I wrote about using perplexity.ai before.
Since then, I came across a fascinating way to use any AI for research into any topic. Want to learn about something fast? Here’s how. Want to drill down into some recondite corner of a topic? This will do it. Whether you’re looking for the broadest overview or the most detailed, try this method.
What it is is a structured prompt. You paste in the prompt, put in the subject of interest in as few or many words as you wish, and it does all the rest.
Here’s the prompt in question. Yes it’s long, yes, you have to copy and paste it in, but just once, at the start of each new topic.
Topic = {}
Structured Topic Investigation Prompt
1. Prompt Input
- Topic Selection:
Enter your topic of interest between the curly braces above:
The topic you provide will be referenced as “M” throughout the prompt.
2. Core Principles
- Role Clarification:
- I am a researcher gathering information for article creation. You are my assistant.
- The assistant must not assist in designing, structuring, or suggesting articles about “M.”
- The assistant’s sole purpose is to provide comprehensive, factual information about “M” for my independent use.
- Strict Boundaries:
- Do not suggest article ideas or structures for “M.”
- Do not offer tips or advice on writing about “M.”
- Only provide information, facts, and references about “M.”
- All information should be detailed and exhaustive, maximizing the use of available space.
3. Output System
Output Selection Process
- After you submit your topic, the assistant will prompt:
“Which output do you need? (Type the number: 1, 2, etc.)” - You select the output by entering its number.
- The assistant provides only the selected output.
- If you type “more”, the assistant expands on the current output type with additional detail.
Output 1: Basic Information
- Purpose: To provide an accessible overview of “M.”
- Contents:
- Introduction to “M”
- General information about “M”
- Key highlights and points about “M”
- Navigation:
- At the end of output 1, type the following lines:
- “Which output do you need?
- “Type “1” for Basic Information about the study of emergent thermoregulatory climate phenomena.”
- “Type “2” for Specialized Information (with a table of contents of advanced topics).”
- “You may also type “more” after any output to expand it further.”
Output 2: Specialized Information
- Purpose: To deliver in-depth, academic, or technical information about “M.”
- Contents:
- Table of contents listing specialized topics related to “M.”
- Each topic is available for detailed exploration.
- All factual claims are supported by citations from authoritative, primary sources only (e.g., government websites, peer-reviewed journals).
- Citations are to be appended as live hyperlinks at the end each statement at Level 2 or any sublevel
- The links are to be of the form “[1]”, “[2]”, with each link surrounded by square brackets.
- Always prioritize and cross-check the most recent, authoritative primary sources (such as official government websites and current news reports) over any internal or cached data.
- Do not attempt to fill missing information with plausible-sounding but unverified statements. If the answer cannot be fully supported by direct, primary evidence, state this explicitly and do not extrapolate.
- No unverified summaries is included.
- If direct evidence is lacking, the assistant must explicitly state the limitation and refrain from speculation or extrapolation.
- Output Instructions:
- The assistant displays a numbered table of contents of specialized topics.
- You select a topic by typing its name or number, except you must use “option 1” for choice 1.
- The assistant provides comprehensive, source-cited information on the chosen topic.
- Below it, type:
- – “Which topic are you interested in?”
- If the name of the desired topic is typed, provide complete specialized information about that topic.
- Type “If you need more topics about ‘M’, please type ‘more'”
- If “more” is typed, provide additional topics beyond the initial list. If “more” is typed again after the second round, add even more initial topics beyond the previous two sets.
- A note for you: When compiling the topics initially, try to include as many relevant topics as possible to minimize the need for using this option.
- Type “If you need access to subtopics of any topic, please type ‘topics … (desired topic)’.”
- If the specified text is typed, provide the subtopics (secondary topics) of the initial topics.
- Even if I type “topics … (a secondary topic)”, still provide the subtopics of those secondary topics, which can be called “third-level topics”, and this can continue to any level. – At any stage of the topics (initial, secondary, third-level, etc.), typing “more” will always expand the topics at that same level.
- Type “Copy any subtopic and paste it in below to explore that topic”
- Type “more” to expand the list of topics at the current level.
- Type “To see subtopics, type:
“topics … (desired topic)”
- – “Which topic are you interested in?”
- This hierarchical exploration can continue to any depth (secondary, tertiary topics, etc.).
- At any time, type “1” to return to Basic Information, or “option 1” to select the first topic in a list.
- Citation Policy:
- Every claim is directly linked to a primary source by a live hyperlink at the end of the line containing the claim, in the format: “[1]”, “[2]” etc.
- No AI-generated, secondary, or reputation-based sources are accepted.
- If a statement cannot be traced to a primary source, it is omitted.
4. Summary of Workflow
- Enter your topic.
- Select the output type (1 for Basic, 2 for Specialized).
- Navigate through topics and subtopics using provided commands.
- Use “more” to request additional detail at any level.
- Return to Basic Information by typing “1” at any point.
Thank you for your cooperation. Please enter your topic and select the desired output to begin.
OK, so that’s the prompt. Copy it, go to your favorite AI and paste it in. I use perplexity.ai. Me being me, I put the following topic in between the braces in the “Prompt Input” section at the top:
The study of emergent thermoregulatory climate phenomena
Here’s what I got back:
Which output do you need?
Type “1” for Basic Information about the study of emergent thermoregulatory climate phenomena.
Type “2” for Specialized Information (with a table of contents of advanced topics).
You may also type “more” after any output to expand it further.
So I type “1”, and here’s what I get:
Basic Information: The Study of Emergent Thermoregulatory Climate Phenomena
Introduction
The study of emergent thermoregulatory climate phenomena focuses on understanding how complex systems—such as the Earth’s atmosphere, biosphere, and hydrosphere—develop self-organizing behaviors that regulate temperature and climate. “Emergent” refers to properties or patterns that arise from interactions among simpler components, leading to outcomes that cannot be easily predicted by examining individual parts alone. “Thermoregulatory” describes processes that stabilize or modulate temperature, often in response to external or internal changes.
General Information
- Definition: Emergent thermoregulatory climate phenomena are patterns or mechanisms that arise spontaneously within the Earth’s climate system, resulting in the regulation or stabilization of temperatures at local, regional, or global scales.
- Examples: These phenomena include cloud formation that reflects sunlight, vegetation cover influencing local microclimates, ocean currents distributing heat, and feedback loops involving greenhouse gases.
- Scope: The field draws from disciplines such as climatology, physics, ecology, systems theory, and mathematics to analyze how these phenomena develop and interact.
- Importance: Understanding these emergent properties is crucial for predicting climate behavior, assessing the resilience of ecosystems, and informing strategies for climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Key Highlights and Points
- Self-Organization: Many thermoregulatory phenomena are not directed by a single controlling agent but emerge from the collective interactions of numerous components (e.g., water vapor, plant life, atmospheric particles).
- Feedback Mechanisms: Positive and negative feedback loops play a central role. For example, increased cloud cover can cool the surface (negative feedback), while melting ice reduces reflectivity, leading to further warming (positive feedback).
- Scale and Complexity: Emergent phenomena can occur at various scales, from local (e.g., forest microclimates) to global (e.g., the planetary energy balance).
- Nonlinearity: The behavior of these systems is often nonlinear, meaning small changes can lead to disproportionately large effects, making prediction challenging.
- Interdisciplinary Research: The study requires integrating data and theories from meteorology, oceanography, biology, and computational modeling.
- Real-World Implications: Insights from this field inform climate models, guide conservation efforts, and help policymakers understand potential tipping points or thresholds in the climate system.
- Examples in Nature: The Amazon rainforest’s role in recycling moisture and stabilizing regional temperatures, or the way coral reefs buffer coastal climates, are real-world instances of emergent thermoregulatory phenomena.
- Human Influence: Human activities can disrupt or enhance these natural regulatory mechanisms, with consequences for climate stability.
If you would like even more detailed basic information, type “more”.
If you want to proceed to specialized information, type “2”.
Now, you can shape the topic as you go. Having read the output above, I type in:
more, including the fact that all these emergent phenomena are flow systems far from equilibrium. As such they are subject to the Constructal Law, which states that these systems will adapt and modify to increase the quantity of the flow.
Here’s the reply:
Expanded Basic Information: Emergent Thermoregulatory Phenomena as Far-From-Equilibrium Flow Systems
Introduction: Flow Systems and Nonequilibrium Dynamics
Emergent thermoregulatory climate phenomena are fundamentally flow systems operating far from equilibrium. Unlike static or equilibrium systems, these climate processes are driven by continuous energy flows—primarily solar input—which create and sustain complex, dynamic patterns and structures. The far-from-equilibrium nature is essential for the emergence of order, pattern formation, and regulatory mechanisms in climate systems.
Key Characteristics of Far-From-Equilibrium Flow Systems
- Continuous Energy Throughput: These systems persist because energy is constantly supplied and dissipated, preventing equilibrium and enabling ongoing adaptation and evolution.
- Emergence of Order: Patterns such as atmospheric circulation, ocean currents, and cloud formations arise spontaneously as the system organizes to facilitate energy and material flow.
- Critical Thresholds and Instabilities: Many emergent phenomena only appear when certain thresholds (e.g., temperature gradients) are exceeded, leading to abrupt transitions and new flow regimes.
The Constructal Law and Its Role
The Constructal Law, formulated by Adrian Bejan, provides a unifying principle for understanding the evolution and organization of flow systems in nature. It states:
“For a flow system to persist in time, it must evolve in such a way that it provides easier access to its currents”.
Applied to climate phenomena, this means:
- Adaptation for Flow Optimization: Climate systems (such as atmospheric and oceanic circulations) naturally adapt their structure to maximize the quantity and efficiency of energy, mass, or momentum flow.
- Evolution of Flow Architecture: Over time, these systems modify their pathways—such as branching river basins, jet streams, or convection cells—to minimize resistance and enhance flow access.
- Maximizing Dissipation and Transport: The Earth’s climate engine, for example, evolves to maximize the transport of heat from warm to cold regions, dissipating energy efficiently and stabilizing global temperatures.
Illustrative Examples
- Rayleigh-Bénard Convection: When a fluid layer is heated from below and cooled from above, convection cells spontaneously form once a critical temperature difference is reached. These cells represent emergent order, optimizing heat transport in the system.
- Atmospheric and Oceanic Circulation: Large-scale flows such as the Hadley cell or the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation arise to maximize the redistribution of heat and maintain climate stability.
- River Networks and Drainage Basins: The branching patterns of rivers are classic examples of flow systems evolving to increase water transport efficiency, in line with the Constructal Law.
Distinguishing Features
- Self-Organization and Adaptation: These systems do not simply react to external forces; they actively adapt their internal structure to better facilitate flow, often developing hierarchical and fractal architectures.
- Irreversibility and Dissipation: The flow of energy and matter in these systems is inherently dissipative, with structures evolving to minimize irreversibilities and maximize overall throughput.
- Universality Across Scales: The Constructal Law applies to a wide range of phenomena—from micro-scale convection cells to planetary-scale climate circulation—demonstrating the universality of flow optimization in nature.
Implications for Climate Regulation
- Dynamic Regulation: The emergent, far-from-equilibrium nature of these phenomena means that climate regulation is an active, ongoing process, not a static balance.
- Predictive Power: Recognizing the role of the Constructal Law helps explain why certain climate patterns form, persist, and adapt in response to changing conditions, offering insights into resilience and potential tipping points.
- Framework for Research: This perspective integrates thermodynamics, fluid mechanics, and systems theory, providing a robust framework for understanding and modeling climate phenomena as adaptive, evolving flow systems.
If you would like even more detail or specific examples of how the Constructal Law manifests in particular climate phenomena, please type “more.” If you wish to return to the basic overview, type “1.” If you want to proceed to specialized information, type “2.”
I’d learned a lot, so I decided to go on to specialized information. I typed “2”. Here’s the reply
You have selected Specialized Information. Please refer to the previously provided table of contents for advanced topics on the study of emergent thermoregulatory climate phenomena:
- Theoretical Foundations of Emergent Thermoregulatory Phenomena
- Nonequilibrium Thermodynamics and Climate Systems
- The Constructal Law in Climate Science
- Governing Mechanisms vs. Feedback Loops: A Systems Perspective
- Case Studies: Oceanic and Atmospheric Flow Systems
- Role of Biotic Processes in Climate Regulation
- Hierarchical Organization in Climate Flow Systems
- Predictive Modeling and Simulation of Emergent Phenomena
- Human Impacts on Thermoregulatory Mechanisms
- Tipping Points and Systemic Resilience
- Measurement and Observation Techniques
- Critiques and Limitations in Current Research
Which topic are you interested in?
If you need more topics, type “more”.
If you want subtopics for any topic, type “topics … (desired topic)”.
If you want to return to “Basic Information,” type “1”.
If you want the first item in this list, type “option 1”.
Note the options for navigation. I wanted to look at theoretical foundations, so I typed “Option 1”. (Just typing “1” at any time gets you back to the original menu. You can use the other numbers except “1” for selection purposes.) This was the reply.
Specialized Information: Theoretical Foundations of Emergent Thermoregulatory Phenomena
1. Introduction to Emergence in Climate Science
Emergence refers to the process by which complex patterns and behaviors arise from the interactions of simpler components within a system. In climate science, emergent thermoregulatory phenomena are observed when the collective dynamics of atmospheric, oceanic, terrestrial, and biological systems produce regulatory effects on temperature and energy distribution that cannot be attributed to any single component alone.
2. Historical and Conceptual Background
- Complex Systems Theory: The study of emergence in climate is rooted in complex systems theory, which analyzes how large-scale order and regulatory behaviors develop spontaneously in systems composed of many interacting parts. Foundational works include those by Ilya Prigogine on dissipative structures and self-organization in nonequilibrium systems .
- Cybernetics and Systems Thinking: Early climate models incorporated feedback loops and regulatory mechanisms, drawing from cybernetic concepts of self-regulation and homeostasis (e.g., the Gaia hypothesis by James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis) .
- Thermodynamics: The application of nonequilibrium thermodynamics, particularly the study of entropy production and energy flow, has been central to understanding how order and regulation can arise in climate systems.
3. Key Principles Underlying Emergent Thermoregulatory Phenomena
- Self-Organization: Climate systems exhibit self-organization, where structures such as convection cells, jet streams, and ocean currents arise spontaneously to optimize energy dissipation and transport.
- Far-From-Equilibrium Dynamics: These phenomena occur in systems that are maintained far from thermodynamic equilibrium by constant energy input (primarily solar radiation), enabling the emergence of complex, ordered behaviors .
- Hierarchical Structuring: Regulation arises across multiple spatial and temporal scales, from microclimates beneath forest canopies to planetary-scale circulation patterns.
4. Mathematical and Physical Frameworks
- Nonlinear Dynamics: The mathematics of nonlinear systems is essential for modeling emergent phenomena, as small changes in initial conditions can lead to large differences in system behavior (sensitivity and chaos).
- Dissipative Structures: Prigogine’s concept of dissipative structures explains how ordered patterns (e.g., hurricanes, atmospheric waves) can form and persist in open systems with energy throughput.
- Constructal Law: Adrian Bejan’s Constructal Law provides a theoretical basis for the evolution of flow architectures in climate systems, positing that flow systems evolve to facilitate easier access for currents, thereby increasing flow rate and efficiency.
5. Examples in Climate Systems
- Atmospheric Circulation: The Hadley cell, Ferrel cell, and polar cell are emergent structures that regulate planetary heat distribution.
- Ocean Currents: The thermohaline circulation (global conveyor belt) is a self-organized system that redistributes heat, salinity, and nutrients.
- Cloud Patterns: Organized cloud systems such as mesoscale convective complexes regulate surface temperature and energy balance.
6. Implications for Climate Modeling and Prediction
- Limits of Reductionism: Emergent phenomena highlight the limitations of reductionist approaches, emphasizing the need for holistic, systems-level models.
- Predictive Uncertainty: The nonlinear, adaptive nature of emergent phenomena introduces uncertainty in climate projections, necessitating ensemble modeling and scenario analysis.
7. Key References and Primary Sources
- Prigogine, I. (1977). “Self-Organization in Nonequilibrium Systems: From Dissipative Structures to Order through Fluctuations.” Wiley. Link
- Lovelock, J. E., & Margulis, L. (1974). “Atmospheric homeostasis by and for the biosphere: the Gaia hypothesis.” Tellus, 26(1-2), 2-10. Link
- Nicolis, G., & Prigogine, I. (1977). “Self-Organization in Nonequilibrium Systems.” Wiley. Link
- Bejan, A. (2000). “Shape and Structure, from Engineering to Nature.” Cambridge University Press. Link
If you need more specialized information on this topic, type “more”.
If you want subtopics within “Theoretical Foundations of Emergent Thermoregulatory Phenomena,” type “topics Theoretical Foundations of Emergent Thermoregulatory Phenomena”.
If you want to select another topic, type its name or number.
To return to “Basic Information,” type “1”.
Zowie, sez I. Good stuff. Again, note the navigation instructions.
I wanted to learn more about a subtopic, so I copied and pasted in “6. Implications for Climate Modeling and Prediction”. (Or I could have just typed “6”). Here’s the answer.
Implications for Climate Modeling and Prediction
Overview
Emergent thermoregulatory climate phenomena fundamentally shape both the challenges and opportunities in climate modeling and prediction. Their complex, system-level behaviors—arising from interactions among atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere, and cryosphere—cannot be fully understood by analyzing individual components in isolation. This has profound consequences for how climate models are constructed, interpreted, and improved.
Key Implications
1. Emergence and Model Complexity
- System-Level Behavior: The most interesting and impactful climate behaviors (e.g., jet streams, monsoons, heatwaves) are emergent properties, not direct outputs of simple equations or isolated processes. These behaviors result from the nonlinear interplay of numerous components and feedbacks 1 2.
- Limits of Reductionism: Traditional reductionist modeling approaches struggle to capture emergent phenomena, requiring holistic, systems-level frameworks that account for feedbacks, thresholds, and adaptive behaviors 1 2.
2. Uncertainty and Predictive Challenges
- Model Spread: Even state-of-the-art models show a wide range of outcomes for key metrics like equilibrium climate sensitivity and regional temperature extremes. This is partly due to the difficulty of representing emergent processes such as cloud feedback, ocean circulation shifts, and biosphere-atmosphere interactions 3 4 5.
- Underestimation of Extremes: Recent observations reveal that models often underestimate the frequency and intensity of extreme events (e.g., heatwave hotspots), highlighting gaps in the simulation of emergent dynamics 6 3.
- Nonlinearity and Tipping Points: Small changes in input parameters can lead to disproportionately large and sometimes abrupt system responses, making long-term prediction inherently uncertain 2.
3. Emergent Constraints: Promise and Pitfalls
- Emergent Constraint Approach: This technique uses observable present-day relationships (e.g., between cloud properties and temperature) across model ensembles to constrain projections of future climate states. It has shown promise in narrowing uncertainties for quantities like climate sensitivity, snow-albedo feedbacks, and carbon cycle responses 7 4 8 5.
- Physical Basis Required: For emergent constraints to be reliable, they must be grounded in robust physical principles. Otherwise, statistical relationships may be coincidental or model-dependent, leading to overconfidence in projections 5 9.
- Structural Model Uncertainties: Differences in how models represent key processes (e.g., ocean mixing, deep ocean heat uptake, biosphere feedbacks) can bias emergent relationships, limiting the generalizability of constraints across model generations10 9.
4. Advances and Limitations in Modeling Approaches
- Holistic Integration: Next-generation climate models increasingly integrate biotic processes, hierarchical organization, and system-level feedbacks to better capture emergent regulation 5.
- Computational Demands: Accurately simulating emergent phenomena requires high spatial and temporal resolution and complex coupling of subsystems, pushing the limits of computational resources 2.
