From hanss@zondisk.sepa.tudelft.nl Mon Oct 28 10:37:28 1996
Received: from dryctnath.mmu.ac.uk by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk with ESMTP id
KAA01519
(8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from
hanss@zondisk.sepa.tudelft.nl); Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:37:09 GMT
Precedence: first-class
Received: from sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by dryctnath.mmu.ac.uk with SMTP (MMTA);
Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:39:08 +0000
Received: from sepa.tudelft.nl (actually host mars.sepa.tudelft.nl)
by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP (PP);
Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:58:40 +0000
Received: from zondisk.sepa.tudelft.nl (zondisk.sepa.tudelft.nl
[130.161.216.6])
by sepa.tudelft.nl (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA08642
for <b.edmonds@mmu.ac.uk>; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 09:59:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from ZONDISK/SpoolDir by zondisk.sepa.tudelft.nl (Mercury 1.21);
28 Oct 96 09:59:01
Received: from SpoolDir by ZONDISK (Mercury 1.30); 28 Oct 96 09:58:58
Received: from tb53.sepa.tudelft.nl by zondisk.sepa.tudelft.nl (Mercury 1.30);
28 Oct 96 09:58:54
Comments: Authenticated sender is <hanss@zondisk.sepa.tudelft.nl>
From: Hans-Cees Speel <hanss@zondisk.sepa.tudelft.nl>
Organization: TU Delft
To: Bruce Edmonds pcp <b.edmonds@mmu.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:28:24 +0000
Subject: Re: "Re: "rosen and life itself.""
Reply-to: hanss@sepa.tudelft.nl
Return-receipt-to: hanss@sepa.tudelft.nl
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Message-ID: <3D3992E5687@zondisk.sepa.tudelft.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
I
> > understand that if there is no 1:1 relation between parts and
> > functions, this is thus not analytic [am I right?]. But what does
> > this have to do with synthetic? You can't just multiply
> > structures, can you? How should I interpreted this?
>
> Note: in my answer to this I let the following shorthand exist... a,
> b refer to the protein subunits, and 1, 2, 3, refer to the substrate
> and the two cofactors respectively.
>
> > > The practical result is in the relation of functional
> > > components to materia
> l
> > > parts. A functional component (such as metabolism, repair,
> > > replication in M-R systems) HAS NO 1:1 mapping to the material
> > > parts (biochemistry, anatomy). It depends on them but can not
> > > be preserved if certain ORGANIZATION is destroyed.
> > If this were possible, analytic models
> > > would be equivalent to synthetic models and we'd be talking
> > > about a machine
> > > Further, all synthetic models are analytic models.
> > > There are analytic models which are not systhetic models.
> > this is what I do not understand, apparently this is the case
> > with non-machine models.
Let me see if I understand now. An analytic model is when I can see a
function and describe it. Some analytic models are also synthetic,
meaning that i can find a structure for every function 1:1. If this
is so, I am dealing with a machine.
If this is not the case, i am dealing with something beyond the
machine metaphor, and that could be an organism.
Am I right?
Hans-Cees
Theories come and go, the frog stays [F. Jacob]
-------------------------------------------------------
|Hans-Cees Speel School of Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and management
|Technical University Delft, Jaffalaan 5 2600 GA Delft PO Box 5015 The
Netherlands
|telephone +3115785776 telefax +3115783422 E-mail hanss@sepa.tudelft.nl
HTTP://www.sepa.tudelft.nl/~afd_ba/hanss.html featuring evolution and memetics!
-- End of filtered message --