Entropy is not what it use to be (English)

[Carlos Boyle]

Dr. Deborah Gordon's video at TED's

"The conversation between pairs is possible in a culture like ours in childhood because is Matristic from which we have obtained the experience of cooperation, equality, participation. The more distant is a society from forms of Matristic cohabitation, more difficult will be to choose democracy as a way of life." We cited Humberto Maturana in this post in a work that Augusto de Franco sends to us in his letter carta de rede social 167 that is referred to us as "Allocutions of Humberto Maturana in two panel discussions organized by the Institute for the Development of Democracy Luis Carlos Galan, Colombia. The same author gave me a book with the material, entitled "Democracy is a work of art" (Bogotá: Cooperativa Editorial Magistério, infelizmente sin fecha). I presume, by literature indications, that it must have been published in the first three years of the 1990s." In a book that I have from Maturana "From biology to psychology" dates in 1993, Maturana talks about these issues, in particularly in one of the essays dated in 1987. The date is more or less coincident, not much changes. But what is Matristic? Maturana says that "when the pastor patriarchy arrived there was a violent encounter between patriarchal culture and Matristic culture, which were diametrically opposed. While the patriarchal culture had ownership in the other had not, while in the patriarchal culture had signs of hierarchies, Matristic culture had no sign of hierarchies, while the patriarchal culture was focused on war, the Matristic not."
We're not going to try a Matristic definition, as we have done an effort to define the brotherhood as a boundary of humanity, we will forward to say that a Matristic structure generates a fraternal social system. "The Matristic is kept in the mother-child relationship. Look that the mother-child relationship in the kindergarten is a continue invitation to collaboration, participation, to resolve conflicts in the conversation, to the non-appropriation, there, the body becomes legitimate and boys and girls can walk around nude." We conceive the matristic as a matrix, a mother´s womb that generates children who are brothers among them. The matix begets fraternity, and if we are talking about a social matrix system what is better than a colony of ants to exemplify “the matrix” (all the ants are engendered by a single queen).
We will appeal once again to Dr. Gordon to explain how ants coordinate in an anthill.
We saw that there was a language between them that consisted of a few words that identified the roles played by ants (S) maids, (E) explorers, (R) collectors, C) queen maids, and so on. The language is a continuous flow of friction (talks) between antennas and bodies (where the smell is the written word of the role of the ant). That streaming data distribution provides a standard feature of the anthill and the various roles played by ants. A typical streaming could be RRSECC, or SERC or a train of that string, SERC-ESRC-ERCS, and so on. What is important for Dr. Gordon is that the streaming in a given period should give the same or similar frequency of occurrence for each word f(S) = f(E) = f(R) = f(C) per unit time. If the ant is S and reads a large decline of any of the other frequencies it mutates its word to the frequency of the missing. This language is rudimentary but effective, is the one witch ants use to coordinate fraternally. So brotherly they do it that their roles are interchangeable.
What comes now is a total ramblings but it may be a theory that explains what follows. In reality we came to know Dr. Gordon from the book “Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and Software” by Steven Johnson, where he presents the colony of ants as emerging from self-organization. Well, we will not talk about emergency but about the coordination emerged from that language, since the chaotic organization of the ants seem to be impossible to have occurred emerging congruent and coordinated enough to colonize every continent except the poles. And that coordination, if it depends on frequency, is very likely to be adjusted depending on frequency of the ants' internal clocks to watches of language. (on this subject is very interesting this other book by Steven H. Strogatz Sync: The Emerging Science of Spontaneous Order)
Suppose that ants spend their lives in pursuit of streaming the words from other ants. This is very similar to what we pointed out in the post The power of fraternity (El poder de la fraternidad) in which we referred tenets of Noelle-Neuman in our digital version for social networking, where we pointed out in the first tenet: "Each agent receives an amount of information flow that they perceive as normal, the decrease or loss of that flow is interpreted as a fear of being held uncommunicated, isolated, out of the game. Isolation the place where no information circulates." This auscultation "quasi-statistical organon", as Noelle-Neuman calls it, gives just the distribution of "opinions" or “written words” that carry the other ants on their backs. It would be very cumbersome to explain the mechanism of sync but there are some videos that verse on synchronization in addition to stunning very enlightening. They are outdated 2 metronomes that are synchronized, then 3 and then 5 metronomes
All end up synchronized beyond the differences in the initial phases and frequencies, amazing. Imagine then such a mechanism or one similar to the one Dra. Gordon should have discovered, by which the language can run anthill. As will be seen in the videos of sync, the time of synchronization of two metronomes, is not the same as the time of synchronization in the case of three or five. The time of entry into phase (all move in sync) is not the same, although the metronomes are equally fraternal, only that the number of them changes each time. We asked about the size of a distributed network and showed that the coordination of the network depended on its ability to respond in time to events that called it into crisis. Now we are talking about biological clocks and adjustment mechanisms and synchronization and we recourse to the post of the ants again. In the video Dr. Deborah Gordon explained that while the behaviour, the language, and all what ants could do inside the ant's anthill is always the same, in means of the year and a half of her entire life, or during the years of life of the entire anthill (twenty), the behaviour of the anthill changes during the course of its "life". The only answer I found is that the change of behaviour of the anthill occurs as the population of the anthill increases (logistic curve) the frequency of the streaming changes. Presumably there is a number, or bandwidth, in which synchronization optimizes and this must happen in the vertical part of the curve, not for very few nor for many. Some bad intentioned may think that this has nothing to do with human social systems. It is a model that works for the ants, can work for humans. For now, the question that David de Ugarte asks of which is the maximum size of a distributed network ..., it is not a naive question, in fact he was asked for it by the president of FIEP. Beyond a clear threshold above which it makes difficult to operate, there is also another lower threshold where it is also more expensive to run social tasks for which the distributed network was formed. The thing gets more complicated now as we consider the size of a distributed network, as we pointed out, the environment has a direct impact on the size of the network and we now have strong evidence that the number also intrinsically impacts on the operation of the distributed network, although that we are closer now than in the first post where we analyzed the case. The key fact lies in the efficiency of the network. It is not very efficient the network of ants, since half of the anthill is booking doing nothing and have to be fed, but the more shrinks is the response time, better may overlap to external events, the more appropriate is the language which will result in the coordination, and the network will be more efficient. Referring to the language is clear (it may be necessary to treat a specific post for this) that to become more efficient is necessary to be digitized, it is not possible the analogue in the crisis (roundabout conversation), it is important perhaps for other moments, for the times of peace and balance, but we found that the binary system is much efficient for the crisis answer. The language must be versatile enough to be able to go digital with ease.