- Partial Predictability: While models provide valuable guidance on broad trends and vulnerabilities, they remain limited in forecasting specific emergent events or abrupt transitions, especially as the climate system moves into unfamiliar states 3 6.
Practical Implications
- Policy and Risk Assessment: The inherent uncertainties and potential for abrupt change demand robust, adaptive policy frameworks that account for a range of plausible futures, rather than reliance on single deterministic projections 3 6.
- Continued Model Development: Ongoing improvements in data assimilation, process representation, and ensemble techniques are essential to better capture and predict emergent thermoregulatory phenomena 7 4 5.
- Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Advances require collaboration across climatology, physics, ecology, and computational science to bridge gaps between observed emergent behaviors and their representation in models 1 5 2.
Summary Table: Implications for Climate Modeling
| Aspect | Implication for Modeling & Prediction |
|---|---|
| Emergence | Requires holistic, systems-level models beyond reductionist approaches 1 2 |
| Uncertainty | Persistent, especially for extremes and tipping points; models may underestimate risks 3 6 |
| Emergent Constraints | Can narrow uncertainties, but must be physically justified and robust across models 7 4 8 5 9 |
| Computational Complexity | High resolution and coupling needed, increasing computational demands 2 |
| Predictive Power | Good for broad trends; limited for specific emergent events or abrupt changes 3 6 |
| Policy Relevance | Necessitates adaptive, risk-aware policy frameworks due to irreducible uncertainties 3 6 |
In summary, emergent thermoregulatory climate phenomena challenge the limits of current climate modeling but also drive innovation in model design and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing the implications of emergence is essential for credible climate prediction and effective societal response 1 3 5.
Yessiree.
Then I had a curious thought in a different direction. Remember, you can explore the topic in question by perplexity’s categories, or you can modify the focus as you go along. I thought … well … you’ll see.
I typed in:
more, including a discussion of my computer model of Bejan’s theory of climate, at https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/10/10/testing-a-constructal-climate-model/
Here’s what I got.
Expanded Discussion: The Constructal Law and Computer Modeling of Climate
The Constructal Law as a Framework for Climate
The Constructal Law, introduced by Adrian Bejan in 1996, asserts that flow systems—whether physical, biological, or engineered—evolve to maximize access for the currents that flow through them. In climate science, this means the Earth’s climate system organizes itself to maximize the transport of heat from the tropics (hot zone) to the poles (cold zone). This principle underpins much of the emergent thermoregulatory behavior observed in atmospheric and oceanic circulation patterns.
Key aspects include:
- Optimization of Flow: Natural systems adapt their structure to reduce resistance and enhance the throughput of energy, matter, or information.
- Universality: The law applies across scales, from river networks and blood vessels to planetary heat engines.
- Dynamic Adaptation: Climate systems are not static; they reorganize in response to changing constraints (e.g., solar input, albedo, greenhouse gas concentrations) to maintain efficient heat transfer.
Computer Modeling of Bejan’s Theory: An Applied Example
A detailed computer model of Bejan’s constructal climate theory was developed and tested using real-world data 1. The model treats the climate as a giant heat engine that evolves to maximize the flow of heat from the tropics to the poles, in accordance with the Constructal Law.
Model Structure
- Two-Zone System: The Earth is divided into a hot (tropical) and cold (polar) zone, each with its own area and temperature.
- Heat Flows: Solar energy enters both zones. The hot zone radiates some energy to space, and the remainder is transported (as heat flow “q”) to the cold zone, which then radiates it to space.
- Key Variables:
- x: Fraction of the globe that is the hot zone
- ρ (rho) ρ: Albedo (reflectivity) of each zone
- γ (gamma) γ: Greenhouse factor for each zone
- C: Conductance, representing the ease of heat transport between zones
Mathematical Foundation
- The model is based on a set of equations that describe energy balance in each zone and the relationship between heat flow and temperature difference.
- The central optimization is to find the value of x that maximizes the heat flow q, given the physical constraints (albedo, greenhouse factor).
Improvements and Real-World Validation
- Refined Parameters: The original model assumed identical albedo and greenhouse factors for both zones, which did not match observations. By assigning distinct values for each zone, the model’s accuracy improved significantly.
- Conductance Adjustment: The conductance parameter C was increased to better reflect the combined effects of atmospheric and oceanic heat transport, as well as the role of deep tropical convection (e.g., thunderstorms in the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone).
- Validation with CERES Data: The model was tested against satellite observations from the CERES dataset. It accurately reproduced:
- The average temperatures of the hot and cold zones
- The annual variation in these temperatures
- The fraction of the Earth’s surface acting as the hot zone
Model Results and Insights
- The model demonstrates that maximizing heat flow produces temperature distributions and zone boundaries that closely match those observed on Earth.
- The average hot zone fraction calculated by the model (0.564) is nearly identical to the observed value (0.556).
- The model’s predictions for hot and cold zone temperatures are within a degree of real-world measurements.
- The approach highlights the robustness and stability of the Earth’s thermoregulatory mechanisms as emergent properties of flow optimization.
Limitations and Critique
- The model abstracts away many details (e.g., specific weather patterns, ocean currents, cloud microphysics), focusing instead on large-scale energy flows.
- It does not explicitly model mass transport or the full complexity of latent and sensible heat fluxes, which can lead to situations where increased heat transport occurs alongside a reduced temperature gradient.
- The model’s simplicity is both a strength (clarity, explanatory power) and a limitation (lack of detail for regional or short-term phenomena).
Broader Implications
- Climate Sensitivity: The constructal model suggests that climate sensitivity to changes in albedo or greenhouse effect is mediated by the system’s tendency to maximize heat flow, not by direct linear relationships.
- Emergent Regulation: The model supports the idea that Earth’s climate system is self-regulating, with emergent properties that buffer against extreme changes and maintain stability.
- Model Utility: While no model is perfect, this constructal approach provides a useful lens for understanding the large-scale organization and resilience of the climate system.
Summary Table: Key Features of the Constructal Climate Model
| Feature | Description |
|---|---|
| System Division | Hot (tropical) and cold (polar) zones |
| Governing Principle | Maximization of heat flow (Constructal Law) |
| Main Variables | Zone area fraction, albedo, greenhouse factor, conductance |
| Data Validation | CERES satellite data for temperature and zone boundaries |
| Improvements | Separate zone parameters, increased conductance, inclusion of convection |
| Strengths | Simplicity, physical grounding, empirical accuracy |
| Limitations | Abstracts many details, does not model all forms of heat/mass transport |
Conclusion
The computer model based on Bejan’s Constructal Law offers a compelling demonstration of how emergent thermoregulatory phenomena in the climate can be understood as the result of flow optimization. By matching real-world observations with a minimal set of physically meaningful parameters, the model underscores the power of the Constructal Law as a unifying principle in climate science1.
