This follows from the thread "Re: MD Genes, Memes, Darwin and Platt"
(The "WAVE" part comes a few paragraphs down)
Hi Platt, Kenneth, Roger and all,
PLATT
> Now will someone kindly take this thread and tie it to the MOQ? I
> enjoy all the speculation about genes and memes, but I'm too
> dense to see what this has to do with the world being a moral
> order. I've searched thru Lila in vain for mention of a meme, and
> the only gene I found was Gene Autry. :-)
Personally, I find this thread highly relevant to the MoQ. Pirsig
himself said he considers MoQ to be much bigger than Lila and ZAMM. By
his estimate, those two novels gave us only a few percent. Thus, the
fact that Pirsig never talked about memes by name doesn't mean that we
shouldn't. I think it might be very useful and enlightening to try and
decide whether memes are biological or social patterns of value. IMO the
answer is both.
KENNETH
>On the memetic list we agreed that memes resides in the brain. But we
also
>agreed upon the fact that we no longer need the analogy between genes
and
>memes.
If that is true, memes would be a Biological PoV. However, it seems to
deny patterns arising out of communities. Aren't there also collective
memes belonging to families, tribes and large societies?
(Pls. correct any errors - I admit to being ignorant on memetics). In
Lila, Pirsig talks about New York City as some sort of a living entity
(the giant). Does it have memes?
JONATHAN
>>Patterns can only
>> persist if their propagation is encouraged (a tautology).
KENNETH (in another post)
>That is just the point I gonna make in the topic I will present to you
all.
>In my opinion patterns (meme and environment) don 't have to be
encouraged
>to propagate themselves. They can propagate from their " own case ".
Let's say that memes largely encourage themselves ("the selfish meme")
but still depend on a permissive environment.
ROGER
>PS -- And my pet theory is that it is self-amplifying feedback loops
that
>lead to the emergence of steadily increasing levels of complexity. But
that's
>another issue.
Let's leave out the amplification for now and settle for perpetuation.
Here's a throwaway line from
Liane Gabora's book review
www.chass.utoronto.ca/epc/srb/srb/moreonmemes.html
"The worldview implied by the Shroedinger equation is extremely
confusing too . . ."
This stirred up in me an idea that I've been selfishly holding onto
since an ancient discussion with Fintan. Since "my book" doesn't look
like coming out any time soon (i.e. I didn't start writing yet), I will
now spill the beans - I ask everyone to please remember that this idea
comes from ME. Here it is:
The ultimate example of a self replicating pattern is a wave - simple
harmonic motion that we learned in high-school physics. The Shroedinger
equation is the application of wave equations to describe the orbitals
of electrons, and FROM IT WE GET THE WHOLE OF QUANTUM CHEMISTRY.
Scientists are obsessed with waves - now physicists have used similar
ideas in "String Theory" to describe all particles in terms of wave
functions. In short, scientists would have us define the whole of
existence in wave equations. The mathematics of wave equations quickly
becomes unworkable for large systems, but the mathematicians have come
up with other self-replication functions like fractals which also prove
useful (consider the computer "Game of Life"), which turn out to be very
useful in modelling chemical and biological systems.
KENNETH
>There is something strange in the way memes act, if we take it for
granted
>that they are selfish in nature, like genes.
>It is time I think Jonathan to present my article, don 't you agree !?
Definitely.
Maybe you will consider posting it up as a contribution to the MoQ web
site forum.
Jonathan
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:48 BST