# Steam Engine - RKC

**URL:** <http://discourse.iapct.org/t/steam-engine-rkc/10797>\
**Category:** CSG1992\
**Created:** [March 20, 1992, 9:03pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/steam-engine-rkc/10797 "1992-03-20T21:03:00Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Robert\_K\_Clark1](http://discourse.iapct.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/3bc359/32.png) [@Robert\_K\_Clark1](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Robert_K_Clark1)\
**Post date:** [March 20, 1992, 9:03pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/steam-engine-rkc/10797/1 "1992-03-20T21:03:00Z")

</div>

March 20, 1992

[From Robert K. Clark (491-2499)]

Chris Malcolm and the Watt Steam Engine Governor.  
Sorry to be slow to respond. My time for SCG is very limited as I am  
responsible for several on-going activities. My CSG files are still  
not well organized. There are many interesting topics, but I can't  
follow them all!

I'm not sure what you are suggesting with this. Are you suggesting  
that it is not "possible to trace all the signals/events through the  
system??" Or that it may be difficult to do in some cases? This can  
be particularly hard to do if digital computers are involved in the  
absence of the system documents. With analog systems, or other  
hardware systems, it may be easier.

What I had in mind was the tracing of each step in the system in  
cause & effect terms. This is what sometimes results in tracing the  
signals ("events") around and around the loop, with the reference  
signal ("set-point") fixed. And then tracing the systems, likewise,  
for the effects of changing the set-point both with and without  
having the out-put "signal" fixed. Tracing the events through the  
hardware may be awkward -- this is one advantage of the Control  
System terminology. It has broad general applicability and is  
convenient in many situations.

Of course much of the interest in Control System Theory of Behavior  
is concerned with application to living beings, mainly, people. And  
this quickly moves to tracing neural networks. Here it is not  
uncommon to find people going "around and around the loop."

Perhaps my following response is unnecessary, but here it is:

The Watt Steam Engine Governor is indeed a negative feedback system  
of brass and steel, with an adjustable set-point. Note I said "may  
be possible to trace all signals/events through the system." These  
"signals/events" need not involve conversion to alternative physical  
form. After all, the concept of "signals" is just that, a "concept."

In the Steam Engine situation, there are several ways to describe the  
"signals." For example, the distance of the spinning balls from the  
axis can be regarded as the "feedback signal." This distance is then  
converted by levers into a force applied to a movable valve,  
countered by an externally adjustable tension on a spring or other  
opposing force. As the valve opens (or closes) the engine operates  
to change the speed of the assembly, particularly the rotating ball  
system. Thus each step in the operation of the system is of a  
"directly cause and effect" or "stimulus response" nature, while the  
over-all operation serves as a control system. Note, however, that,  
without some entity to adjust the "set-point," the operation of the  
Steam Engine as a control system is incomplete.

There are many non-living systems in which the physical expression of  
one or another signal may be different from what is expected. For  
example, many thermostatic systems detect temperature by means of the  
shape of a bi-metallic strip. In such a case, the temperature signal  
can be regarded as the position of the end of the strip. Which may,  
in turn, make or break an electrical contact -- the comparator --  
producing an output signal to some part of the output function.

The physical expression of some feedback systems may be difficult to  
untangle, but if the conditions defining such systems are met, the  
over-all operation is clear.

You speak of "forecasting." Indeed, you are right. In some  
situations a great deal can be accomplished without detailed  
information. Meteorology, for instance. There are many examples of  
this in physics and elsewhere. What I don't like about Determinism  
(hence "Behaviorism" carried to the extreme) is the implication that  
one is powerless to change ANYTHING! Of course this is extreme, and  
usually handled by limiting the application of the deterministic  
philosophy. I say I "don't like Determinism" because that is  
essentially my orientation. I have been unable to find any way to  
demonstrate either determinism (complete, unlimited) or free will  
(limited, of course). So I "takes my choice."

I reacted to the quotes from Bill's remarks about BEHAVIORISM, with  
which I agree, because it seems to me that a more philosophical  
viewpoint is more effective. This also begins to show my approach,  
primarily that of an experimentalist who needs a working theory --  
that works -- in order to interpret and communicate his experimental  
results.

Regards, Bob Clark

> **···**
>
> Subject: Steam Engine - RKC