Can Complex Network Physics Revolutionize Systems Biology and Other Fields?

AI Thread Summary
Complex network physics shows potential for revolutionizing systems biology and other fields, though its development is still in early stages. The application of network modeling in epidemiology and social sciences has been noted, but further exploration is needed. Thermoeconomics is mentioned as an intriguing area, though its validity and connection to networks remain uncertain. Interest in biological network inference is growing, particularly in DNA regulation networks. Overall, the field holds promise for diverse applications, especially in understanding complex biological systems.
pjmarshall
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
Haven't really seen much discussion about this field, but it seems interesting. It appears to have some promise in systems biology, but what about in other fields? What kind of material will arise from this field? Is thermoeconomics mostly pseudoscience, or just undeveloped?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Check out Mark Newman at UMich: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/

Network modeling is used in epidemiology and social sciences to some effect but I think it's on the low end of the development curve still.

Hadn't heard of "thermoeconomics". Looks like it might be interesting. But I didn't see any connection to networks...
 
Thanks for the link. (personally) I'm specifically looking at its applications to biology.
 

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
View full post »

Similar threads

Thoughts on neural networks "discovering" physical concepts
Replies
6
Views
1K
Programs What are some good graduate programs in the Physics of Complex Systems?
Replies
1
Views
3K
New Member Introduction - JD Longmire
Replies
2
Views
269
B Relativity and Biological Aging: How Time Dilation Slows Cell Activity
Replies
14
Views
1K
Biological Info: Understanding & Analyzing
Replies
15
Views
3K
B What are complex numbers good for?
Replies
13
Views
2K
Thoughts on neural networks "discovering" physical concepts
Replies
1
Views
2K
Crackpot Philosophy from the Swamp: An Ontological view of Fields in QFT.
Replies
3
Views
290
Former specialist who was forced to be a generalist by life....
Replies
2
Views
384
Physics, energy and sustainability research
Replies
1
Views
629

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top