More on Crichton and Gaia
- More on Crichton:
From the back cover:
Crichton: "A cloud of nanoparticles--micro-robots . . . This cloud is
self sustaining and self-reproducing. It is intelligent and learns
from experience. For all practical purposes, it is alive."
Crichton, whether he fully understands what he wrote or not, has
described the nucleotide modulating forcing on cirrus clouds--how
inbetween the conductive ionosphere and conductive oceans heat
trapping particles will move or not in an organized manner depending
on the weight and charge of the nucleotide parosal.
Crichton: "It has been programmed as a preditor. It is evolving
swiftly, becomeing more deadly with each passing hour."
Wrong. It has a symbiotic relationship with the cellular life below
in the oceans, and the role below is to influence conductivities
there--influecing how the particles will move most effectively in the
field. The goal is to modulate chaotic climate conditions and
feedback living temperatures, hydrology and temperatures.
More specifically starting on page 72:
Crichton: "After working for years with multi-agent systems, you
begin to see life in terms of those programs.
Basically, you can think fo a multi-agent environment as something
like a chessboard, and the agents like chess pieces. The agents
interact on the chess board to attain a goal, just the way the chess
pieces move to win a game."
Crichton: "The differences is that nobody is moving the agents. They
interact on their own to produce the outcome."
Wrong. The job of the skyborne nucleotides was to feedback living
temperatures and chemistries behind an OVERALL pattern of electrical
fields and currents. What moved these "agents" was a combination of
chaotic inputs from changes in solar insOlation, lumenosity, season--
even cosmic ray flux AND how the biosphere from below modulated these
electrical inputs. Successful modulations above and below recombine
to reproduce small nucleotides units above and larger, conductivity
altering ecology below--to form a living entity that survives.
Crichton: "If you design the agents to have memory, they know things
about their environment. They remember where they've been on the
board, and what happened there. They can go back to certain places,
with certain expectations. Eventually, programmers say the agents
have beliefs about their environment and that they are acting on
those beliefs. It's not literally true, of course, but it might as
well be true. It looks that way."
For early pre-cellular life, it indeed was literally true. From
above, with the cirrus, the heat trapping uniformity came from the
nucleotide parasols -- but from below the nucleotides eventually
evolved the ability to, by their volume, to influence conductivities
below--and the two began to have a relationship that resulted in a
global entity that best modulated the chaotic changes that earth has
faced over the past four billion years. The memory below was more
complex in the sense that cellular life is complex, whereas from
above it was, again, just weight and charge. They then rained down
back to recombine (the certain place) with the certain expectation
that they had fed back the proper temperature and chemistries to
survive yet again. However, if chaotic climate inputs changed,
nucleotide parosols and conductivity patterns below that did
regionally survive would--and the remaining would get blow into
places where eventually sun and wind and temperatures/chemistry would
destroy them, and not allow them to pass on.
Crichton: "But what's interesting is that over time, some agents
develop mistaken beliefs. Whether from a motivation conflict, or some
other reason, they start acting inappropriately. "
No. The nucleotide parasols no longer trap heat and enhance
convection and produce surviving chemistries and temperatures below
Crichton: "The environment has changed but they don't seem to know
it. They repeat outmoded patterns. Their behavior no longer reflects
the reality of the chesssboard. It's as if they are stuck in the
Nucleotides are not self aware, but the rest of it is good.
Crichton: "In evolutionary programs, those agents get killed off."
Or they don't rain down, sorted nicely by parosal weight and charge,
to a set of nucleotides that would recombine with them to make more
particles to blow back up to the clouds when ambiant winds call. But,
the surviving members have to have the ability to evolve back even to
what did NOT survive in the sense that there is many solutions over
time for the problem of climate modulations to chaotic inputs.
Crichton: "They have no children. In other multi-agent programs, they
just get bypassed, pushed to the periphery while the main thrust of
agents moves on. Some programs have a "grim reaper" module that sifts
them out from time to time, and pulls them of the board.
But the point is, they're suck in their own past. Sometimes they pull
themselves together, and get back on track. Sometimes they don't. "
Good stuff. Oh, the subconscious mind. I have heard Crichton on
Charlie Rose recently talking about how sometimes in the creative
process you are not even aware what you are talking about until well
after it has happened. What I wonder is how many people are writing
and talking about Gaia this way--and when will it really come into
the public's awareness