The fractal dimension of group selection
Locked
The fractal dimension of group selection
 
|
We recently discussed the concept of a fractal dimension, and today morning I had the idea that we can apply it to the concept of group selection to measure how many dimensions an evolutionary system has. If you are interested take a look at http://blog.cas-group.net/2020/07/the-fractal-dimension-of-group-selection/ -J. - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
Re: The fractal dimension of group selection
|
|
Interesting. Reading it gave me one of those, “OH Crap! Why didn’t I thing of that?” moments. I now realize that I don’t know whether “fractality” is a descriptive concept (it presents a state of affairs that requires explanation) or an explanatory concept (gives an account of a state of affairs that has been presented) or a “tethered” concept, in which an explanation and a description are bound analytically to one another. George Williams once [wrongly] defined adaptation as “that which natural selection produces”. Thus Adaptation and Selection became tethered and statements of the form, “natural selection produces adaptation” became analytically, not empirically, true. Is the fact of fractality tethered to an explanation of fractality? Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm We recently discussed the concept of a fractal dimension, and today morning I had the idea that we can apply it to the concept of group selection to measure how many dimensions an evolutionary system has. If you are interested take a look at -J. - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
Re: The fractal dimension of group selection
|
|
For me Darwin's "natural selection" is mainly a metaphor that nature selects the best fit animals naturally just as a breeder selects his animals manually. Dawkins' selfish genes are a metaphor too: genes act selfishly just as egoistic people. A fractal dimension is a broken dimension. I think it can be a good description for the dimensionality of a system that is already halfway towards a new system, by simulating and approximating the elements of the new system. I am not sure if my calculation is mathematically correct, I have simply applied the concept in a casual and informal way, as physicists often too. I think the values make sense though. I like this idea of a fractal dimension for an evolutionary system. -J. -------- Original message -------- From: [hidden email] Date: 7/5/20 19:00 (GMT+01:00) To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The fractal dimension of group selection Interesting. Reading it gave me one of those, “OH Crap! Why didn’t I thing of that?” moments. I now realize that I don’t know whether “fractality” is a descriptive concept (it presents a state of affairs that requires explanation) or an explanatory concept (gives an account of a state of affairs that has been presented) or a “tethered” concept, in which an explanation and a description are bound analytically to one another. George Williams once [wrongly] defined adaptation as “that which natural selection produces”. Thus Adaptation and Selection became tethered and statements of the form, “natural selection produces adaptation” became analytically, not empirically, true. Is the fact of fractality tethered to an explanation of fractality? Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm We recently discussed the concept of a fractal dimension, and today morning I had the idea that we can apply it to the concept of group selection to measure how many dimensions an evolutionary system has. If you are interested take a look at -J. - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
Re: The fractal dimension of group selection
|
|
In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5
Hi, Jochen, So, I am writing to ask for access to our mind for this work. I think it explores your notion of “fractality” but in a very different language. What’s access cost, these days? Nick Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm We recently discussed the concept of a fractal dimension, and today morning I had the idea that we can apply it to the concept of group selection to measure how many dimensions an evolutionary system has. If you are interested take a look at -J. - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
Re: The fractal dimension of group selection
|
|
Nick, your paper looks interesting. From what I understand it tries to analyze the group selection metaphor. Metaphors are a natural tool we use to understand abstract objects. To understand a complex problem knowing the tool is important, but it also helps to understand the underlying processes from different perspectives. One perspective is reciprocity: Kin selection: gene-gene reciprocity for biological genes. I help my brother or cousin to reproduce his genes, and he helps to reproduce my genes because we are related. Group selection: biological gene-group gene reciprocity. I help the group to reproduce its genes, and the group helps me to reproduce my genes by supporting me. Another perspective is virtuality: Group genes first appear in fluid "virtual" form, in flocks, as the paper says. Groups can exhibit group-level traits even if they are not encoded as genes. In the course of time these traits and collective behavior patterns can solidify in written form. These written rules are then the foundation for a new evolutionary system. And we have the perspective of fractality: Phenotypes in a evolutionary system can be complex and often exhibit a self-similar structure, which