(gavin Ritz 2010.07.18.12.00NZT)
Can this statement be true?
All the possible
perceptions (PCT term) that will be, can be, have
been or come to be
(I’m sure this is very huge no# of signals) are equal
to all the niches
(technical term from evolution) in the environment.
Further all the possible
controlled variables are actually the niches
for all living things.
If it’s possible that
it may be true then this opens a relationship with
evolutionary theory. So
what is it we are really controlling?
This question reminds me of a book by
Varela and Maturana called "The Tree
of Knowledge". In this book the
authors put away the traditional view of
evolution as optimization, but rather
introduce the concept of
evolutionary drift.
Yes I know this book by
Varela and have it on my shelf, I was not thinking of Varela’s work when
this idea popped into my head.
They emphasize that in evolution each
living thing is
not the result of a optimization algorithm,
but is the way it is because
of the structural couplings with its
environment (the niche).
I suppose that statement is
really saying a similar thing
Now it is interesting how a control system
can evolve. As much of the
control logic is found in the input and
output functions, we have an
hen-and-egg problem: Did the neural
circuits for the perception exist
before those for action or the other way
round?
This is a very good question
and not an easy answer. The trivial answer is that all living matter is not
only matter but matter and information (maybe a perception). Only informed matter
seems to evolve, but with the environment. I also suppose this is not much different
to what Plotkin was trying to say in Darwin Machines. I was just looking at the
issue through the eyes of PCT.
For me the answer is obvious: Both parts
have to evolve in a strong
coupling with each other (trancending
hen-and-egg) and perception can not
be seperated from action.
Of course, this can only apply to hard
wired control systems. In higher
order control tasks like controlling your
position on the lane, it is
obvious that the perception is there first
in order to learn the
appropriate action.
HG