Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id AAA03331 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 10 Feb 2001 00:45:30 GMT X-Originating-IP: [209.240.220.231] From: "Scott Chase" <ecphoric@hotmail.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 19:42:54 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F53wiqkEJTpUaJb8bA100007e4a@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Feb 2001 00:42:54.0365 (UTC) FILETIME=[6794ACD0:01C092FA] Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>From: Chris Taylor <Christopher.Taylor@man.ac.uk>
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: Darwinian evolution vs memetic evolution
>Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 17:33:39 +0000
>
> > do any of these processes where distinct identifiabe
> > change is what gives these forms meaning constitute processes of
> > replication?
>
>Not if they require an animator, working to a storyboard. However I
>think if you put a frame of Mickey Mouse on a photocopier and used that
>to generate successive frames, each a copy of the last, you'd soon see
>something - phenotypic inheritance (because there's no genotype) just
>like for memes. You could even stretch it to have a selection process
>for similarity to the original, or select for something else (bear with
>me - I know the photocopier example is weak because you'll end up with a
>black sheet eventually but I think it captures something of what I was
>on about).
>
I've tried to read photocopied directions before that were many generations
removed from the original. I gave up trying to make out the words. I also
photocopied a rare book once. Halfway through the task a piece of page fell
onto the glass plate and I didn't notice it for quite a few pages (and dimes
fed into the machine).
I think the photocopier analogy illustrates the relation between archetype
and ectype. The original copy is the archetype or common ancestor to all
succeeding copies at this branch point. The succeeding copies are imperfect
representations of the original, but I guess they would serve as originals
at their own branch points. Some branchings might, for some reason or
another, to be better than the other offshhots from the common ancestor.
Branchings with pieces of yellowed page occluding the image would probably
wind up in the wastebasket. I'm babbling.
>
>You could easily produce an (apparently) unchanging animation of a
>static object without breaking the definition of what constitutes an
>animation...
>
There would be subtle changes, such as those pesky blotches and streaks and
those areas where the toner didn't quite get there. Copiers tend to vary in
how well they do the job. I've learned this the hard way. Nothing like
photocopying a journal article and not noticing a region where the words
don't appear in the same region(s) on every page until later. Costs money
too.
>
>Incidentally has everyone seen the fun stuff that happens when you point
>a video camera at its own monitor - very cool!
>
>
Or the mirror effect when you stand between two mirrors and see yourself
disappear into apparent infinity with a twist IIRC. It seems like the image
takes on a greenish tint as it goes on also.
One pressing question which I haven't gotten a good answer for relates to
making digital copies (such as burning CD's). If you make successive copies
with analog cassette tape the quality deteriorates quite fast. A couple
generations later, the tape hiss is unbearable. Now digital is much cleaner,
but is it perfect when copies are made? If you made succesive copies for
thousands of generations A (ancestor) copied as B (generation 1), B copied
as C (generation 2) and so on, would there be enough of an error rate for
the quality to eventually deteriorate to the point where you could actually
notice it when listening to a CD WAY down the line? Would occasional
glitches begin to accumulate with the multitude of generations or is
CD/digital copying perfect?
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
===============================================================
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 : Sat Feb 10 2001 - 00:47:40 GMT