[MD] Social Ants?

[Horse]

Hiya Case

Good to see you caught the drift of my last post. Both chaos and 
complexity are areas of non-linear systems and very well described and 
visualised in terms of networks.
Where I see the importance of all this in relation to the MoQ is that 
much of the literature I've come across describing how these systems 
arise and interact talk in terms of qualitative and value relationships. 
There is great emphasis on the requirement that for novelty to emerge 
from complex systems there is a necessary balance between the dynamic 
and static aspects of a system. The emergence of organic systems (life) 
from inorganic matter is seen as occurring 'at the edge of chaos' where 
there is a delicate balance between the requirement for stability within 
a system that is far from stable (non-equilibrium). This has definite 
echoes of Pirsigs description of why atoms become chemistry professors! 
A balance of stability and freedom, order from chaos.

Ah well, better go as I have some more reading to do.

See ya


Horse



Case wrote:
> Horse,
> 
> Cheers indeed! I am going to put my own spin in this. Your grasp of
> networking is out of my league but see if this resonates with what you are
> saying.
> 
> If you take the internet as an example of a network, consider its structure.
> Your email starts at you computer in runs out a small cable into a bigger
> and bigger cable, into a fiber pipe line. The fiber pipes carry huge amounts
> of data including your e-mail which is routed into smaller pipes and smaller
> pipes until it hits a small cable that runs into my house. This structure is
> replicated in the road outside my house which leads into a four lane and
> into town and out to the interstate and out to other towns. The roads cross
> over a river that is fed by a system of tributaries. 
> 
> The same structure exists in the tree outside my window as it stretches to
> the sky to catch sunlight and into the ground to soak up nutrients. The
> identical form is found in the blood stream of my dog, in her lungs and her
> nervous system. 
> 
> It can easily be conceived in social relationships where most of my
> communication occurs between my family members and co-workers but branches
> out to acquaintances and retail clerks.  When I think about my dog she is
> for me the pattern of all dogs but the idea of dog branches out to include
> great Danes and shiatsus. I remember my phone number but am hazy about the
> number I used in college years ago. This pattern of values exists as you say
> in the inorganic world, the biological world, the social world and in our
> intellectual patterns.
> 
> It is self similar across scale. It is ubiquitous. In each instance the
> function and structure are similar. The structure is fractal self similarity
> and the function maximizes the number of possible interactions. The trunks
> exists were the probability of interaction is high and the branches and
> twigs represent increasing less probability but create more possibility. The
> trunks are more static (predictable) and the branches more dynamic
> (uncertain) and open to new possibilities.
> 
> I am no mathematician but there is an underlying math to this structure that
> is breathtakingly simple. 
> 
> When you see an idea that it that universal and that simple and
> transcendent... Well, let me put it as plainly and crudely as I can: I
> mentioned in an earlier post, lumpers and splitters. I am a lumper and to
> see all that lumping going on across scale - across dimensions just flat
> gives me a woody.
> 
> Back when I first read Lila I was reading about chaos and fractals, networks
> and self similarity. When Pirsig was talking static and dynamic patterns of
> value I though yes, yes and that pattern looks exactly like broccoli.
> 
> Case
> 
> 
> Hi Arlo, Case, Steve and other interested parties
> 
> I'm still considering much of what follows so any comments would be 
> enormously appreciated.
> 
> I've been following the recent discussions about individuals, ants, 
> bee's and other related stuff and thinking about the way in which you've 
> been looking at these ideas. The idea of apparent 'societies' of cells, 
> ants etc. doesn't seem to make sense in terms of the MoQ.
> I was thinking to myself "How can a group of similar entities working 
> together which, apparently produces something greater than the sum of 
> its parts not be a society?". Then a thought popped into my head - 
> they're not societies of anything - they're networks!
> I'm not sure if this will help in any way but it just seemed so obvious. 
> A society is a particular form of network but a network isn't 
> necessarily a society. Most of the things you've been discussing here 
> might be explained in this way. And the other interesting thing about 
> networks is that when you think in these terms you have to include the 
> connections between them - i.e. a network is a set of nodes and their 
> connections. Where you gents have been referring to 
> atoms/cells/bees/ants/individuals etc in past posts you could insert the 
> term 'node'. The relationships between atoms and cells and bodies etc. 
> are the network connections. Nodes don't generally exist in isolation.
> 
> An atom is a collection of sub-atomic particles (nodes) and their 
> relationships or ways in which they're connected. So an atom is (in 
> simple terms) a connected network of protons, electrons and neutrons.
> 
> I'll use shorthand from here on. For 'connected network of X' read 
> 'collection of nodes of type A and/or B and/or C etc. and the way in 
> which they're connected' - or something like that.
> 
> A molecule is a connected network of atoms.
> A cell is a connected network of molecules (actually if you consider 
> Lynn Margulis's - or maybe that should be Konstantin Mereschkowsky's - 
> symbiogenesis idea then a cell is a symbiotic grouping of subnetworks of 
> other items).
> A body/organism is a connected network of cells.
> A hive/nest is a connected network of bee/wasp/ant bodies.
> A society is a connected network of primates/humans !!! .....
> 
> And so on - I assume you get the general drift of my thinking.
> 
> Complexity and emergent systems also come into this view as you can 
> think in terms of multiply connected (complex) networks emerging from 
> lower order or simpler networks.
> Instead of thinking of atoms, molecules, cells, bodies etc. think of 
> inorganic/organic/social/intellectual patterns of value and how each is 
> more complex and emerges from the previous level.
> Each of the MoQ's levels could be considered as networked patterns of 
> values varying in complexity.
> That may (or may not - assuming you're still with me) go some way to 
> accounting for static patterns of value but I was also thinking about 
> where DQ fits in?
> Consider Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela's thesis on autopoiesis:
> 
> ======================
> 
> from wikipedia
> 
> "...the term autopoiesis refers to the dynamics of a non-equilibrium ( 
> or non-equilibrium thermodynamic (NET) (Dyke, Charles, 1988, ch. 9)) 
> system; that is, organized states (sometimes also called dissipative 
> structures) that remain stable for long periods of time despite matter 
> and energy continually flowing through them."
> 
> "From this very general point of view, the notion of autopoiesis is 
> often associated with that of self-organization."
> 
> =======================
> 
> A stable system in a state of non-equilibrium could well be thought of 
> as static patterns of value within a dynamic system - which seems, to me 
> anyway, similar to the way Pirsig describes the SQ/DQ relationship.
> 
> As you can probably tell from the disjointed state of the above this is 
> just a brief outline/sketch of my thoughts. I'm still thinking about 
> this, tossing various ideas about and reading various related items but 
> this germ of an idea might possibly be useful. Anyone fancy trying to 
> expand this idea into something workable or coherent? Let me know what 
> you think.
> Anyway, this post's getting far too long so I'll sign off, don my 
> asbestos suit and await any replies that may be generated.
> 
> Cheers folks
> 
> 
> Horse
> 
> 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>