From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!spool.mu.edu!uunet!idtg!dow Sun Dec  1 13:05:55 EST 1991
Article 1676 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca rec.arts.books:10791 sci.philosophy.tech:1184 comp.ai.philosophy:1676
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!spool.mu.edu!uunet!idtg!dow
>From: dow@idtg.UUCP (Keith Dow)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: The Philosophical Foibles of John McCarthy
Message-ID: <339@idtg.UUCP>
Date: 27 Nov 91 17:56:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: idtg.339
References: <1991Nov25.235301.5346@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1991Nov27.143242.5886@uniwa.uwa.oz.au>
Followup-To: rec.arts.books
Organization: Integrated Device Technology, Santa Clara
Lines: 16

>I don't know what motivated John McCarthy's choice of Turbulence as an
>example, but I might imagine that he has heard enough discussion of the
>subject at The Member's Table at the Faculty Club to realize that it is
>a lively subject of debate. For myself, all I can say is that in my own 
>work with Lattice Boltzmann modeling  I use Reynolds' Numbers at least
>10 orders of magnitude too small to be able to make a useful contribution
>to the discussion -- except to say that turbulence does not scale!
>					^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Looks like you should start attacking the problem using renormalization
group theory since the problem doesn't scale.

Also some progress has been made in understanding turbulence.  I went to
"Granola Tech" (University of California at Santa Cruz) and heard several
talks where the speaker had some insight into the onset of turbelence and 
the resulting chaos.


