Re: Logic + universal evolution

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Fri Aug 17 2001 - 22:41:31 BST

  • Next message: joedees@bellsouth.net: "Re: Logic"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA13479 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:38:49 +0100
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:41:31 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: Logic + universal evolution
    Message-ID: <3B7D493B.17814.343E86@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <003b01c12751$5aae6f60$db86b2d1@teddace>
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On 17 Aug 2001, at 12:18, Dace wrote:

    > > TD:
    > > Obviously. The question is how the birds manage to maintain the
    > > right distance, particularly when the whole flock turns on a dime.
    > > Either the brain is running an incredbly elaborate motion program or
    > > the flock is a morphic field in which the birds are "particles."
    > > While the latter possibility might strike you as being "weird," the
    > > former possibility would require neural computing processes
    > > unimaginably more powerful and rapid than anything humans have ever
    > > devised.
    > >
    > > JD:
    > > No, just rapid reaction time, and the reaction times of birds, like
    > > their heartbeats, are a lot faster than ours, crerating the illusion
    > > that they are all changing direction at the same time when actually
    > > there is a small reaction time involved.
    > >
    > Chris:
    > > Have a look round for a boids variant (most have probably seen it
    > > already): Simple sim of birds (from The Bronx I suppose) with a
    > > handful of rules (stay a rough distance from your neighbour, etc.)
    > > and they do most of the things all flocks do - it looks really
    > > organic, but needs no 'hand of god' style guiding force.
    >
    > Yes, all you need is a simple set of rules to account for this kind of
    > behavior. But different species of birds produce different patterns
    > of group-flight. Why this particular pattern on not another? Why do
    > the birds all go left and not right, or right and not left? You're
    > arguing from abstraction. It's not enough to account for the general
    > outlines. We've got to fill in the details. A simple set of rules
    > doesn't explain the specific flocking behavior of a specific set of
    > birds any more than their rapid reaction time.
    >
    Because of the original outside stimulus perceived at the periphery
    of the flock, combined with the execution of the simple rules that
    cause the domino-effect co-ordination of reaction.
    >
    > > As for the intentionality of the
    > > flock, just watch some crowd violence to see how these
    > > para-democratic decisions are made.
    >
    > As this list demonstrates, humans are no less vulnerable than birds to
    > collective mentality and behavior.
    >
    Here, we tend to collectively reject crank pseudoscience; other
    lists, of course, embrace it.
    >
    > Ted
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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 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 Aug 17 2001 - 22:43:16 BST