Message-Id: <34394C20.3727@rug.ac.be>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 13:37:52 -0700
From: Mario Vaneechoutte <Mario.Vaneechoutte@rug.ac.be>
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Rhythmicity, Was: Replicators, was Non Homuncular Memetics
Mark Mills wrote:
> I'd add rhythm to your list of requirements, hopefully emphasizing your
> point. Without rhythm, the system is dead. Research has shown circadian
> rhythms exist at the RNA level. Higher frequency rhythms probably exist
> at the DNA-RNA level, but remain beyond our measurement skills.
I not really understand what you refer to. I am also unaware of
frequency rhythms. It might be interesting when you could give the
references or explain a bit more.
> >The only independent replicator on Earth is the cell which
> >can be regarded as a system of molecules forming a closed semantic
> >circle.
>
> I'm not sure what you are getting at here. I know we are talking about a
> difficult notion, but I wonder if the statement is a bit extreme.
>
> I doubt that any cell is really a closed circle. If it was entirely
> closed, it would be a 'black hole,' emitting no evidence of its existence.
>
> All life is dependent on other life forms since all contribute to the
> environment and life adapts to the environment. No life form is entirely
> independent and self sufficient.
Snip.
My excuses for not being clear. I meant independent replicator with
respect to information. See, reply to Aaron for more explanation.
> >It is here that the basic dissimilarity with memes can be found:
> >memes are merely used for information exchange between different
> >processors. In opposition to genetic biology, these processors (I mean
> >us) are not encoded by the information contained in memes.
>
> I suspect the perceived dissimilarity reflects choices in definitions and
> perspective. It seems likely that an open minded consideration of the
> DNA substrate/code system (genetics) with the neural substrate/code
> system (memetics) will find remarkably similar processes.
I am studying similarities and dissimilarities between genes and memes
since a few years. I think there is even a formal comparison possible,
if we can agree that in genetics we are looking at an end stage process
(the cell) which we (fruitlessly) try to compare to culture where memes
are replicated by hosts.
The trick might be consider the initial function of nucleotide
information as a true language (used for better communication between
prebiotic processors, just like words now enhance communication
possibilities between humans), instead of considering RNA and DNA as a
replicators from the start. The last approach is currently the main
stream paradigm among biologists thinking about the origin of life (with
a tremendous number of practical and theoretical problems), although
people like Stuart Kauffman suggest to start with networks of
interacting molecules, an idea which is in the same direction of some of
my suggestions. All of this needs better explanation, so we shouldn't
discuss these preliminary ideas of mine any further at the moment.
Only, your questions forced me to write this down.
I suggest to look at
>
> Mark
>
> ===============================================================
> 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
-- Mario Vaneechoutte Laboratory Bacteriology & Virology Blok A, De Pintelaan 185 University Hospital Ghent Belgium 9000 Ghent Tel: +32 9 240 36 92 Fax: +32 9 240 36 59 E-mail: Mario.Vaneechoutte@rug.ac.be Editor J. Memetics: 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