Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Syntropy (software)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Lightbound in topic Redirect Priority

Untitled

[edit]

How 'Edgy' is Syntropy?

To what extent is Syntropy accepted as a plausible theory by mainstream science? Is it a subject of scientific debate, and is it gaining or losing currency and credibility?  Preceding unsigned comment added by Global46 (talkcontribs) 00:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Syntropy — tendency versus a property of a state

[edit]

Quoting the definition in the article:

"Whole Systems": "A tendency towards order and symmetrical combinations, designs of ever more : advantageous and orderly patterns. Evolutionary cooperation. Anti-entropy."[1]

The relation of syntropy as defined above and entropy as defined in physics is unclear. For one thing, a tendency of a system is definitely different in kind from a property of the state of a system, which is what entropy in physics is. The quoted definition is of a social sciences flavor rather than of the rigor of natural sciences. —Dan  Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.245.110.163 (talkcontribs) 17:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Redirect Priority

[edit]

This page is just a breath above an advertisement, and not even well formed yet. I am going to certainly argue and make the point that a point of knowledge should be the main result when searching for the word "syntropy," not a programming tool. "Syntropy" is a well established concept in the literature of scientific knowledge and should not be trumped for a piece of software. I am adding this article to a disambiguation for syntropy and re-establishing the physics concept of syntropy as the main result of the keyterm. --Lightbound talk 03:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply