Context of a process-1

All processes of our body interact. We may distinguish between close and remote interactions. Somatic, or age injuries, are of the first kind. CA rule stands for the effect of remote processes. Hitherto  CA rule was kept constant so that remote processes (CA) did not interact with the observed CA.  The context   of these experiments was narrow.  A previous experiment described how the context may be broadened by letting one CA control the rule of another one . In the present experiment CA rule is controlled by the observer.

The first CA serves as reference. In the following CA the rule was modified at t = 1.  The CA rule consists of 27 transformations.  In the first set of experiments, the outcome of each transformation at a time was set to zero. The experiment was therefore repeated 27 times.  It is a single bit rule injury (compare with somatic and age injuries).

The outcome varied. Some CA expanded indefinitely, other became chaotic and the rest died. The second  CA depicted below went through a transient phase and then started oscillating. This outcome is a (viable) solution .

Next,  the outcome of each transformation at a time  was set to one, and  the experiment was repeated 27 times. In the last run the outcome of each transformation at a time was set to two

Rule injury  changes the rule, and is meaningful only if inducing a solution. The set of totalistic rules is vast. Let's call it A.  The set of  totalistic solutions is much smaller, as this experiment illustrates. Let's call it B < A. We might enumerate totalistic solutions by examining all totalistic rules. Let's call this set C.  C contains many solutions which are not relevant to the CA[rule=600] above. In order to be relevant, a solution has originate in one of the 46 states through which CA[rule=600] oscillates. Since many solutions in C do not meet this requirement C > B.

Context fallacy

This example illustrates another aspect of the context fallacy. A phenomenon observed within a narrow context is assumed to be valid also within a different one. Like The Central Dogma of Molecular Biology which was worked out in vitro, and is hardly valid within the extended context of the organism. Many solutions in C are not relevant to the narrow context of CA[rule=600], and do not contribute to its health. In other words if the observer forces a non-relevant solution upon CA[rule=600], it will die (like in the experiment in chapter 51). This fallacy clouds medical reasoning in cancer and led to the following conclusion: Their Cancer is different from mine

nca=1 zygote -> effect[no 1000]; go109]; restoreparams; putinstep [ If[j > mm =19, rul1[[21,2]] = 2; rul[[1]] = rul1]; go[100]; solutions: {a. color, rule-position, time} a017mm, a221mm.

Previous page
Next page