkly different Sovereignty Systems. One was based on Keynesian Economics developed by British economist John Maynard Keynes – The general Theory of Employment, Interest and Money . Thiswas very popular post world war for nearing three decades. In the Keynesian theory, the sovereignty played a dominant role by constantly regulating the market diminishing the role of  individual businesses. Meaning macroeconomics preceded microeconomics. During this time there also existed another theory proposed by Friedrich August von Hayek. The economics theory lead by  Hayek contrasted that with Keynesian by arguing for lesser intervention by the sovereignty and unleashing the creative individuals in the market place and allowing for market to correct by itself by process of self-regulation. In contrast to Keynesian economics Hayek laid more emphasis on microeconomics & de-regulation rather than sovereignty determined macroeconomics. As an anti-thesis to Keynesian economics, Hayek published ‘Road to Serfdom’. This publication iconoclastically argued that the Keynesian economics inevitably would lead into serfdom (cartoon representation). Hayek’s economics influenced the era beginning with Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. It was based on Hayek’s theory that globalization was fiercely sought.

For any Enterprising Professional, it is difficult not to acknowledge that in either of the economic theories, Fiefdom was thriving at its hilt. In Hayek era the intrusive state of the Keynesian was replaced by domineering Oligarchy business houses in which domineering and Machiavellian managers manipulated and schemed non-existing business market to advance their own careers . The effect of both the state and oligarchy on the enterprising and ethical individual was to stifle. Although in the Hayek, the individuals certainly did thrive, but then the ‘economy of scale’ lead the small businesses subsequently  to become behemoths and introduce hegemony into the system where creative individual went into oblivion.

Coming back to Enterprise behavior, it can be concluded that the dysfunctional behavior in either of the economics era, was introduced by  the chicaneries that underpins fiefdom. This led to eventual doom in the Wall Street. Today we have both the systems intermingled as evident by the bail out plan and one should wonder with a  shudder about the amok run that is to compound, should fiefdom be allowed un-arrested.

Also, it is but evident that pluralistic framework is emerging where both Keynesian’s sovereign led macroeconomics and the Hayek’s free enterprise microeconomics are blending to form a heterogenous system The sovereignty provides the macrocosm while the individual ingenuity provides impetus to the dynamic microcosm. This means as an Enterprising Individual, one needs to incorporate inclusive perspectives where both the macro and micro coexists, as not being disjointed, rather both being deterministic of each others behavior. ‘Implicate Order’ provides basis for such a scheme of things. And, ‘Syndication’ as a mechanism will prevail providing the needed impetus to the grass root level.

Few years later after writing the above article, came across this soul searching documentary by Jamie Johnson, lineage of Johnson and Johnson family. He talks about 1 Percent who control pretty much everything in America. Very well made and well intioned documentary. In the documentary After hearing President Bush pay tribute “To a hero of freedom – Milton Friedman, he has used a a brilliant mind to advance a moral vision”, Only thing that is left to said is this, now an individual is a soul lost forever in the concrete wilderness of capitalistic corporate that democratic government we create protects. Continue to remain in a straight jacket, at least for now, autonomy for an individual is cause lost forever.

Enterprise Architecture – Theory of Constraints – EA unravels Complexity – ‘Success is not Luck’

Goldratt on ‘Theory of Constraint’

    Advt based on TOC – Regulated Harmony

While credit card speeded up the process, it did take away money from one and made dependent on the Creditors. Credit Card companies make awesome loads of money taking advantage of the imposed systemic dependency. (antithesis)

    Note: TOC attempts to detect bottlenecks in processes (especially in a simpler process cell) that may eventually choke the entire system.