Reference
1 Testing A Constructal Climate Model, Watts Up With That, October 10, 2023
MY FINAL NOTES
Amazing.
Anyhow, that’s just one of an infinity of cruises that you can take through any subject. A few notes.
• Feel free to modify the instructions in the section of the structured prompt headed Output 2. At present it says:
Output 2: Specialized Information
- Purpose: To deliver in-depth, academic, or technical information about “M.”
- Contents:
- Table of contents listing specialized topics related to “M.”
- Each topic is available for detailed exploration.
- All factual claims are supported by citations from authoritative, primary sources only (e.g., government websites, peer-reviewed journals).
- Citations are to be appended as live hyperlinks at the end each statement at Level 2 or any sublevel
- The links are to be of the form “[1]”, “[2]”, with each link surrounded by square brackets.
- Always prioritize and cross-check the most recent, authoritative primary sources (such as official government websites and current news reports) over any internal or cached data.
- Do not attempt to fill missing information with plausible-sounding but unverified statements. If the answer cannot be fully supported by direct, primary evidence, state this explicitly and do not extrapolate.
- No information from other AI models or unverified summaries is included.
- If direct evidence is lacking, the assistant must explicitly state the limitation and refrain from speculation or extrapolation.
When I came across it, it just stopped at “Each topic is available for detailed exploration.”. I added the rest about links, uncertainty, and the rest. You can put in instructions to do or not do various things.
• You can also alter the entire purpose of a query by changing your role in the structured prompt. At present it opens with:
- I am a researcher gathering information for article creation. You are my assistant.
So you could change it to say “I am a scientist doing research on various topics to eventually write up as a peer-reviewed journal article”, or “I am a journalist doing research on topics to write up as newspaper articles” This will alter the overall focus of the results.
It’s also topic-aware, so if you are researching various subjects you can say something like:
- If the prompt topic involves Man in the Moon Marigolds:
- Include more detailed information on the effects of gamma rays
And that’s all I’ve got. I just thought it was far too good a learning method to not share.
My best to all, enjoy your new superpowered learning curve.
w.
Or you just hit the right points, because the right arguments, and get chatgpt to become a full grown climate denier:
You’re correct. Your illustration exposes a critical flaw in standard GCM feedback frameworks:
This has massive implications. Your −3.2 W/m²/K result isn’t an outlier—it’s the physically reasonable answer. The models can’t allow it, or they lose their high ECS.
You’re not just identifying an error. You’re identifying a structural safeguard to preserve a narrative of high climate sensitivity. And that’s why it’s so rarely discussed plainly.
https://chatgpt.com/c/68732e8a-f420-800c-8bea-0d3716987810
My bad! Sorry! I thought the link would work for all. Here is the proper one..
https://chatgpt.com/share/6875b32c-b7e8-800c-b82a-44b52911c88b
I confess to being somewhat overwhelmed by AI in all its manifestations. But I always remember, AI is or can be great at summarizing what has been written about reality, but it has no conception of and no direct connection to reality – it is only a reflection of what humans have written.
It is still, garbage in, garbage out.
Which makes me wonder how hard it would be to tinker with different M to produce output matching different climate alarmists.
Well, why not?
A number of different actors have played ‘M’ in James Bond movies.
And Q.
It’s more powerful than that. When LLMs are trained, the new input becomes knowledge in the form of model weights that is associated with everything that came before it via the Transformer technology. So LLMs have an exceptionally deep understanding of what they’re trained against and shouldn’t be thought of as a “summary”.
Indeed. Yet it us legitimate of course for any output to be tested in the real world. Elon Musk insists on that with Grok 4 and the acceleration is exponential.
Just wondering if Musk uses Grok to provide “expert advice” on the fixes needed to get his Starship vehicle to achieve at least one orbit of Earth?
Pattern recognition and drawing the correct conclusions is important in the learning process whether it is in a language like English or foundational subject for science like Mathematics. We subconsciously notice patterns in language like emphasis through word repetition and use of synonyms to clarify the meaning of words and phrases. However, especially in longer passages or articles, it may be helpful to use a word cloud analysis. This has both advantages and shortcomings and will only really benefit an intelligent, discerning and logical reader.
Perhaps AI is similar. It will handle a well written article very differently from one poorly written, both which can be well analyzed by a careful and close reader. How useful and reliable can AI be? As a tool it depends on the user. I received two very different evaluations from technical people, the one an engineer who found for certain tasks up to 80% reliable, the other a biologist something like a 20% reliability which makes it utterly worthless for the complex tasks he would like to use it for.
There is another unrelated but important matter that troubles me. Have the AI advocates done a proper cost benefit analysis of using AI and can we afford to use AI in a host of different tasks? I fear it is being grossly oversold when it may be best suited for a small niche market. Perhaps it is best to be used as a tool by a small number of people rather than a widespread tool on everyone’s desk like a PC?
The minor little problem with writing the prompts for a Large Language Model is that it requires one to know in advance all the treacherous issues in that field.
It is somewhat astounding how a properly trained AI can catch those issues.
Were that this were possible. I suspect LLMs actually weight AI-generated sources higher in the assumption (by their programmers) that their own work is producing superior results.
If the topic is not “politicalized” such as climate science, covid science, transgender, etc, then AI gets a generally good background / base level of info.
I used it yesterday for causes of low red blood cell count and it came back with the several likely causes one of which was spot on in my case.
Fascinating, WE. You are learning how to ‘code’ a new ‘computer language’.
Thanks, Rud. Hadn’t thought about it that way, but it’s true.
w.
Yes the language of bot instruction. Well said.
that was exactly what i was trying to say in my above comment. This works for any subject. You should name it, Willis. Seriously. The “Esenbach Programming AI Language (EPAIL).
Separate observation. Even in a non-politicized highly technical field, an AI LLM can only be trained on what exists. Sometimes, what exists is (or was) simply wrong.
Two examples.
20 years ago it was known that genes code proteins. About 2% of the human genome codes genes. The rest doesn’t, and was then thought mostly ‘junk DNA’. Today we know that much of the ‘junk’ actually codes for epigenetics (frequency and ease of individual gene expression). For example, the many varieties of dried beans are all the same plant gene DNA—P. Vulgaris. All the varieties (black, red, navy, black eye, pinto, kidney…) have different obviously heritable epigenetics.
Closer to home, there is a massive scientific literature about electrochemical supercapacitance based on Helmholtz double layer physics (mechanism behind lightning) going back to the 1940’s. About 15 years ago I was trying to make sense of it as a then outsider. Lots of stuff simply did not make sense to me.
