Evolution is not magic. You haven't addressed the substance of Matt's questions at all. What you're suggesting is magical unless you can talk about specific mechanisms, as Richard did last week. Richard's idea - though it is extremely unlikely and lacks empirical evidence to support it - is technically plausible. He proposed a logical chain of ideas, which can be supported and/or criticized, something you need to do if you expect to be taken seriously.
There are obvious parallels here with AGI. It's very easy to succumb to magical or pseudo-explanations of intelligence. So talk specifically and technically about *mechanisms* (even if extremely unlikely) and you're not wasting anyone's time. Terren --- On Thu, 12/11/08, Eric Burton <brila...@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Eric Burton <brila...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: FW: [agi] Lamarck Lives!(?) > To: agi@v2.listbox.com > Date: Thursday, December 11, 2008, 6:33 PM > I don't think that each inheritor receives a full set of > the > original's memories. But there may have *evolved* in > spite of the > obvious barriers, a means of transferring primary or > significant > experience from one organism to another in genetic form... > we can > imagine such a thing given this news! > > On 12/11/08, Matt Mahoney <matmaho...@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > --- On Thu, 12/11/08, Eric Burton > <brila...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> You can see though how genetic memory encoding > opens the door to > >> acquired phenotype changes over an organism's > life, though, and those > >> could become communicable. I think Lysenko was > onto something like > >> this. Let us hope all those Soviet farmers > wouldn't have just starved! > >> ;3 > > > > No, apparently you didn't understand anything I > wrote. > > > > Please explain how the memory encoded separately as > one bit each in 10^11 > > neurons through DNA methylation (the mechanism for > cell differentiation, not > > genetic changes) is all collected together and encoded > into genetic changes > > in a single egg or sperm cell, and back again to the > brain when the organism > > matures. > > > > And please explain why you think that Lysenko's > work should not have been > > discredited. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trofim_Lysenko > > > > -- Matt Mahoney, matmaho...@yahoo.com > > > > > >> On 12/11/08, Matt Mahoney > <matmaho...@yahoo.com> > >> wrote: > >> > --- On Thu, 12/11/08, Eric Burton > >> <brila...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> It's all a big vindication for > genetic memory, > >> that's for certain. I > >> >> was comfortable with the notion of > certain > >> templates, archetypes, > >> >> being handed down as aspects of brain > design via > >> natural selection, > >> >> but this really clears the way for > organisms' > >> life experiences to > >> >> simply be copied in some form to their > offspring. > >> DNA form! > >> > > >> > No it's not. > >> > > >> > 1. There is no experimental evidence that > learned > >> memories are passed to > >> > offspring in humans or any other species. > >> > > >> > 2. If memory is encoded by DNA methylation as > proposed > >> in > >> > > >> > http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20026845.000-memories-may-be-stored-on-your-dna.html > >> > then how is the memory encoded in 10^11 > separate > >> neurons (not to mention > >> > connectivity information) transferred to a > single egg > >> or sperm cell with > >> > less than 10^5 genes? The proposed mechanism > is to > >> activate one gene and > >> > turn off another -- 1 or 2 bits. > >> > > >> > 3. The article at > >> http://www.technologyreview.com/biomedicine/21801/ > says > >> > nothing about where memory is encoded, only > that > >> memory might be enhanced by > >> > manipulating neuron chemistry. There is > nothing > >> controversial here. It is > >> > well known that certain drugs affect > learning. > >> > > >> > 4. The memory mechanism proposed in > >> > > >> > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16822969?ordinalpos=14&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum > >> > is distinct from (2). It proposes protein > regulation > >> at the mRNA level near > >> > synapses (consistent with the Hebbian model) > rather > >> than DNA in the nucleus. > >> > Such changes could not make their way back to > the > >> nucleus unless there was a > >> > mechanism to chemically distinguish the tens > of > >> thousands of synapses and > >> > encode this information, along with the > connectivity > >> information (about 10^6 > >> > bits per neuron) back to the nuclear DNA. > >> > > >> > Last week I showed how learning could occur > in neurons > >> rather than synapses > >> > in randomly and sparsely connected neural > networks > >> where all of the outputs > >> > of a neuron are constrained to have identical > weights. > >> The network is > >> > trained by tuning neurons toward excitation > or > >> inhibition to reduce the > >> > output error. In general an arbitrary X to Y > bit > >> binary function with N = Y > >> > 2^X bits of complexity can be learned using > about 1.5N > >> to 2N neurons with ~ > >> > N^1/2 synapses each and ~N log N training > cycles. As > >> an example I posted a > >> > program that learns a 3 by 3 bit multiplier > in about > >> 20 minutes on a PC > >> > using 640 neurons with 36 connections each. > >> > > >> > This is slower than Hebbian learning by a > factor of > >> O(N^1/2) on sequential > >> > computers, as well as being inefficient > because sparse > >> networks cannot be > >> > simulated efficiently using typical vector > processing > >> parallel hardware or > >> > memory optimized for sequential access. > However this > >> architecture is what we > >> > actually observe in neural tissue, which > nevertheless > >> does everything in > >> > parallel. The presence of neuron-centered > learning > >> does not preclude Hebbian > >> > learning occurring at the same time (perhaps > at a > >> different rate). However, > >> > the number of neurons (10^11) is much closer > to > >> Landauer's estimate of human > >> > long term memory capacity (10^9 bits) than > the number > >> of synapses (10^15). > >> > > >> > However, I don't mean to suggest that > memory in > >> either form can be > >> > inherited. There is no biological evidence > for such a > >> thing. > >> > > >> > -- Matt Mahoney, matmaho...@yahoo.com > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > > agi > > Archives: > https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > > RSS Feed: > https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ > > Modify Your Subscription: > > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > agi > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
