[Martin Taylor 961024 18:30]
Bruce Gregory (961024.1525 EDT) to Rick Marken (961024.1320)
Hmmm. At least one of us is wrong. Only Martin knows which one.
Well, let the neigh-sayer weigh the question. Because I think Bruce is
wrong in saying the above.
Rick Marken (961024.1320)
>Martin, like Kent, is talking about the behavior of control systems.
>Both are using the same "dynamical equations."
Yes, like Kent, I'm talking about the behaviour of control systems (in
interaction with each other).
No, we are not using the same dynamical equations. Kent is looking at how
two (or more?) control systems of fixed characteristics alter their signal
values over time when they interact. I am looking at how their interactions
would be expected to change as the control systems reorganize and learn
how to deal with one another. It's a different area of concern. But it's
true that both areas involve system dynamics. Its just that they are the
dynamics of different systems: Kent's behaves, mine learns to behave; Kent's
interest is in time scales of seconds to years (in human interactions),
mine would be in years to millenia or longer.
Not from what I undertand. Kent is using control system equations to model
interacting control systems; Martin is (or would like to be) using dynamical
"attractor" equations to model the behavior that _results_ from the
interaction of control system equations.
I'm afraid I don't see the distinction. Kent looks at the values of
the CEVs over which there is conflict, having modelled the interior
structure of the control systems that are conflicting. I look at the
tendencies of the values of perceptual control error, having modelled
the processes that allow those errors to change (reorganization). Kent
works in a background theoretical system that has a lot of engineering
behind it, I'm placing the modelling in the context of a theoretical
system that has a lot of mathematical knowledge behind it. I'll wager
that Kent knows as little of the engineering theory of control as I
know of non-linear dynamical theory; but I think we both know enough
of the appropriate theoretical background to see how interacting
control systems fit within it.
So neither of you is wrong, and neither of you is right. But I'll grade
your tests.
I'd have to give an A to Marken for the second sentence, and a failing
grade for the first. Bruce gets an A for his first sentence and a failing
grade for his second. A nice symmetry. Happy with your grades, Bruce?-)
Perhaps I should bray for you both??? Neigh, neigh.
Martin