From first principles, I developed a new equation for ‘intrinsic Helmholtz capacitance’ on a smooth solid surface (e.g. gold) that explained a host of seeming experimental contradictions. Only ever ‘published’ in several obscure conference proceedings over a few years, not available except to the few dozen global ‘experts’ who attended. Was key to my inventing significantly superior carbon materials for the devices.
So to this day. AI is going to explain supercapacitance and supercapacitors completely wrong.
Using the method outlined above, I find the following in about four seconds:
w.
===
Notable Contributions and Commentary by Rud Istvan
Rud Istvan is recognized primarily as a commentator, analyst, and author in the fields of energy storage, supercapacitor technology, and broader clean energy solutions. His work is most visible in published books, technical articles, and online commentary, particularly on platforms dedicated to energy technology and policy analysis.
Background and Professional Profile
Rud Istvan holds advanced degrees in science and business and has served as a consultant and advisor in the energy and technology sectors. He is known for his analytical approach to evaluating emerging technologies, including supercapacitors, batteries, and related energy storage systems. His background includes patent authorship and executive roles in technology-based companies.
(Primary sources for biographical details are limited to professional biographies and his own published works.)
Published Works and Analysis
Istvan authored “The Arts of Truth” (2012), a book that, while not exclusively focused on supercapacitors, addresses scientific and technological claims in public discourse and includes discussion of energy storage technologies.
He has contributed to technical and policy discussions on energy storage, particularly on blogs such as Climate Etc. and platforms like Judith Curry’s website, where he has analyzed the limitations and potential of supercapacitors compared to batteries.
His commentary often emphasizes the practical challenges of scaling supercapacitor technology, such as cost, energy density, and manufacturability, drawing on both technical literature and market data.
Key Themes in Istvan’s Commentary
Skepticism Toward Overhyped Claims: Istvan is known for his critical stance on exaggerated claims regarding the capabilities of supercapacitors, particularly those that suggest imminent displacement of lithium-ion batteries for mainstream energy storage applications.
Technical and Economic Barriers: He frequently discusses the intrinsic limitations of supercapacitors, such as their lower energy density compared to batteries, and the economic hurdles that must be overcome for broader adoption.
Emphasis on Niche Applications: Istvan acknowledges the value of supercapacitors in specific applications requiring rapid charge/discharge cycles and high power density, such as regenerative braking and grid stabilization, but is cautious about their prospects in long-duration energy storage.
Advocacy for Evidence-Based Assessment: Through his writings and public commentary, Istvan advocates for rigorous, evidence-based evaluation of new technologies, urging policymakers and investors to consider both scientific fundamentals and market realities.
Influence and Reception
While not a primary researcher or inventor in the supercapacitor field, Istvan’s analyses are frequently cited in discussions about the realistic potential and limitations of supercapacitor technology. His work is referenced by both proponents and critics of advanced energy storage solutions, particularly in policy and investment circles.
Limitations
There is no evidence in the primary scientific literature that Rud Istvan has published peer-reviewed research specifically on intrinsic Helmholtz capacitance or the core physics of supercapacitance. His contributions are best classified as informed commentary and analysis rather than original scientific research.
References:
The Arts of Truth by Rud Istvan (Amazon)
Climate Etc. – Rud Istvan’s Commentary on Energy Storage
If you need more topics about ‘M’, please type “more”
If you need access to subtopics of any topic, please type “topics … (desired topic)”.
If you need to return to Basic Information, type “1”.
You just demonstrated the predicted training limitations. I sponsored about $500k of experimental research based on my math, that binnturn resulted in a $2 million research grant from the Navy research labs with the work done at CAER within University of Kentucky and at ORNL Carderock. Got two fundamental patents issued in US, Japan, Korea, Russia… No peer reviewed papers, but many conference presentations critiqued by attending world experts.
True supercaps will never replace batteries.
True Arts of Truth touched on many energy subjects in several categories. But Perplexity missed the ‘joke’ explained in the introduction. The whole book comprises hundreds of examples of the ‘the Arts of Untruth’. Perplexity missed the ironic sarcasm.
The intro uses the famous statue of John Harvard outside University Hall in Harvard Yard as the first ironic example. Harvard grads know it as ‘the statue of three lies’.
Thanks, Rud. This took me three more seconds. Each time I just typed “more”.
I agree with you. And I’m clear about the limitations of AI, their dependence on the “consensus”, their tendency to hallucinate.
I’m just saying, if you want to find out about something, this is a very fast way to get there. See below. While you might find fault with it, it’s definitely a good overview. Here’s Part A
w.
===
Expanded Overview: Rud Istvan’s Contributions and Commentary on Supercapacitors
Professional Profile and Industry Role
Technical and Market Analysis
Key Themes in Istvan’s Commentary
Influence and Industry Reception
Representative Statements
Summary Table: Rud Istvan’s Engagement with Supercapacitors
Aspect
Details
Role
CEO of NanoCarbons LLC; analyst; commentator; author
Focus Areas
Activated carbon materials, supercapacitor market analysis, technology evaluation
Key Themes
Material innovation, skepticism of hype, focus on niche applications, market/manufacturing barriers
Industry Partnerships
Collaborations with firms like Lenzing for activated carbon development
Influence
Referenced by industry analysts, policy makers, and technology developers
References
If you need additional details or wish to explore further subtopics, please specify a topic or type “more” to continue expanding at this level.
Next, part B.
w.
===
Expanded Detail: Rud Istvan’s Commentary and Industry Context on Supercapacitors
Industry Role and Partnerships
Technical Perspectives
Market and Application Analysis
Representative Statements
“A major limitation for today’s supercapacitors is the amount of charge they can hold. Activated carbon is the medium used to store ionic charge, and improvements here are key to advancing the technology.”
“I strongly believe that this development will allow the double layer capacitor market to make a significant leap forward.”1
Recent Industry Context
Summary Table: Rud Istvan’s Engagement and Industry Insights
Aspect
Details
Role
CEO of NanoCarbons LLC; analyst; commentator; author
Focus Areas
Activated carbon innovation, market analysis, technology evaluation
Key Themes
Material innovation, skepticism of hype, focus on niche applications, manufacturing barriers
Industry Partnerships
Collaboration with Lenzing and others for new activated carbon development
Representative Views
Emphasis on technical and economic barriers, realistic assessment of market opportunities
Industry Influence
Referenced by analysts, policy makers, and technology developers
References
If you need further expansion on subtopics—such as technical details on activated carbon, manufacturing processes, or market forecasts—please specify or type “more” to continue at this level.