is at best described by fractal structures. If they are so complex that they develop an own language which can be used to create and store genes, then their instances can emulate, simulate or approximate an entity from a different evolutionary system based on different genes. This approximation of a different dimension is typical for fractal structures, too. Therefore the dimension of an evolutionary system in a transitional state can at best be described by a fractal dimension. If a new evolutionary system emerges at all depends on the solidification of group genes (which can be expressed in "repeated assemblies", see Smaldino (*) or my new book). If this is not convincing I would like to recommend the paper of Paul Smaldino and the work of David Sloan Wilson. You mention him in the paper, he is an expert in this area who knows all about group selection. -J. (*) "The cultural evolution of emergent group-level traits", Paul E. Smaldino, Behavioral Brain Science 2014 Jun 37(3) 243-54 -------- Original message -------- From: [hidden email] Date: 7/5/20 23:21 (GMT+01:00) To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The fractal dimension of group selection Hi, Jochen, So, I am writing to ask for access to our mind for this work. I think it explores your notion of “fractality” but in a very different language. What’s access cost, these days? Nick Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm We recently discussed the concept of a fractal dimension, and today morning I had the idea that we can apply it to the concept of group selection to measure how many dimensions an evolutionary system has. If you are interested take a look at -J. - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
Re: The fractal dimension of group selection
|
|
In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5
The concept of "embedding" is probably helpful here: The coastline of Britain is an embedding of a 2-dim object (a coast) in a 1-dim object (a line). Like a 4-dim hypercube that looks complex because it is embedded in a 3-dim space. Likewise a group can be seen as a 2-dim object (natural + cultural dimensions) embedded in a 1-dim object (natural organism). The fractal dimension is a result of this embedding. Maybe we have mathematicians here that can explain it better how complex structures and fractal dimensions can arise from embeddings ? :-/ -J. -------- Original message -------- From: Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> Date: 7/6/20 10:20 (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The fractal dimension of group selection Nick, your paper looks interesting. From what I understand it tries to analyze the group selection metaphor. Metaphors are a natural tool we use to understand abstract objects. To understand a complex problem knowing the tool is important, but it also helps to understand the underlying processes from different perspectives. One perspective is reciprocity: Kin selection: gene-gene reciprocity for biological genes. I help my brother or cousin to reproduce his genes, and he helps to reproduce my genes because we are related. Group selection: biological gene-group gene reciprocity. I help the group to reproduce its genes, and the group helps me to reproduce my genes by supporting me. Another perspective is virtuality: Group genes first appear in fluid "virtual" form, in flocks, as the paper says. Groups can exhibit group-level traits even if they are not encoded as genes. In the course of time these traits and collective behavior patterns can solidify in written form. These written rules are then the foundation for a new evolutionary system. And we have the perspective of fractality: Phenotypes in a evolutionary system can be complex and often exhibit a self-similar structure, which is at best described by fractal structures. If they are so complex that they develop an own language which can be used to create and store genes, then their instances can emulate, simulate or approximate an entity from a different evolutionary system based on different genes. This approximation of a different dimension is typical for fractal structures, too. Therefore the dimension of an evolutionary system in a transitional state can at best be described by a fractal dimension. If a new evolutionary system emerges at all depends on the solidification of group genes (which can be expressed in "repeated assemblies", see Smaldino (*) or my new book). If this is not convincing I would like to recommend the paper of Paul Smaldino and the work of David Sloan Wilson. You mention him in the paper, he is an expert in this area who knows all about group selection. -J. (*) "The cultural evolution of emergent group-level traits", Paul E. Smaldino, Behavioral Brain Science 2014 Jun 37(3) 243-54 -------- Original message -------- From: [hidden email] Date: 7/5/20 23:21 (GMT+01:00) To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The fractal dimension of group selection Hi, Jochen, So, I am writing to ask for access to our mind for this work. I think it explores your notion of “fractality” but in a very different language. What’s access cost, these days? Nick Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm We recently discussed the concept of a fractal dimension, and today morning I had the idea that we can apply it to the concept of group selection to measure how many dimensions an evolutionary system has. If you are interested take a look at -J. - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ |
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |