3 ms·

> What does it mean for nature to implement an algorithm? It means that nature, in this case the ants, perform the steps of the algorithm. > assumptions about

• maksimum 9y ago
  The algorithm as expressed in the article is simply the result of observing simple mechanical actions. We don't know whether those mechanical actions are actually what the ants are 'thinking about' when they build a bridge. As a result we've 'mapped' actions that the ants take into terms that make sense to us. It's not clear what "the algorithm" looks like in the original space, i.e. in the ants' heads.
• goatlover 9y ago
  > I don't follow what your confusion is, exactly. Could you try explaining it differently please? When we say that A is B, or A implements C, which B is known for implementing, and we don't caveat it as an analogy or model, then we're making an existence claim about A's nature. We're saying that A is fundamentally B stuff. > It means that nature, in this case the ants, perform the steps of the algorithm. Does that mean an ant nest IS A computer? Does nature literally compute? Or is that just a helpful way of looking at things? My point that the language of the article is smuggling in an ontological claim about nature. Maybe it's only meant as a useful mental model and not an actual existence claim. But maybe not. And some people will take it literally.