Text 316, 85 rader
Skriven 2004-10-05 06:29:00 av Tim Tyler (1:278/230)
Ärende: Re: New Discipline: Synth
=================================


Anthony Cerrato <tcerrato@optonline.net> wrote or quoted:
> "Tim Tyler" <tim@tt1lock.org> wrote in message:

> > "Artificial life" was /never/ a term confined to computer
> > simulations.
> >
> > It has /always/ been a term that referred to man-made
> > organisms - of *all* sorts.
> >
> > Whether the orginsms in question have been in virtual
> > worlds, made from metal, plastic, silicon, fullerenes, molecular
> > nanotechnology - or other material - has never been
> > specified in definitions of the term.
> >
> > Alife 1 - back in 1987 - had Eric Drexler, Richard
> > Dawkins, Hans Moravec, and A. Graham Cairns-Smith giving talks -
> > those guys are *not* computer scientists.
>
> Dunno 'bout that. Wikpedia:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_life
>
> gives the following statement:
>
> "Artificial life, also known as alife, is the study of life
> through the use of human-made analogs of living systems. Computer
> scientist Christopher Langton coined the term in the late
> 1980s when he held the first "International Conference on
> the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems" (otherwise
> known as Artificial Life I) at the Los Alamos National
> Laboratory in 1987."
>
> Note the phrase, "...is the study of life through
> the use of human-made analogs of living systems."

Not a terribly brilliant definition: artificial life is not a
study of anything - it is a name for the systems in question.

To refer to a scientific discipline you would have to
say "the study of artificial life".

....but apart from that I see no problem with the paragraph.

> This jibes with my readings which have always only discussed
> alife in terms of electronic or electromechanical/simulation
> or analog techniques, i.e., they do not usually include real
> world or lab biology/synthesis, which was what I was
> speaking of.

....but they *do* include those things.  They may not /usually/
do so today - for the simple reason that we can't /actually/ build
most sorts of artificial living organisms today - but all forms
of artificial living organisms are covered by the term.

> I also note the following definition (which specifically
> includes the word, "simulation,") given in: The American
> Heritage? Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
> Copyright ? 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
> Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
>
> artificial life
> n.
> The simulation of biological phenomena through the use of
> computer models, robotics, or biochemistry. Also called
> Alife.

Any definition of artificial life that claims defines artifical
life as a form of simulation is *miles* off track.

Artificial life need not be a simulation of anything.  Part
of the point of it is to create new instances of living organisms.

These need not be copies of - or simulations of - existing
living systems.
-- 
__________
 |im |yler  http://timtyler.org/  tim@tt1lock.org  Remove lock to reply.
---
ū RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info@bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2á˙* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 10/5/04 6:29:12 AM
 * Origin: MoonDog BBS, Brooklyn,NY, 718 692-2498, 1:278/230 (1:278/230)