[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Ecological Economics and Entropy
Mike Asher (masher@tusc.net) wrote:
: mfriesel@ix.netcom.com wrote:
: > >
: > > Hehehe. Unfortunately, that is not the correct definition of carrying
: > > capacity. If you're going to create the meanings as you go along,
: > > communication becomes impossible.
: > >
: > I note:
: >
: > Actually, communication only becomes impossible when people refuse to
: > agree on definitions. You see it here all the time.
: Very true, especially when we're dealing with slippery concepts like
: 'growth' and 'standard of living'. Carrying capacity, however, has a
: clear, rigorous, definition: the asymptotic value of the controlling
: population equation. Mr. Hanson's definition of CC as "population of a
: given species that be supported indefinitely in a defined habitat without
: permanently damaging the ecosystem" is fallacious.
This must mean that a lot of population models (nonlinear ones with
temporally intermittent behaviour) will have no carrying capacity.
Right?
--
Mach's gut!
Bruce Scott, Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik, bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de
Remember John Hron: http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hron-john/
Follow-Ups:
References: