From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Sat May 29 2004 - 12:36:35 BST
Wish I had more time for a detailed response ... This is important stuff
Mark.
(Part of my own knowledge modelling agenda based on MoQ.)
It's all about change and change ranges from gradual to chaotic. AI / AL /
Living Systems Simulation / Cybernetics has got closest amongst the sciences
to apreciating the evloutionary nature of change (and learning), and the
emergence of "levels". The idea of "sweet spots" where there is coherence
between change events and environmental "opportunty. Coherence emergent from
Chaos, not imposed by external rationale - the tension of SQ and DQ as you
put it.
The balance between coherence and chaos is the key.
Major subject in relating quantum scale "random chance" to ordered real-life
scale events - even biological and mental.
You may think I digress - but I'm not so sure.
Important subject matter this.
All the best,
Ian Glendinning
----- Original Message -----
From: <Valuemetaphysics@aol.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 12:20 AM
Subject: MD Coherence and A.I.
> Dear forum,
> Artificial Intelligence is helping scientists understand how biological
> evolution works. It is becoming more and more apparent that Biological
evolution is
> most Dynamic at a sweet spot or state of tension between chaos and order.
> This state may be common in all patterned evolution?
> If A.I. is going to develop, it appears it is going to do so at a coherent
> state?
>
> Christopher G. Langton is a leading MIT scientist working with A.I. I
notice
> Langton has contributed a paper to Artificial Life II: proceedings of the
> workshop on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems, Santa Fe,
1990.
> Addison Wesley. 1992 (Christopher G. Langton, Charles E. Taylor, J. Doyne
Farmer,
> Steen Rasmussen, editors) titled "Life at the Edge of Chaos." It may come
as
> no surprise to those following coherence that Stuart A. Kauffman has also
> contributed in collaborated with Sonke Johnson with "Co-Evolution to the
Edge of
> Chaos: Coupled Fitness Landscapes, Poised States, and Co-Evolutionary
Avalan
> ches."
>
> The edge of chaos is an exciting point in evolution:
> "Langton developed the Lambda (l) scale from 0 to 1 which represented the
> degree of information retention and movement in a system. At the zero end
of the
> scale information is fixed or frozen. Further along it is periodic, moving
in
> endlessly repeating cycles. At the opposite end (one) it is totally
chaotic.
>
> Langton discovered a 'sweet spot' on this scale where complexity was at
its
> highest and where living systems and artificial life thrived! He called
this area
> the 'edge of chaos.' It is located between the periodic and chaos areas.
It
> is a place where information movement has the right balance of stability
and
> flexibility. It is an abstract window or arena in the information
universe, a
> balance point where complex adaptive systems are at their best. When an
a-life
> environment is tuned to the edge of chaos the most novel, interesting and
life
> like behaviours emerge. Wolfram discovered the same concept studying
cellular
> automata and divided the areas into four classes. Class 4 related to the
edge
> of chaos, at 0.273 on the Lambda scale." A New Reality p110
> (My emphasis.)
>
> When the MOQ used to enquire into what a sweet spot is, it may be said
that a
> sweet spot is exceptional tension between patterns of static Quality. The
> term coherence seems well suited here to describe a point where Dynamic
Quality
> drives evolution towards higher coherent states.
>
> So, a sweet spot is coherence; it is exceptional tension between patterns
of
> static Quality.
> The Metaphysics of Quality provides a basis for evolution as a moral
> activity.
> Many years ago i suggested that A.I. may be involved in the next level of
> moral evolution; level 5 in the MOQ? The reason i suggest this isn't so
much
> because it is obvious! I suggest it because coherence demands it:
> "Computer scientist Danny Hillis with the help of Biologist Eric Lander,
> "developed an equation that quantified the boundary where the punctuated
> equilibrium event occurred. The equation is one over e squared (e is a
well,
> established mathematical constant). When the level of the specific genes
reached this
> value, there would be a phase transition and the population would make a
> dramatic leap to a higher level. If we think of civilisation as a whole as
Ray's or
> Hillis's population of a-life entities and we replace genes with memes and
> enabling technologies, then surely we are close to some massive punctuated
> equilibrium? Levy described how during periods of stability in Hillis's
simu
> lation, analysis revealed 'seething' activity of genes, which were
establishing the
> foundations for the next leap. The world today is characterised by
'seething'
> activity in philosophies, worldviews, religious and metaphysical ideas,
> scientific breakthroughs in every field and technological advances from
main
> stream to alternative." All these new ideas, paradigms, discoveries and
inventions are
> analogous to epistatic genes. "Instead of genetic changes building
undetected
> towards the critical mass, (described by the one over e squared formula)
and
> creating an evolutionary leap, we have memes and enabling technologies
leading to
> the same thing. In a sudden and spectacular leap of evolutionary change a
> total change of our society our civilisation and environment could occur
similar
> to Hillis's and Ray's simulations where punctuated equilibrium emerged." A
> New Reality p247
> (My emphasis.)
>
> I am not in a position to determine specific changes, but i feel MOQ
> coherence suggests which ever way any new phase transition goes it should
involve
> SQ-SQ tension? There should be a Dynamic vehicle for continued evolution
and a
> static protecting sheath of old level patterns.
> Intellect is level 4 in the MOQ. So, level 5 may strive to round off level
4
> in a stable coherent state? Assuming we take a view of level 4 as art,
then it
> may be helpful to suggest that level 5 will use art its protecting base?
That
> does not sound so bad to me. I rather feel Humans can lead a meaningful
> relationship with a level of evolution which relies on creative Human
expression as
> its pool of life?
>
> Yes, this is so much speculation. However, we create the future by
dreaming
> about it?
>
> All the best,
> Mark
>
> P.S. I find Chris Banks' book, A new reality covers way too much ground
and
> indulges in too much speculation. It reminded me of Ken Wilber's style!
But
> Banks' quotes, like those of many of Wilber's, are from more important
primary
> sources.
>
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 29 2004 - 12:50:26 BST