Joined: June 2006
|Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 16 2012,13:37)|
|Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Nov. 16 2012,13:11)|
|A few more questions about measurement:|
1. What's the smallest unit of "cellular intelligence" your measurement system can reliably measure--i.e., what is its resolution?
2. Have you evaluated the system's repeatability and reproducibility? ("Repeatability" = the extent to which one can rely on the same measurement being made by two or more people independently; "Reproducibility" is the extent to which one can rely on one person being able to accurately measure the same thing continually)
3. Have you investigated and defined the conditions under which your system might yield unreliable results, and controlled for them?
It's like being pregnant, you are or are not. There is no resolution, all four requirements are either met are they are not, and where they are it starts self-learning then it's soon growing all over the (real or virtual) planet.
Gary, here's what you said, with emphasis added:
|As long as they [cloned bacteria] were well isolated from external information from wild colony conjugation the molecular level intelligence of the clones would be essentially identical. But the cellular intelligence is the part it develops during its lifetime and depends on environment, resulting in tumblers, swarmers, or even sessile, resulting in very different cellular intelligence circuits.|
You say that cellular intelligence develops during its lifetime and then you say, wrt your measurement system, "It has no resolution." The verb "to develop" connotes incremental augmentation or progression. How can you possibly know anything about the development of "cellular intelligence" without being able to discern incremental stages of development?
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT