In Poul Anderson's "Gypsy," a spaceship called the Traveler is lost in space whereas, in Anderson's "Epilogue," another spaceship called the Traveler is displaced in time. In "Gypsy," the Traveler becomes the first ship in the Nomad culture in Anderson's Psychotechnic History whereas, in "Epilogue," a one-off story, the Traveler crew learns of three billion years of technological evolution on Earth:
not soil but sand;
not tree trunks but metal shafts;
not branches but girders;
not twigs but geometrical structures;
not leaves but solar panels;
not grass or flowers but growing crystals;
not animals but "motiles";
not birds but "fliers";
not human beings but self-conscious robots;
not speech but radio.
Details are endless.
12 comments:
Poul's fictional mechanical ecosystem is meticulous -- note that there is no equivalent of bacteria, for example.
There is nothing on a molecular level. No nanotech. Which makes me think that there cannot be equivalents of either neurons or genes.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling and Paul!
Mr. Stirling: A good point, one I never thought of before.
Paul: But "Epilogue" was first pub., I think, in 1960. That would be at least 20-25 years before nanotech was even thought of. Within the terms of the science and technology known in 1960 the story was very, very well done.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Yes. Before nanotech was thought of. Nevertheless, the fact that the selection and evolution is only on a macroscopic mechanical level makes me think that there cannot be any basis for consciousness.
Paul.
Paul: well -any- recording device holding the instructions for constructing the machines would be subject to error.
That's how mutations in genes occur. The overwhelming majority of mutations are harmful; a few happen, by random choice, to be helpful; that's how evolution functions.
And Poul doesn't specify much on how the computers that function as a nervous system function -- that's left up in the air.
He does not even say that the "motiles" and "persons" contain computers. They contain something that thinks. In other words, they have grown brains.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
And my recollection of Zero was that he was a kind of hunter/forager, far more concerned with getting what he and One needed for survival. We should not expect such beings to have much interest in abstruse reasoning!
Ad astra! Sean
But one of them speculates about space and time and others are artistically creative. Zero composes poetry and criticizes his friend's poems.
Paul: yes, they're analogous to human hunter-gatherers.
With significant differences -- for example, they can install parts from their prey into their own bodies.
Kaor, Paul!
Well, that is true, so I was wrong. And archaeologists have discovered how humans from as far back as the Old Stone Age were capable of creating works of art.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: humans make symbolic representations of things -- including imaginary things. It's "what we do". The communications and introjection we evolved to deal with each other as social beings get splayed out over the landscape.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I agree, and that includes anthropomorphizing both inanimate objects and animals.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment