[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: