Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tt] [info] New artificial life workgroup

Expand Messages
  • Piper
    IMO the virus meets the criteria for living as much as a bacterium. The use of someone else s DNA makes it more clever than the bacterium. Maybe the IQ of
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 3, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      IMO the virus meets the criteria for "living" as much as a bacterium. The
      use of someone else's DNA makes it more clever than the bacterium. Maybe the
      IQ of future sapiens will be superior because of what the virus has taught

      That being so, WATER IS NOT ESSENTIAL TO LIFE. What about C? If there is C
      in a virus, can it be replaced with something else?

      So why then say life is water-based or C-based? Who issued these dogmas?

      If an intelligent machine is found in the stony paleontology record of
      Andromeda as a product of evolution and/or creativity of Andromedan
      nano-robotic scientists, who is to say it is not a record of life even if it
      lacks C and water?

      Some non-viral crystalline minerals are amazingly complex and contain C.
      Some do not.

      If crystalline viral matter encrypts its destiny, why not other crystals
      too? How clever of mineral crystals to use the bodies of humans etc. to
      carry on after they leave the ground.

      I am a prospector.

      If BC's free miners find paleosoil from the dino age (eg 150 mya) and it
      contains very complex and new crystals not discovered before what do we say?
      Microfossils are well studied and have at least one journal of their own.

      What about fossilized virus from the dino age? The discovery of fossilized
      virus would make an interesting article in a journal of paleontology. Dino
      hunters "think big". Why should they not "think small".

      Didn't the dinos carry viruses?

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Tom Barbalet" <tom@...>
      To: "Piper" <pay_the_piper@...>
      Cc: "Eugen Leitl" <eugen@...>; <life-gazette@yahoogroups.com>;
      Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:29 AM
      Subject: Re: [tt] [info] New artificial life workgroup

      > Quoting Piper <pay_the_piper@...>:
      >> Should the virus be studied as the model for machine A-Life?
      >> It has brilliant self-replication ability. It does not waste energy by
      >> using its metabolism to build the reproductive machine. Rather it uses
      >> the machinery of other creatures.
      > Lots of discussion of this via;
      > http://www.biota.org/podcast/live.html
      > The interesting approach is to use artificial life methods to
      > model/assist with community growth. This is something I have talked about
      > through Biota Live. See Procedural Publicity, a couple of shows ago for
      > more on this.
      > Best regards,
      > Tom Barbalet.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.