How to Solve it?
The title of the thread is taken from the title of a book by a Mr. Polya (mathematician).
I propose a radical method of solving problems, one which I simply copy-pasted (me not an original thinker) from nature. True that DNA replication is hi-fidelity i.e. errors are rare and if they do occur, mirabile dictu, there's a proof-reading mechanism. Nevertheless, errors aka mutations do occur. Most are, as geneticists like to call them, silent (damage = 0), others can be debilitating and still other lethal. That however seems to be a price worth paying if you consider how we must be adaptable to an everchanging environment. In short our weakness is our strength.
Furthermore, there doesn't appear to be a trend in the mutation rate - it's probably constant at some value and has been for at least 2.5 million years. That is to say, our genes are selecting for errant genes, the ones that do make mistakes. The essence of nature's approach: solve problems by making mistakes.
So, can we solve problems this way, following nature's lead?
Problem? Go make a mistake!
I propose a radical method of solving problems, one which I simply copy-pasted (me not an original thinker) from nature. True that DNA replication is hi-fidelity i.e. errors are rare and if they do occur, mirabile dictu, there's a proof-reading mechanism. Nevertheless, errors aka mutations do occur. Most are, as geneticists like to call them, silent (damage = 0), others can be debilitating and still other lethal. That however seems to be a price worth paying if you consider how we must be adaptable to an everchanging environment. In short our weakness is our strength.
Furthermore, there doesn't appear to be a trend in the mutation rate - it's probably constant at some value and has been for at least 2.5 million years. That is to say, our genes are selecting for errant genes, the ones that do make mistakes. The essence of nature's approach: solve problems by making mistakes.
So, can we solve problems this way, following nature's lead?
Problem? Go make a mistake!
Comments (42)
"“I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.” - Thomas Edison
It's how the light bulb was invented. Many scientific discoveries were made by accident. These discoveries have had a major impact on the world and are often attributed to chance circumstances or serendipity. It's poking around in the dark most of the time, but with every new discovery the light of humanity becomes slightly ever so brighter.
Observe how a new born baby learns to move it's arms and legs or use it's vocal cords effectively and in a coordinated way. First it moves randomly while little by little through a complex cybernetic feedback process the child learns to direct it's movements more purposefully. This process is called "motor babbling", and nature in her evolutionary process works in a very similar way.
The more evolved we become the more intelligently evolution works through us. Evolution is both the subject and the object of nature, and it steps on it's own shoulders to reach higher and higher.
Nice! The happy mistake, the blessing in disguise, the lion that scared away the wolves. :cool:
Another example i forgot to mention is how DeepMind's AlphaGo AI learned to play Go by playing itself over and over. It was only given the rules of the game and used reinforcement learning to become a superhuman player. It only had the rules of the game to work with, and it had to make many mistakes before it became the best 'Go' player to ever exist, starting with random moves. Master level players are still studying it's moves, sometimes perplexed as to why it made certain counter intuitive moves.
Clarify for me what you were asking exactly or talking about? It appears that i might have misunderstood.
If the solution to a problem takes one step then one correct mistake would suffice, but if a problem needs more than one step then it takes a series of mistakes; each correct mistake becomes the platform for the next correct mistake, which takes some kind of learning. Learning is essentially a mistake eliminating process that gets you to the right mistake.
Quoting punos
Aka intelligence. :clap: :100:
Genes keep making the same mistake (mutation) over and over again ... that's life's little secret. :zip: don't tell anyone.
It may be like the creative and experimental process in evolution itself. Amidst a backdrop of chaotic mistakes some kind of evolution and transmutation of consciousness may take place. In human consciousness the emotional experiences related to mistakes leads to different approaches. It may parallel evolution itself as a form of cosmic tuning process.
There are probably biological aspects of this, and Rupert Sheldrake's idea of morphic resonance points to the way in which there is some inherent memory in nature itself. On the genetic level, there is some speculation that junk DNA may contain more about potential than previously thought, especially about emotional development. The psychology of making mistakes has a profound influence on wellbeing and, it may be that the experience of suffering itself involves a shift in awareness and consciousness.
That's a lot to digest mon ami. I suppose there's method to (nature's) madness. Does that sum up your thesis?
The philosophy question may be whether there is any 'method' beyond our meaning and understanding of it. Making mistakes is our human way of seeing it and within nature it may be just about diversity and what works as an evolutionary pathway. Perhaps, there are no mistakes ultimately and it is about human framing, although the idea of 'mistakes' is probably important in trying not to repeat that which has not achieved desired goals.
Mathematics in a nutshell. The cleaning lady of a famous mathematician was asked what the guy did. She replied, "He scribbles on paper, scowls at it, and wads it up and throws it away."
By mistake I refer to genotypes that cause morbidity and mortality e.g. sickle cell anemia which is a case in point because the sickle cell trait is strength in malaria zones like subsaharan Africa, but is a weakness in nonmalaria zones like Europe. For a European, the sickle cell trait is an illness, but for subsaharan Africans it's a lifeline against severe/complicated malaria.
:lol: Trial and Error?!
Utter reality, believe me! You make a sequence of mistakes, altering things as you go along, hoping the sequence converges to the result you're after.
Two wrongs make a right?
