>#Life must have emerged from the physical world. This emergence must be understood if our knowledge is not to degenerate (more than it has already) into a collection of disjoint specialized disciplines.
>... #physics and #biology require different levels of #models ... physical theory is described by rate-dependent dynamical #laws that have no #memory, while #evolution depends, at least to some degree, on #control of dynamics by rate-independent memory #structures."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12009802_The_physics_of_symbols_Bridging_the_epistemic_cut
Not according to Howard Pattee, they don't.
Read the paper and see if you can find a flaw in his reasoning. I can't.
Care to provide an example of this "physical memory"?
Contrails in a cloud chamber.
@Pat
I believe that is just a #record of an interaction between two (or more) physical #structures.
Memory requires an entire physical #system able to preserve the #information contained in this record from one moment in time to another until it is retrieved (by the system) and used for something else.
According to #HvFoerster, the "integrated functional circuit" for #Cognition requires three things:
1⃣ #Perception
2⃣ #Memory, and
3⃣ #Prediction
Prediction is essential for drawing (memory-based) #inferences
>" without which perception degenerates into #sensation and memory into #recording".
See pp 105-106 in the quite interesting collection of his thoughts *Understanding Understanding*
@Kihbernetics
That paper is about epistemology. I'm referring to physics, where memory exists whether anybody's around to know it or not.