imported>Import: Imported current content

2026-01-28T11:54:25Z

Imported current content

New page

==The Game Theory==

Evolutionary [[GameTheory]] addresses the behavior (interaction) of communicating players (objects) at the level of composite systems of populations of players competing for finite resources (ZeroSumGame).

In light of [[ANewKindOfScience]], Evolutionary Game Theory can be applied to understanding self emergent order in all dimensions exhibiting the requisit completity that simple rules can manifest in aggregate.

As we introduce various players, the outcome, show by simulation is roughly as follows (sciam ref etc?).

* The [[AlwaysCooperate]] and [[TheBully]]: after 100 generations [[TheBully]] dominates
* Add [[TitForTat]]: tit for tat retaliation thrives at 100 generations but [[TheBully]] wins at 200.
* Add [[GenerousTitForTat]]: Forgiving 1/3 of the time pays off at generation 200, but [[TheBully]] get revenge at 300.
* Add [[PavlovsDog]] and [[TheBully]] is finally defeated. Pavlov learns optimal behavior like [[DumbAnimals]] following [[SkinnersLaw]]. It is speculated that he wins by never giving a sucker an even break. Pavlov will always bully an [[AlwaysCooperate]].

The challange in evolutionary game theory is finding what is beyond Pavlov. We can deduce the answer looking at our own evolution.

* The hunter gatherer: defeats pavlov by exploiting his predictability.
* The farmer herder: beats the hunter by building symbiosis.
* The monarch: thrives by the power of controled masses.
* [[TheMasses]]: the monarch is ultimately subserviant to the will of the subjects.

The factor of success include:

1. [[SelfSynergy]]: bully, pavlov, hunter, proton.
* Propogation (replication, duplication, communication)
* Resiliance (lifetime, robustness, flexibility, immutability)
* Self reliance
* Self awareness
* Self realization
* Self actualization

2. [[SymbioticSynergy]]: tit for tat, farmer, monarch
* partnerships for survival
* use of abundant resources to increase order and diversity
* Cross actualization

3. Solidarity: always cooperate, [[TheMasses]]
* [[MobRule]]
* Democracy
* live and let live [[SocialContract]]
* Composite actualization of [[CollectiveIntelligence]]

Although the game is "zero sum" at the bottom layer, the [[EmergentBehavior]] is not. Solidarity wins by maximizing the growth of the entire system.

An enjoyable challenge in designing such contests is deciding what kind of freedoms to give the system in terms of parameters that it can vary. For example a naive set up cannot 'discover' the merits and weaknesses of a [[PoliceForce]].

With a simple set up, using [[ClassicalLogic]], it is clear that the best option for an individual (in a zero sum game) is to be Pavlov and bully the weak, but using [[QuantumLogic]] like quantum interactions where there is a delayed choice based on [[FutureValue]], the bully is firmly defeated and the meek inherit the universe.

===Without [[QuantumLogic]]===

Even without invoking [[QuantumLogic]] non-bully outcomes can be predicted. It is a sufficient condition is that a group has more power than an individual. But nobody is going to give you their money with the knowledge that they will ultimately get more back than if they take your money unless they live by [[FutureValue]] logic.

===Observations===
The TV show survivor is a good example to group dynamics in action. Those who win form loyal collaborations. Allying with others creating an [[UsAndThem]] mentality beats those who stand alone or in lesser coallitions. In that game, there is only one winner, in the game of life we can beat those that would defeat us and all win through solidarity. There is no limit to the [[FutureValue]] we can create.

*Your example, Survivor (as well as Big Brother 3 in USA), denies your statement. [[CooperativeBully]] strategy wins that game. A small group of Cooperating Bullies wins, with the best Bully in the group winning the game. How does that show solidarity? It doesn't, unless you are talking about the solidarity of a small Us, and embracing an [[UsAndThem]] mindset. --[[StarPilot]]

*The point is that there is no just one winner in the real world, everybody can win in theory. -[[JimScarver]]

*Humm, isn't Survivor, Big Brother, and other such games demonstrations of The Monarch? --[[User:StarPilot|StarPilot]] 16:14, 11 July 2006 (EDT)

==Darwinism and Mutations==

The scientific support for Darwinism is overwhelming, yet 54% of Americans favor creationism.

I think what most creationists are uneasy with is the idea that is often associated with Darwinism that random mutations are responsible for evolution.

Like the million monkeys typing randomly will eventually write all the great works of literature, so it is thought by many that random mutations generate the variety of life we see on earth.

The facts are clear that mutations are generally NOT random, in fact many random errors in the [[DNA]] are repaired. It is a highly complex process involving high level switching of alternatives rather than random errors. ''If you doubt this reflect on exactly what you mean by random. When a single cell is starved of nutrient it makes 'random' changes, but these changes are ones which preferentially affect the system by which it obtains nutrients.''

Died in the wool Darwinists will reject the idea of any directedness to change, 'how can a genome know the future?'. What they miss is that the genome (and other structures) can obtain meta information through past experience. This is a powerful evolutionary strategy which even classical Darwinists should see will be selected for by evolution - once mechanistic explanations can be sufficiently clearly presented to them.

The complexity of the process is sufficient to expect it involves intelligent processes and possibly [[Consciousness]] (why not?).

==[[HegelianDialectic]]==
How is [[HegelianDialectic]] manifest?

EvolutionaryGameTheory - Revision history

imported>Import: Imported current content