= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
randallsquared comments on Homogeneity vs. heterogeneity (or, What kind of sex is most moral?) - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (78)
The speed of light strongly implies that this won't happen.
The speed of light is not really much of an issue here. What would eventually cause problems is if universal expansion drove the living regions of the universe into causally disconnected regions - as can supposedly happen in some cosmologies - but that possibility seems a long way off.
I think we may mean different things by "one organism", then. I think I'd say that processes would have to be fairly tightly coupled (even if through other processes) to be parts of the same organism, but that couldn't easily be achieved with even minute-sized delays.
The idea of all living things forming one big organism involves the end of evolution via natural selection, due to the lack of independent actors for there to be competition between.
I have some essays explaining what I think is meant by the idea:
http://alife.co.uk/essays/one_big_organism/ http://alife.co.uk/essays/self_directed_evolution/ http://alife.co.uk/essays/the_second_superintelligence/
Like you say, you seem to be talking about something quite different.