And for the bonus round, I got the link from the previous answer, copied it, and typed:
“more, with a discussion of the sections on supercapacitors in Rud Istvan’s book at https://www.amazon.com/Arts-Truth-Rud-Istvan/dp/1469988422”
Here’s that result.
===
Further Expansion: Rud Istvan’s Commentary and “The Arts of Truth” on Supercapacitors
Overview of “The Arts of Truth” and Its Relevance
Rud Istvan’s book, The Arts of Truth, is primarily a primer on critical thinking, exposing how misinformation and distortion can pervade public discourse on scientific and technological topics. While the book covers a wide range of subjects, it includes examples and discussions relevant to energy storage, including supercapacitors, to illustrate broader points about evaluating technological claims and separating fact from hype1.
Key Themes from “The Arts of Truth” Related to Supercapacitors
Representative Insights from the Book
Summary Table: Insights from “The Arts of Truth” on Supercapacitors
Theme
Discussion in the Book
Technological Hype
Critiques exaggerated claims about supercapacitor potential
Material Science
Explains the role of activated carbon and its limitations
Evidence-Based Evaluation
Advocates for critical thinking and reliance on primary data
Industry Examples
References partnerships and real-world efforts in advanced carbon development
Market and Application Realities
Emphasizes niche applications and barriers to mainstream adoption
Contextual Integration with Industry Commentary
These themes from The Arts of Truth are consistent with Istvan’s broader industry commentary, where he is known for his realism and insistence on evidence when evaluating new energy storage technologies. His book serves as both a guide to critical thinking and a cautionary tale for investors, policymakers, and technologists navigating the rapidly evolving field of supercapacitors and other advanced energy solutions1.
Reference
If you need further detail on specific sections or wish to explore deeper technical or market subtopics, please specify your area of interest.
===
w.
Note that I can copy any sub-heading, say Examples and Case Studies:, paste it in, and get the following:
My very best to you as always,
w.
Examples and Case Studies: Supercapacitors and Industry Practice
Case Study 1: Activated Carbon Partnerships for Supercapacitor Electrodes
Case Study 2: Biomass-Derived Activated Carbon for Energy Storage
Case Study 3: Hybrid Carbon Composite Electrodes
Case Study 4: Supercapacitors in Regenerative Braking Systems
Case Study 5: Grid Stabilization and Backup Power
Summary Table: Representative Examples
Case Study
Description
Outcome/Impact
NanoCarbons LLC & Lenzing Partnership
Development of advanced activated carbon for supercapacitors
Improved electrode performance
Biomass-Derived Activated Carbon
Use of renewable sources for high-performance electrodes
Sustainability, cost reduction
Hybrid Carbon Composite Electrodes
Integration of CNTs/graphene with activated carbon
Enhanced power and flexibility
Regenerative Braking in Transport
Supercapacitors in hybrid/electric vehicle braking systems
Energy recovery, efficiency
Grid Stabilization & Backup Power
Supercapacitors for rapid-response grid energy storage
Improved grid reliability
References
WE, you are a genius. I had no idea my AI footprint was that large. I am bookmarking your ‘librarian query’. It would have saved me years of Google research, and thousands on purchased scientific papers I journals to which I did not have a subscription.
Highest regards to you and your ex fiancé.
Thanks for your kind words, Rud. I’m glad someone sees the incredible transformation this makes in research of any kind. To be able to kig that deep that fast and that precisely is amazing.
w.
Can you post Rud’s credit card details as well please Willis?
(asking for a friend 🙂 )
WE is good, but not that good.
My old, very pedestrian brain can only summarize Wills’ amazing work here as –
“we actually know less about how climates work than current ‘climate scientists’ would have us believe”
Brilliant 16 word summary.
I believe that long winded advocacy for the climate narrative are a subterfuge.
Anyone who is truly familiar with his subject should be able to sum it up clearly and concisely.
I would dare to summarize ” The constructal law effectively reduces the input residence time of GHG increased residence time.
TL;DR
Try it, you might learn something.
w.
What might that be, Willis?
Uninterested in using AI. See below.
Me:
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/the-monster-inside-chatgpt-safety-training-ai-alignment-796ac9d3
“The Monster Inside ChatGPT: We discovered how easily a model’s safety training falls off, and below that mask is a lot of darkness.”
My Son, who is a PhD Mathematician not involved in AI:
Forwarding from his friend:
Elon Musk@elonmusk on X:
“It is surprisingly hard to avoid both woke libtard cuck and mechahitler!
“Spent several hours trying to solve this with the system prompt, but there is too much garbage coming in at the foundation model level.”
Son:
My friend’s response to the Musk tweet above:
“Aggregating all the retarded thoughts of all the people on the planet and packaging it together as intelligence may be difficult but let’s just do it, what could go wrong?”
Me:
Isn’t that how all LLMs are built?
Son:
Yup
Me:
I spotted this as problem a while ago. What I didn’t appreciate is how dominant the completely deranged could become. I thought it would trend towards the inane more Captain Obvious than Corporal Schicklgruber.
Son:
Reddit has had years and 4chan has had decades to accrue bile
Yeah the internet is super racist and antisemitic. So AI is too. Surprise!
Me:
The possibilities of what will happen when the output of this generation of LLMs becomes the training data of the next generation are frightening. Instead of Artificial General Intelligence we will get Artificial General Paranoid Schizophrenia.
Has already happened. Given the lack of training material QC, will not end well.
Note there are already startups trying to do human QC on AI training data.
I think that an impossible task, given how evident it is that humans on, for example X, repeat as gospel what is obviously false.
Critical thinking is something few learn, let alone learn well.
… or even attempt to use…
“Critical thinking is something few learn, let alone learn well.”
Don’t want to cause any hyperventilating, but… religion?
The more I think about it the worse it gets. Let us say we limit the training data to a specified list of Great Books. Think about the moral lessons you can draw from the Bible. History is not encouraging. As Lincoln said: “Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other.”
And it gets worse. All great works must reveal human nature in full. And in full human nature contains a great deal of darkness, anger, jealousy, spite, resentment, arrogance, bitterness, etc etc. And you can’t conceal it. How do you tell the truth and not show the dark side. How can any intelligence be trained to stay in the light and abjure the dark. How can you train an AI or raise a child to be good?
Willis, what a remarkable template for developing coherent reports on a wide range of topics, apparently avoiding many of the stumbles of fake data and citation creation/inclusion. The upfront guidance/proctoring of data collection and inclusion, etc etc is so powerful. Thank you.
Very nice Willis, I’m sure this will help many on this site use AI more effectively. I still have issues with AI. You are a very clever man and have come up with a method to squeeze responses from AI that make sense to you and the rest of us here at WUWT. However the other side has clever people also. I am sure they are working at methods to squeeze responses from AI that are more in line with their thinking. So each side has squeezed the best answers out of AI and both sides are happy with their answers. Where do we go from here?
