# equilibrium point hypothesis

Thu May 8 02:55:59 EST 2003

```Thanks for the reply

Richard

"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:PSeua.143446\$ja4.6662989 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> "siu99rnj" <siu99rnj at rdg.ac.uk> wrote in message
> | Hello
> |
> | What is the equilibrium point hypothesis? It is coming up in a lot
> opf
> | papers I have read that are to do with arm torques.
> |
> | Thanks
> | Richard
>
> In the work I've done, it's the dynamic condition of of 'momentarily'
> maximized TD E/I-minimization.
>
> Think of this in terms of a 2-D least-potential-energy diagram - like
> a "U".
>
> Maximum TD E/I-minimization occurs at the lowest point in the "U".
>
> This correlates to an "equilibrium point" because the dynamics tend
> to overshoot max TD E/I-minimization, which results in their 'moving
> back' in the other direction, and the overall illusion of there being
> a 'determining oscillation', but the 'oscillation' is just an
> artifact of the ongoing TD E/I-minimization dynamics.
>
> An important feature of TD E/I-minimization is that all minima that
> are converged upon are themselves dynamic minima - not actual
> 'equilibrium points', but fleetingly-extant 'tools' within much
> larger information-processing dynamics - hierarchical TD
> E/I-minimization, which dynamically converges upon many TD
> E/I-minimizations within TD E/I-minimizations, ... .
>
> There's =nothing= at 'equilibrium' within an Living 'normal' nervous
> system. All there is within such is relative TD E/I-minimization
> which is never complete, and which ceases only at Death.
>
> I like to think that Isaac Newton intuited some of this whenever I
> contemplate his "never at rest" metaphor :-]
>
> K. P. Collins
>
> --
> "Schmitd! Schmitd! Ve vill build a Shapel!"
>
>
>
>

```