That sounds very reasonable, but how would that “activation” take place?
I have been thinking about the reference signal and it seems to me that, if it is zero then it causes a maximal error signal and maximal output function. On the other hand if it is as high as percetual signal then error signal would be zero and output function
might be in rest and the control system would not actively affect anything in its environment.
So if the organism is hungry, then the reference signal to the system that perceives the missing of food should be zero or small to activate beharior to search food. If the organism is satisfied then the upper control system should echo the perceptual signal
back as such as a refence signal, which causes that organism is indifferent to perceptions connected to food.
Or am I totally lost again?
Lähettäjä: Bob Hintz firstname.lastname@example.org
Lähetetty: 6. marraskuuta 2016 0:11
Aihe: Re: VS: Perceptual Control Theory Talk
bob hintz 11-5-16
I would like to suggest that the the control loop for an external perception is activated by the output of a control loop that manages an internal perception. Hunger is an internal perception which might activate the control loop that results in hunting
and consuming food. When enough food is consumed the internal loop no longer has an error and the output of that loop deactivates the external loop. The temporal interval between end of one hunt and the beginning of the next will depend on the size of the
prey, the rate of digestion of the predator, the number of partners that might share in the kill and who knows what other variables that might affect the experience of hunger.
Thirst would be another simple and pretty universal example. Everyone regardless of species quits drinking after a few swallows and starts again after a time interval while lots of internal processes occur.
I am not sure why we imagine internal processes only involve the minimal basics of the biology of life. If nourishment is not placed in contact with a human infant’s lips within hours after it is born, it will be unable to survive. If the infant is unable
to coordinate breathing and swallowing, a care giver typically removes the swallowing option so that breathing can resume. Premature infants are at particular risk in this regard. Very premature infants cannot even be fed the regular way and need intravenous
nourishment. The infant is able to develop and grow because of the support of other people, but each infant has it’s own genetic code and develops in it’s own fashion as long as it has at least a minimally supportive social environment. I suspect that an
infant learns to feel hunger because it is given the opportunity to eat and can affect the perceptions involved in the digestion process. All infants quit sucking at some point even if more is available. All infants quit sucking if the environment quits
providing nourishment. Infants apparently practice sucking thumbs in the womb even without needing nourishment as they are learning to alter their own sensations of them selves.
I suspect that the hierarchy of external control is created to meet the needs of internal control and that it must match to some extent the hierarchy in use by the other human beings with whom one interacts on a daily basis. Each individual’s hierarchy
must match well enough with the actual external world that they are able to continue to live. Almost every infant learns the language of his/her parents. If the family speaks more than one language, most children will learn whatever is available.
I keep a copy of Bill’s speculation about reorganization visible on my desk and continue to think about the implications.
I have two papers I would like to make available, but when I tried to attach one it failed to go through. Any suggestions would be appreciated.