Hi Andy
This thread about computers "supporting" MoQ levels above inorganic
has yanked me out of newbie lurk mode. My thoughts take two orthogonal
tracks. First, the "organic" level is not necessarily limited to or
defined by what we have found and classified as "life" in the
universe. Second, the reality of any given thing under Quality cannot
be considered to exist without a second referent to provide point of
view.
First track: Spot on, I agree 100%. I'm also very intrigued by the name
"organic". Why did you use that name for the 2nd level?
2nd track: To me, that's the quality event producing the subject (point
of view), and the object (given thing). Does that chime with you too?
To follow the first track, first review what constitutes biology or
life. Pooping is not a defining characteristic. An organism that
accumulates all of its waste until death or outsources its energy
production is still an organism. I say that a biological pattern it is
any pattern that tends toward self-perpetuation despite adversity.
Atoms and most molecules do not qualify but DNA is such a pattern. In
a favorable environment, DNA perpetuates its pattern by building
defenses and making copies of itself. These activities are the result
of molecule-manipulating programs embedded in the DNA. We are capable
of manipulating DNA and thus capable of rudimentary hacking of
biological programs. (Please correct me if I need correction on the
biological level.)
Nothing to correct here. It's just great to see you're writing very
technical and none of that usual "magic of life" that is usually used to
alienate the 2nd level from the first. We know pretty much about how a
cell works, that DNA is used only as a library where ribosomes can fetch
the sequence/recipe they need to create a new protein. There is no
mystery left. We can't just point to DNA and say that this is the big
mystic step that made life a new level on top of the first. We have to
come up with something better if we really want to keep that level.
This definition of the biological level does not necessarily exclude
patterns invented or circulated by man. We have already seen man-made
self-perpetuating patterns in the wild: computer viruses. These
patterns are self-replicating in that they can spawn viable copies of
themselves in favorable environments. To varying degrees, they exploit
their environment despite adversity. To varying degrees, they take
part in communication of information about their environments, so they
can be said to have a social level. To varying degrees, they have been
programmed to mutate to gain advantage against other patterns in their
environment. The fact that one can easily defeat the pattern by
pulling the plug is no proof against its being biological as the same
effect could be applied to you by suffocation.
I agree computer viruses can be seen as biological, or organic,
patterns. *But*, they don't use our inorganic level.
They have a completely new inorganic level. One where gravity, energy,
light, mass etc. doesn't exist. The physical laws of their inorganic
level are the laws of the processor, and the stuff of their world are
ones and zeros. On top of that, the computer viruses are organic patterns.
Do you agree?
So you could say that a computer "supports" biological patterns in
that a computer "is a suitable medium for" biological patterns. This
is no different from saying that the ocean supports life, if you can
suspend whatever social or theological precepts prevent you from
attributing to man the ability to breathe life into matter, at least
outside of polite company.
However, if what I wrote above is true, then we need to look for our
version of an organic level inside the computer. The one that is built
on our inorganic level with voltage, currents and magnetism.
The organic level with the computer viruses doesn't count. Agree?
I am too fuzzy on the second novel to embark on any proof that we have
created self-supporting intellectual patterns in electronic computers.
That will be in my mind as I study.
Can't wait. :)
The second track is more firmly grounded in the first novel, with
which I am currently becoming reacquainted. Consider an unpowered
computer lying in a dark closet with nobody around to see it. Does it
exist? At what levels? If it is online and connected to the internet
and communicating with other computers, yet nobody is aware of it at
this specific moment, does it exist? At what levels? Let me make it
more concrete.
At the present moment in your time frame, you are reading these words
from a screen (or hearing them from an assistive device) and
suspending your knowledge that the symbols ride on signals composed of
electronically controlled pixels (or vibrations of speaker membranes)
that convey symbols from me to you across thoroughly inorganic air.
The medium of communication need not have the capabilities of the
participants.
That we have interposed electronic computers in our communication loop
is no more significant than had we had this discussion via paper or
smoke signals or mind melding. Smoke is no more capable than a
computer is of "being" intellectual, yet both are capable of conveying
patterns between intellectual beings.
Hmm... Perhaps not being intellectual, i.e. thinking new thoughts. But
it *is* capable of handling static intellectual patterns. It can correct
misspelled words, it can foresee weather, it can do pretty much anything
a person can do, except inventing new things to do. It's not dynamic at
all, but I would still claim it's way more capable than a piece of paper.
Again, welcome!
Magnus
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
