June 28th, 2024

> Second law: You cannot expect actual order (stable structure) to arise spontaneously. If you see it, there must have been a controlled process lurking behind the scenes which involves entropy production in the larger naturally unfolding context.

> An example would be: A priori, if I tossed a 100 coins and they all came up heads, or if all the gas molecules were repeatedly going to one corner of the room, you'd be surprised, and consider it a thermodynamic miracle. However, if you were more careful, you'd notice how this is an open system, and point out some systematic force that biases it towards a "low entropy" region, producing a bunch of heat in the process, in accordance with the Second Law over the whole system.

> Cosecond law: You cannot expect deep caring (stable commitment) to arise via control/force. If you see it, there must have been organicness/freedom lurking behind the scenes which involves connection, even in contingently-arranged controlled situations.

> An example: You and I might have met in order to work on a project; our relationship might be purely instrumental and it would be surprising if it extended beyond into true love. But not really: it's possible that we have liberated interactions within that container that allow back and forth openness and integration of our more personal sides, which is in line with the cosecond law.

I don't believe it

(struck that I have some sense of this wrt 2nd law, but I feel like insofar as I've traced the proof it's pretty loose)

science, progress

"gears" understanding

reductionism

likelihoods describe things that are compact, causal, modularly defined

posteriors are complex, depend on lots of factors

LCM <=> GCF

cartesian ? sets <=> disjoint union sets

MO > same fact-ness? like integrals & differentials

S > yes, theorems for free

MS > but that's a statistical thing

(I think that that's still viewing it in the causal frame. in the telic frame it looks more like "no, it's because he wants to win and can")

is it possible to dualize?

if so, what does it look like?

(but there's a choice of dual, depending on how you structure the first category)

meaning and duality

(beyond chapter 1 not very readable)