Yes.  The paradox of development is that it always gets where it’s going even 
though it doesn’t KNOW where its going.  That’s what makes ca rules so 
enticing.   Constructor theory sounds interesting.  

 

n

 

Nick Thompson

 <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]

 <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> 
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Jon Zingale
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2021 6:34 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Wizards[⚣]?

 

"""

Oh, for instance:  I tried to get development psychologist to think about  the 
implication of Wolfram’s patterns.  They just weren’t interested.    Where’s 
the soul?
"""
The first thing that crosses my mind is constructor theory and that got me 
wondering about support from the life-level community. It seems that one of the 
theories founders, Chiara Marletto, wrote a bit on the subject: 
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1407.0681.pdf
"""
Neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory explains how the appearance of purposive 
design in the sophisticated adaptations of living organisms can have come about 
without their intentionally being designed. The explanation relies crucially on 
the possibility of certain physical processes: mainly, gene replication and 
natural selection.

In this paper I show that for those processes to be possible without the design 
of biological adaptations being encoded in the laws of physics, those laws must 
have certain other properties. The theory of what these properties are is not 
part of evolution theory proper, and has not been developed, yet without it the 
neo-Darwinian theory does not fully achieve its purpose of explaining the 
appearance of design.

To this end I apply Constructor Theory’s new mode of explanation to provide an 
exact formulation of the appearance of design, of no-design laws, and of the 
logic of self-reproduction and natural selection, within fundamental physics. I 
conclude that self-reproduction, replication and natural selection are possible 
under no-design laws, the only non-trivial condition being that they allow 
digital information to be physically instantiated. This has an exact 
characterisation in the constructor theory of information. I also show that 
under no-design laws an accurate replicator requires the existence of a 
“vehicle” constituting, together with the replicator, a self-reproducer.
"""
 
Is this at all in the ballpark of your thinking on the matter?
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:
 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to