Re: Me against the meme

From: Chris Taylor (
Date: Tue 08 Nov 2005 - 11:52:50 GMT

  • Next message: Scott Chase: "Re: Me against the meme"

    Nah -- she's channelling ;)

    So there's the on/off switch; to flesh it out, for the hell of it I did a Google 'I'm feeling lucky' on "emergence paper wasps termites nest building local rules" and got which I haven't read more than the abstract of but anyway...

    Derek Gatherer wrote:
    > Here's Marais's orginal.
    > In the middle section there is:
    > "While the termites are carrying on their work of restoration on
    > either side of the steel plate, dig a furrow enabling you to reach
    > the queen's cell, disturbing the nest as little as possible. Expose
    > the queen and destroy her. Immediately the whole community ceases
    > work on either side of the plate. We can separate the termites from
    > the queen for months by means of this plate, yet in spite of that
    > they continue working systematically while she is alive in her cell;
    > destroy or remove her, however, and their activity is at an end."
    > So if there is a spooky field, it must emanate from the body of the
    > queen. Therefore, it cannot be a property of the whole nest, but merely
    > of the queen's individual body. Therefore it is not a holistic field at
    > all. QED.
    >>> The pheromones must be getting though the plate then. (Actually I
    >>> dispute that the sound hypothesis has been ruled out. Where did you
    >>> read that?)
    >> I covered this one already! It is really straightforward, based on
    >> actors following rule sets applied to _local_ stimuli without need of
    >> intermediate-range signalling of any kind whether chemical or
    >> vibrational knee-hearing or whatever.
    >> The plate was as you said _inserted_ implying that the mound's
    >> development was already well underway, setting up a set of basic
    >> conditions before intervention (point one). The actors continue to
    >> follow _local_ rules of the form 'if you are confronted with X, do Y'
    >> (point two). And incidentally, wrt the plate, they would essentially
    >> ignore it as they have no programmed response to the smell/feel of the
    >> plate. All you would see is a (predicatable given sufficient
    >> [reductionist-produced] knowledge) minor distortion at the interface
    >> of the mound and the plate -- correct?
    >> It all works just fine and such systems are extremely robust against
    >> even the grossest of perturbations. There _is no issue here_. Next case.

    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)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue 08 Nov 2005 - 12:12:51 GMT