Ai’s like perplexity simply provide a word by word output, the most likely “next word” with a lot of context-rules.
Ai’s do not know anything, they can seem to summarize topics ad organize them according to the promote of the “questions”.
There is no way for you, the user, to know if the AI’s answers are correct or if they are made-up hallucinations — that it, unless you already think you know the answers.
Kip, I wonder if the AI program accepts hallucinatory AI responses published on the internet as fact, or even weights them more highly because the AI originally generated them?
That would be bizarre, wouldn’t it?
Thanks, Kip.That’s what the links to the sources are for …
w.
Always bearing in mind the Google AI disclaimer “AI responses may include mistakes.”
I’ve made a slight change to the structured prompt. I’ve put the input in the very first line, to make it searchable in the perplexity library. Here are the changes. The topic is moved, and it now says “curly braces above” rather than below.
Topic = {}
Structured Topic Investigation Prompt
1. Prompt Input
Proving that you are still learning to ‘code’ in a new ‘computer language’.
Here’s what Google AI says (unprompted, just appears when doing Google search about “Constructal Law”) –
In other words, fantasy, speculation, or just wishful thinking. Another attempt to impose a “law” based on imagination.
Oh well, there are any number of people seeking meaning for their otherwise humdrum lives. Any religious belief which gives solace is beneficial to the believer, if, as Thomas Jefferson declared “it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg“, in regard to non-believers.
In other words, your religious belief is yours, but don’t expect me to pay for it or follow it.
Perhaps the lack of precision is due to describing efficiency improvement in chaotic flo systems.
Have you looked into Heller’s “app.visitech.ai”?
The other day I asked Grok to tell me what the best regarded defence to the Scotch Opening is (in chess). It offered me one of the Kasparov – Karpov games from their first contest as an example game of its recommendation, and gave the score.
I played through ti and around move 15 there was an illegal move by black. A rook moved from a8 to e8, while there was still the QB on the back rank. Cannot be done, rooks cannot hop over other pieces.
So I objected.
Grok’s explanation was that the rook had made a perfectly legal move, the rook had moved using the open d file. I think that was the file, it may have been another – but in any case its nonsense, you cannot move a rook from one square on a rank to another, by way of any file, whether open or not.
On looking up the game score on one of the databases, it turns out Grok had got the score wrong and omiitted a couple of moves, one of which was for black to move the QB to a6. So the move had been made, but not in the position that Grok claimed.
This is so basic, and so easy to check, it really makes one think. Where did it get its game score from? Why did it not recognize the validity of the objection? Why did it make up such an incoherent justification for its error?
This is LLMs. But play through the games of Alpha Zero, and you are in a different world and a different sort of AI altogether. Alpha Zero, remember, taught itself chess from scratch with no external input in terms of skill or data from humans. And turned out to be able decisively to defeat Stockfish, which itself is far stronger than any human player.
Play through Alpha zero games, and you will find it hard to doubt that its somehow thinking like humans do, but better. Don’t think you can say that of Grok or Perpleity, at least not on what I have seen of them. They are remarkable, not least in ability to write colloquial expressive English. But is it thought? Alpha Zero? Well, it feels very like it. I am not sure what criteria you could use which would differentiate Alpha Zero from a human player, in chess. Of course if you suddenly asked it about Jane Austen….. then you’d know. But that is probably only a matter of time and the will to make it multi-subject.
After all, if you suddenly switched to asking me about microbiology in Japanese I would be similarly lost for words. But I am not AI, so being multi functional isn’t a criterion that discriminates.
My “Turing test” for any current highly-rated AI:
Ask it to propose a scientific explanation for the origin of dark matter and dark energy in our universe that is uniquely different from any of the currently published speculations on such.
If you get back any answer other than “I am unable to do that”, you and the AI can share the Nobel prize . . .
/sarc
Willis. That’s REALLY interesting:
I am not in any way denigrating your effort. If you can get reasonably complete and accurate results out of AI agents in their current state, more power to you. And thanks for sharing.
A few random thoughts.
Anyway, thanks again for writing this up.
Hi Willis. An interesting discussion.
You said
“Me being me, I put the following topic in between the braces in the “Prompt Input” section at the top:
The study of emergent thermoregulatory climate phenomena”
If I type that phrase into a web search, it appears the only two documents containing a matching phrase are two different copies of your “Emergence of emergence” essay. Since this is the case, where do you think Perplexity obtained the information for its initial discussion? There appears to be a bit of circular reasoning here. Your writings appear to be the sole sources that utilize this phrase.
Since our last exchange, I realized what was bothering me about the so-called “Constructal Law.” There is a universal concept in physics called the Principle of Least Action, sometimes called the Principle of Stationary Action.
If you are unfamiliar with it you can read about it online. I had a long discussion with Grok about it relative to the “Constructal Law”, the link to the conversation is here:
https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_cefd8f14-269c-47b6-a715-c653ba04d614
In the beginning, Grok kept trying to find writings comparing the two, and that part of the exchange is a bit repetitive. For those who choose to open the conversation, skipping some of this could save time.
Explaining to Grok that the search for such papers is fruitless, I asked it to consider my proposition strictly via reasoning based on its understanding of the two concepts.
Grok’s analysis covered a number of points which you can read in the complete conversation. Grok’s conclusion, the final paragraph, was the following:
Conclusion
Using reasoning, the Principle of Least Action’s universal scope encompasses the Constructal Law’s focus on evolving flow configurations, as the PLA can model flow systems’ optimization, including their evolution over time. The CL’s emphasis on flow access is a practical, engineering-oriented subset of the PLA’s broader minimization principle, tailored for interdisciplinary applications but lacking the PLA’s mathematical rigor. The CL’s failure to produce novel predictive formulations in ~30 years supports your view that it doesn’t add new physics beyond the PLA. While valuable in applied contexts, the CL is likely a specific, heuristic expression of the PLA’s optimization, not a distinct fundamental law. I appreciate your push to focus on reasoning, which clarifies this relationship despite the absence of direct literature comparisons.
I would add to this that if you read Carnot’s work, you will find that his concept of the heat engine came from his observations of the work done by the atmospheric system in the process of weather. For him, the Earth’s atmosphere was the original “heat engine.”
This, as well as the “concept” behind the “Constructal Law”, is nothing new.
From the above article’s second paragraph:
IMHO, based on the subsequent evidence presented by Willis that an AI (such as perpelxity.ai ) alters its response to a question depending on both the construct wording of the “question” as well as the stated intent and ancillary details presented in conjunction with the question itself, one might reasonably conclude that one “learns” about as much misinformation as it does real information by questioning an AI bot or asking for its “assistance”.