Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.15480/882.114
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorImhof, Peter-
dc.date.accessioned2006-02-10T11:00:03Zde_DE
dc.date.available2006-02-10T11:00:03Zde_DE
dc.date.issued2000-08-
dc.identifier.issn1436-7998de_DE
dc.identifier.urihttp://tubdok.tub.tuhh.de/handle/11420/116-
dc.description.abstractIn the early 70’s, scientists debated hotly the provoking claims that Meadows and his co-authors put forward in their book ‘Limits to Growth’ and which they based on computer simulation runs. This lively debate is reconsidered to flesh out two more general aspects of scientific computer simulation. The first point deals with the question where simulation scientists locate the agency in the activity of computer simulation: Is it the assumptions made by humans or is it the calculations done by the machine that are to be held responsible for the simulation results? The second aspect hints to the problem of how much data are necessary to make a computer simulation a true and meaningful representation of reality. In the case of the debate over Limits to Growth these two questions were answered differently by the proponents and the critics of the simulation study. Whereas many scientific controversies involve scientists who have done research which has lead them to diverging conclusions about the same matter, the debate over Limits to Growth differed in this respect. It can be construed more adequately as the repulsion of researchers who tried to intrude social scientific expertise with the help of computer simulation. This is why computer simulation became one of the key issues in this scientific debate.en
dc.language.isoende_DE
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess-
dc.subjectcomputer simulationde_DE
dc.subject.ddc004: Informatikde_DE
dc.titleComputer Simulation in the Controversy over Limits of Growthde_DE
dc.typeWorking Paperde_DE
dc.date.updated2006-02-10T11:00:05Zde_DE
dc.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:gbv:830-opus-1726de_DE
dc.identifier.doi10.15480/882.114-
dc.type.diniworkingPaper-
dc.subject.bcl54.76:Computersimulationde
dc.subject.gndComputersimulationde
dc.subject.gndWissenschaft / Methodede
dc.subject.bclcode54.76-
dc.subject.ddccode004-
dcterms.DCMITypeTextde_DE
tuhh.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:gbv:830-opus-1726de_DE
tuhh.publikation.typworkingPaperde_DE
tuhh.opus.id172de_DE
tuhh.oai.showtruede_DE
dc.identifier.hdl11420/116-
tuhh.abstract.englishIn the early 70’s, scientists debated hotly the provoking claims that Meadows and his co-authors put forward in their book ‘Limits to Growth’ and which they based on computer simulation runs. This lively debate is reconsidered to flesh out two more general aspects of scientific computer simulation. The first point deals with the question where simulation scientists locate the agency in the activity of computer simulation: Is it the assumptions made by humans or is it the calculations done by the machine that are to be held responsible for the simulation results? The second aspect hints to the problem of how much data are necessary to make a computer simulation a true and meaningful representation of reality. In the case of the debate over Limits to Growth these two questions were answered differently by the proponents and the critics of the simulation study. Whereas many scientific controversies involve scientists who have done research which has lead them to diverging conclusions about the same matter, the debate over Limits to Growth differed in this respect. It can be construed more adequately as the repulsion of researchers who tried to intrude social scientific expertise with the help of computer simulation. This is why computer simulation became one of the key issues in this scientific debate.de_DE
tuhh.publication.instituteTechnik und Gesellschaft W-5de_DE
tuhh.identifier.doi10.15480/882.114-
tuhh.type.opusResearchPaperde
tuhh.institute.germanTechnik und Gesellschaft W-5de
tuhh.institute.englishTechnology and Society W-5en
tuhh.institute.id10de_DE
tuhh.type.id17de_DE
tuhh.gvk.hasppnfalse-
dc.type.driverworkingPaper-
dc.identifier.oclc930768015-
dc.type.casraiWorking Paperen
tuhh.relation.ispartofseriesResearch Reports // Institut für Technik und Gesellschaft, Technische Universität Hamburg-Harburgde_DE
tuhh.relation.ispartofseriesnumber4de_DE
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.creatorOrcidImhof, Peter-
item.creatorGNDImhof, Peter-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.tuhhseriesidResearch Reports // Institut für Technik und Gesellschaft, Technische Universität Hamburg-Harburg-
Appears in Collections:Publications (tub.dok)
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
RR4.pdf103,37 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

252
Last Week
0
Last month
0
checked on Apr 19, 2019

Download(s)

182
checked on Apr 19, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check

Export

Items in TORE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.