Hi,
Fabio asked
a provocative question :) - “what
benefit do we get by seeing Antonio’s system in term of information, which we
would not get by seeing it via ‘traditional physics’ only?”
This
question relates to many other "threads" that were suggested, and one
way is to simply say - taking the weak IDSO view - that it is easier to
compare different engineering designs by analysing information dynamics. For
instance, imagine a completely centralised modular robot, controlled from a
single module/segment that regularly receives data from other segments, computes
the best actions for every segment, and sends the instructions back. It appears
that this would not satisfy the minimal control effort principle that Antonio
advocates. But how do we systematically compare this design with other,
more distributed, designs? Measuring instructions' size, number of packets,
memory usage, etc. would be prone to ambiguities. While doing the analysis
information-theoretically introduces "the lingua franca" for multiple
designs.
The
strong IDSO view would maintain, in my interpretation, that if such
"lingua franca" is possible then it's only a matter of time till
evolution/self-organisation (and even human-designers) discover it, and put to
use. In other words, "proto-symbols", that were mentioned in the
previous message, would help in capturing the relevant bits and using it
functionally. This is obviously only a conjecture.
Thanks,
Mikhail
i also like Antonio’s point. A question
could be “what benefit do we get by seeing Antonio’s system in term of
information, which we would not get by seeing it via ‘traditional physics’
only?”