Self Regulating Chaos (subconscious intelligence)

    Or is it really Harmony Discerned from Chaos !!Probabilistic Determinism – seems like Harmony, While individual occurances are stochastic (random)

Case Study – Strategy & Enterprise Architecture

Strategy Game  

By Srinidhi Boray

Enterprise Engineering & few fundamentals to ponder about : –  

 

Definition of EA as a subject? (is it management, or economics, or sociology, or psychology, information technology, is it any one of these or all of them working together choreographed by chaos, or the management’s whim, or the market forces). What really is this dicey animal !?Where do the following elements fit in the larger EA space :

 

  • Structure
  • Behavior
  • Canonical View,
  • “Single Version of Truth”
  • Strategy
  • Capabilities
  • Vision
  • Mission
  • Goals
  • Objectives
  • Features
  •  Requirements
  • Specifications

 

 

There are many definitions for EA. Almost all  the attempts from the IT folks renders the boundary of the EA quite narrow and it tends to become IT centric. The original vision for EA was to encompass the broadest sense, while making the best attempt in capturing the descriptive details of an enterprise existing as a magnificent juggernaut. 

 

Try asking several who have worked at the same company for several years to describe the company they work for. Each one of them will come up with their own description as the picture conjured in their mind. None of them will have a common definition. In some abstraction they all are attempting to define the single truth. But when the description is broken down into details, then each will come up with a model that suits best to the picture that they carry in their mind. Is this wrong? And, should one attempt a ‘canonical’ view, a term quite favorite to IT folks. At the highest and the broadest sense, a single version of truth necessarily does not mean a canonical view. But when dealing with information engineering within the information architecture cross section, then canonical view is certainly a notion to work on to achieve a unified enterprise wide information framework. 

 

As an exercise, or for an excellent case study, you can read the document at the following link http://www.sec.gov/about/secstratplan0409.pdf) published by SEC. This is their 2004 to 2009 Strategic Plan.

 

Very good document to explore from EA perspective, although as an EA one might not find it to be structured accurately. That is the job of the EA anyway to ‘structure’, while understanding who has written this – Is it CEO, CIO or CTO. Obviosly it is not CTO or CIO. Also questions you will ask are: Does this document deal with the strategic plan or it is really dealing with tactical requirement? Then it could be ‘strategy’ in this document is a tautology issue. If not, then from management perspective what really is a ‘strategy’ and how is it different from ‘tactical’ efforts that improves the overall performance or the organizational effectiveness. Which disposes an enterprise uniquely, is it strategy or tactics? Refer Michael Porter on ‘what is strategy’. Structurally where does ‘strategy’ lie and where should ‘tactics’ exist. Is strategy from EA framework perspective, concept, context or logical? Can ‘tactic’ lie in the same space as ‘strategy’, if not then where should it be. What values are the thoughts like these adding to EA. 

“What is Strategy?”    

 

Michael E. Porter     Harvard Business Review, November-December 1996.Today’s dynamic markets and technologies have called into question the sustainability of competitive advantage. Under pressure to improve productivity, quality, and speed, managers have embraced tools such as TQM, benchmarking, and reengineering. Dramatic operational improvements have resulted, but rarely have these gains translated into sustainable profitability. And gradually, the tools have taken the place of strategy. As managers push to improve on all fronts, they move further away from viable competitive positions. Michael Porter argues that operational effectiveness, although necessary to superior performance, is not sufficient, because its techniques are easy to imitate. In contrast, the essence of strategy is choosing a unique and valuable position rooted in systems of activities that are much more difficult to match.Order article at Harvard Business Online

 

Ram Charan’s Lecture 

 

Why is it crucial to know how to link Strategy to Tactical Execution (Most Failures occur here)

And, render Governance via a ‘social system’ as a productive unit of work. 

 

 

Now after gaining some clarity on ‘strategy’ what are the thoughts running in the mind, presumed that it is wearing the EA hat . (its always piqued at its tip 🙂 ) I guess some like these :- The overall entropy. The overall system dynamics. What SEC does to secure stability in the market. The types of financial derivatives exists in the market. How market trade different products. What Fed does to ensure market stability. How policies are made and why? How are they operationalized.  How can the various behaviors be better described and understood. Why did the market fail despite all the systems in place. Why did ‘randomness’ or speculation become the dominant behavior. What is a Systemic Fault and how did it manifest. What role does EA play in understanding all these?