Re: Phonosemantics and More parallels in the genome (and elsewhere)

From: Zylogy@aol.com
Date: Fri Jan 19 2001 - 01:46:11 GMT

  • Next message: John Wilkins: "Re: DNA Culture .... Trivia?"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id BAA01070 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 19 Jan 2001 01:49:38 GMT
    From: <Zylogy@aol.com>
    Message-ID: <58.609932b.2798f663@aol.com>
    Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:46:11 EST
    Subject: Re: Phonosemantics and More parallels in the genome (and elsewhere)
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    CC: Zylogy@aol.com
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 129
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    In reply to Wade- in absolute terms, sure, there aren't any static
    structures. But relatively, there are, in terms of staying power. A crystal
    lattice, all other things being equal, has more ability to last than say, a
    glass of the same material- at least on the local level. Obviously we're
    talking about tight, close bonds and geometrical ordering. What I'm saying is
    that the introduction of disorder- while it might help reduce the
    vicissitudes introduced from the global environment an object is immersed in
    (like the branch bending in the wind), at the local structural level can only
    destroy that structure. Scaling is very important here, though, as a caveat.
    That said, order within such relatively static structures can be structural
    only.

    Order IN the midst of flux, on the other hand, gives one the seeds of new
    structure, and from that communication. Just as seed crystals in a molten or
    dissolved matrix do.

    Back to static structures, though- here, disorder can be used
    communicatively, so long as it is mobile- think of how transistors work.

    As for paramecia- evolution at the pellicular-cilial level is still
    evolution, but not genetic. Permanent (unless something else comes along),
    heritable change.

    It really doesn't matter where information is stored, so long as the degrees
    of freedom of change in the storage unit are low enough to maintain that
    information in some form. DNA and the paramecium's pellicle are relatively
    static even though they are being constantly renewed and repaired. Its the
    old red brick/black brick building problem. It would be much harder to store
    much information in a liquid, unless something was dissolved in it that could
    hold it. Think of the immune system.

    Obviously as I said a really static storage medium would be useless (unless
    of course readable without damage). Natural media are capable of loosening
    themselves up a bit (literally and figuratively) so that the information can
    be retrieved or altered. But then they go back to relative stasis again, and
    so are able to preserve what was gotten from them or transcribed to them.

    In the end we are left with order and disorder, and degrees of freedom. Total
    disorder, as well as total order, are useless communicatively. Like yin/yang,
    only a little bit of the other added to the mix and you have a whole new
    ballgame. If you can alternate between them, and who knows what you can
    create. Like me, for instance.

    Jess Tauber

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 19 2001 - 01:51:14 GMT