"Guy Hoelzer"  wrote in message
news:cbivm3$1dg3$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
> [Hamilton] was the first AFAIK to model a dynamical evolutionary
> system that included a positive feedback loop, thus potentiating an engine
> of evolutionary change.  Viewed in this way, the model of kin selection
> shares fundamental similarities with models for the evolution of any
> signaling system, including the coevolution of mutualistic species
> interactions.
>
> More food for thought (I hope),

Unfortunately, there are also some fundamental differences.  If you look
at the literature that grew out of Hamilton and Axelrod's (1980?) paper,
you will see that there are enormous complexities in even figuring out
whether one strategy is superior to another.  The space of possible
strategies is infinite-dimensional.  And if you take a look
at the Hofbauer and Sigmund book, you will see that there are huge
difficulties in understanding the dynamics, even if you are offered
a small finite collection of strategies "on a platter".

Agreed that signalling and mutualism are the next stage.  But I have
no illusions that these phenomena will be understood in the sense of
being rigorously modeled any time soon.  Nonlinearity makes everything
much, much more difficult.  AFAIK Prigogine's school has still not
extended the minimum entropy production theorem to systems that are
far from equilibrium.  And they are working with effectively infinite
populations with a fixed dynamics.  The evolution of signaling strikes
me as considerably more difficult still because the invention of new ways
to cheat is a nondeterministic source of continuing perturbations.

Hamilton's rule for unilateral altruism was "easy".  Reciprocity and
signaling are going to be very hard.  IMHO.
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 6/27/04 6:00:18 AM