From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!torn!utcsri!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!convex!constellation!uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu!rwmurphr Tue Jun 23 13:21:26 EDT 1992
Article 6333 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!torn!utcsri!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!convex!constellation!uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu!rwmurphr
>From: rwmurphr@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Robert W Murphree)
Subject: Re: Vitalism and Intellectuaism
Message-ID: <1992Jun20.200712.2918@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu>
Sender: usenet@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu (Nets)
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
References: <1992Jun7.002032.614@news.media.mit.edu> <1992Jun8.134537.468@cs.ucf.edu> <1992Jun10.041831.16727@news.media.mit.edu> <1992Jun11.181124.19003@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> <488@tdat.teradata.COM>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1992 20:07:12 GMT
Lines: 36

>|If the virus-other species system is sufficiently complicated to defy
>|simulation by symbol manipulating devices, which maybe it is, then maybe
>|understanding is also something which requires something more than 
>|symbol manipulation-being as such or whatever.

>It is certainly beyond the capabilities of currently available computational
>devices, but is this an intrinsic limitation, or just a current engineering
>limit?  The answer is not clear.  (There is *also* the fact that we do not
>know enough about the virus-cell system to fully specify the parameters of
>the simulation).

When I think the the defintion of "state" in control theory (EE control
theory).  I think of an ideal system which, to the degree to which you
specify the parameters of the system ( R's and L'c and C's , masses and
distances, or whatever) you can specify the future state of the sytem, 
given the initial conditions to any desired accuracy (see Karl Popper's
definition of experimental determinimism). I just cannot think of how
one would do this with living things, even a bacteria. 
 
 If the "state"
is living versus dead, it seems no matter how carefully you specify the
situation, you can almost always wriggle out of any given prediction of
this state.  Physicians make their money trying to predict and effect
this living or dead state and as an ex-medical technician, let me tell
you its hard to do.  
 
I suppose the current work to predict the tertiaru
teriary structure of proteins from primary sequence structure is an
example of how this sort of attempt to find a "state" is going.  I hope
a molecular biologist will read this and comment. My reading of the 
work in the problem of predicting tertiary protein structure is that
the process of how proteins fold is so complicated that describing them
is more like geology (trying to find a few generalizations from vast
amount of knowledge-a little pattern recognition)than physics or
computer science. I know very little of the current science in this
area so watch out.  


