RE: Dawkins' Mutation Test for Replicators

Gatherer, D. (
Mon, 30 Aug 1999 13:28:08 +0200

Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 13:28:08 +0200
From: "Gatherer, D. (Derek)" <>
Subject: RE: Dawkins' Mutation Test for Replicators
To: "''" <>

In the old days of radio crystals they used to cut the crystals along the
X/Y axis. The problem was that in using this 'natural' cut it was found that
occasionally these crystals would 'jump' frequencies and so were useless for
long term radio work. No explanation was offered for this, all that happened
was the X/Y cut was avoided.

Okay, no problem so far.


Crystals are, by their nature, 'pure' forms and in the context of purity we
start to see a pattern in that when I cut a crystal along a natural fissure
so there is little loss of atom layers such that the two surfaces resulting
from the cut are highly correlated; the more layers you lose in the cutting
process so the faster the drop-off of correlation (at a rate of1/2^n).

If you place each of the resulting crystals in a faraday cage you should not
have any detection of resonance from the surfaces of each crystal. In an
experiment done some time ago we DID find 'resonance' in that stimulation of
one surface elicited a 'change' in the surface in the other crystal. This
experiment was 'casual' and so needs 'work' but it does go along with the
identical twins concept and the 'purity' pattern. (would need to use SQUIDS
to do things 'properly'.)

Still okay. I can't explain your result, but see no reason to doubt it.

The crystal observations do not necessarily mean that we have some sort of
'magical'communications but it does emphasise the presence of the 'purity'
pattern in that we find similar concepts at all scales of analysis --

No, I don't see this. You have suddenly leapt into 'purity pattern'.

pattern in that we find similar concepts at all scales of analysis --
crystals or twins or even with correlated minds (this seems to come about
due to two or more people having the same *beliefs* and as such thinking the
same way.

No, there have to be biological explanations for biological facts. You're
not giving one.

there was no 'random' guessing, the tests where on brain wave patterns, both
twins placed in faraday cages.

Okay then, maybe that's the frequency of random similarity of 'brain-wave'
patterns (which are what? alpha waves?)

your are taking things out of context, the context is the *purity* pattern
in thinking. Genetic correlation comes from the continuum effect were CE =
sum of 1/2^n (1/2^n being the genetic relationship of an individual to
others) the effect would mainfest when CE = 2 which is what you find in
'pure' forms ('ideal' identical twins) is 1/1 + 1/1 = 2.

relationship to parents/siblings is 1/2
aunts uncles = 1/4

So what? This is elementary genetics.

and this is without considering repressions of expression that can skew
these relationships.

and what are repressions of expression?

I would seriously consider an analysis of twin data etc etc since it does
say something about the purity pattern. The question is whether this is a
'real' pattern or else a pattern linked to our method of analysis, our ways
of thinking. Personally I am biased to the latter, as I demonstrate in my
articles on wave/particle duality and the EPR paradox (which implies
'superluminal' communications).

No, I don't see that EPR and other quantum things can help us to understand
twins or monkeys.

My assertion is that the results of the
experiments comes from the recursive dichotomisations used in the
creation/analysis of the data;

No, again, the results come from interpreting the experiments in the light
of the research tradition in which they are grounded.

the method alone guarantees seeing frequency
distributions that imply some sort of connection, wave interference patterns
imply dependencies but these patterns are built-in to the method - ANY
recursive dichotomisation will create these patterns regardless of the
nature of the elements of the dichotomy!

Now I'm just lost. What is the basis of this strange theory you have?

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)