Talk:Edge of chaos

Get rid of 'edge of chaos' link

I don't think http://bactra.org/notebooks/edge-of-chaos.html deserves inclusion here. The article says:

I think the evolutionary argument, as usually stated, rests on a big mistake about what nervous systems, immune systems, genetic regulatory nets, etc., evolve to do. This is not transmit information from one place to another, or be "flexible" in some abstract sense, but cause actions which enhance the fitness of the organism they happen to be in.

That is true, but 'edge of chaos' ideas explain the context in which this evolution takes place, so they are very relevant. It is a bit like using the fact that the purpose of a clock is to tell the time to argue that gear wheels etc. are irrelevant. One wonders if this link was put in by way of self-advertisement: it is just a blog rather than an RS in any case. --Brian Josephson (talk) 10:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Furthermore, the Google Scholar search link below it is redundant -- you don't need Wikipedia to tell you that doing that will get you references to the subject of the article! --Brian Josephson (talk) 09:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

"Critical range" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Critical range has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 22 § Critical range until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 00:11, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Moved

Needs sourcing: The phrase has also been borrowed by the business community and is sometimes used inappropriately and in contexts that are far from the original scope of the meaning of the term. Viriditas (talk) 11:56, 24 October 2025 (UTC)