2 + 184 + 453 - 2 = 637. I thought 2 was a 7 and I added it; I made the same mistake again (thought 2 was a 7), but this time I subtracted it and got the right answer. Some problems have a nature that mistakes cancel each other out. This is the nub of random error as opposed to systematic error.
Wrong, you are not right. :brow: You keep moving in a direction, making changes as you go along, hoping for a flash of inspiration or a breakthrough. It's rare that you can see a complicated proof in its entirety at the beginning. :cool:
I was hopin' for errors to lead to correct results. I believe @punos made a reference to accidental discoveries. For example, Roentgen carelessly leaves an X-ray source + a photographic plate + his wedding ring ( :wink: ) in a drawer and we now have X-ray machines, a godsend for orthopedicians around the world.
[s]W[/s] + W = [s]W[/s][sup]2[/sup] [Mistake]
Ergo,
W = 2 [Correct Answer]
:cool:
Yep you are essentially right, but i would adjust your statement to say that nature (evolution) explores all possible branches in parallel in the available environment. Each species and even each individual it produces adaptively explores their respective niches at the same time, and if a certain niche leads to a dead end (wrong mistake) then that species or individual dies or stagnates, so no need to backtrack; even though i imagine it may still happen in some circumstances.
Quoting Agent Smith
Right, every correct mistake gets preserved in that species or individual for the next generation, and the wrong mistakes get deselected from active genetic circulation. :up:
:smile:
The retracing of the steps back as in Ariadne's thread is a feature of sequential processing. Nature's a parallel processor, like you seem to be implying. The Tree of Life sprouts many limbs simultaneously.
Indeed, decidely computer-like, using a brute-force search algorithm.
i.e. Natural selection :up:
It's funny that you say that because i think about the forces of nature as akin to simple algorithms like how gravity tends to sort matter by specific density, and electro-magnetism tries to bring unlike charges together, but keep like charges apart. The strong and weak nuclear forces are a bit more mysterious, but they still seem to function as algorithms of some sort.
I don't have a better way to think about it than the universe being some sort of computational system. I hesitate to call it a computer since i don't want to give the impression of an ultimate programmer with complex intentions.
Comparing the universe to a computer:
----------------------------------------------------
universe = computer
energy = power / electricity
time = processor
space = memory
instructions = logic
information / data = matter
ecosystems = operating systems
organisms = programs
forces = daemons or algorithms
:up: Yeah, the universe-as-"computer" notion is like interpreting evolution as caused or directed by an "Evolver". Re: vestigial anthropomorphic bias (à la animism).
Correct. It is not to say that our universe could not be a simulation with a complex programmer behind it, because even if that were true the programmer and his universe must be explained in the same way regardless. The true universe behind any simulation could still resemble how a simulation works computationally, but the factor by which it forms must not exceed some minimal level of complexity. So no complex gods or entities with high level intentions, motivations, and advanced knowledge at the Alpha point. It's more reasonable to put such entities at or close to an Omega point universal singularity.
Does this sound reasonable to you?
You don't think it's possible for an advanced civilization that evolved naturally to create a simulation in an actual real world computer that produces artificial intelligent life that then goes on to create their own simulation inside their own simulated computer?
What you are saying about the two aspects of the sickle cell/malaria trait is true of most parts of life, with all flaws in nature having an up and a downside. For example, it was through the exploration of diseases that so much was known about the body and science. This applies to all aspects of culture too. The grave horror and sufferings of the first and second war were a starting point for the revolutionary movements of the 1960s, including so much social change.
It goes back to the yin and the yang, formerly known as the problem of good and evil. It is encouraging really because it shows that suffering caused by 'mistakes' may be potential for positive innovation and creativity.
I am writing this from a rather difficult situation, probably due to many mistakes of myself and others. I am in the process of moving from the accommodation where I am now as it is being repossessed. At the moment, I have half my things in the old place and half in the new, hoping to get out of here properly by Friday. Yesterday, at the old place where I am there was a big crash and the kitchen ceiling collapsed. Fortunately, no one was hurt but it is really unsafe as there is a great big gaping hole, foam coming through and wires exposed and it is not possible to use the bathroom without going through the kitchen. So, I am agonising over sorting, almost tempted to leave a ghastly mess behind here and get out of here asap.
What I am trying to illustrate by my own anecdotal story is that the outcomes of mistakes are critical juncture for innovation and change. In human beings there is the question of what we learn from mistakes, which is the psychological factor in the any evolutionary perspective on 'mistakes' or flaws in nature.
The vicious cycle of mistakes and fear is probably central to the idea of karma and what is learned through the consequences of action, with the principle, 'As you sow, so shall you reap.' It does seem for many people it is a vicious cycle of similar experiences as a basis for experiential learning and reflection.
There are also the big and the small mistakes as a spectrum. The big ones are those such as criminal acts, including murder, which alter the course of one's life entirely. For most people, however, it is more about wrong jobs, courses and failed relationships, which lead to regrets. It can be hard to avoid getting stuck in wallow in self pity or recrimination and move on. Everyone goes at different paces and,often, 'quick fixes' as solutions don't work.
There is so much variation in what is learned practically and how much is part of the philosophy quest itself. Perhaps, in the grand scheme of human life mistakes may lead a person to go deeper in the search for wisdom and understanding.