Agreed. The quantity scalar is certainly not the only metadata that could be stored. If I was actually writing a program, the objects_in_scene array would probably be allowed to contain as many details as the system decided was relevant. Then the scalar would be the size of the array of objects, with each object having a pointer to an archetype and properties defined for any of those details. In fact, the size need not actually be stored, but can be reconstructed easily by examination of the array itself using something like objects_in_scene.count().
For other objects, it might make sense to count more explicitly. An object referring to a group archetype, for example, might be given a size property if the system cared to do so. From what I’ve read, it seems likely that (in human brains) this property will mostly store an exponent rather than trying to determine an exact number.
I expect this can get extremely complicated in a human brain! Evolution isn’t much for intra-system optimization just for efficiency’s sake, after all.
Agreed. The quantity scalar is certainly not the only metadata that could be stored. If I was actually writing a program, the
objects_in_scene
array would probably be allowed to contain as many details as the system decided was relevant. Then the scalar would be the size of the array of objects, with each object having a pointer to an archetype and properties defined for any of those details. In fact, the size need not actually be stored, but can be reconstructed easily by examination of the array itself using something likeobjects_in_scene.count()
. For other objects, it might make sense to count more explicitly. An object referring to agroup
archetype, for example, might be given asize
property if the system cared to do so. From what I’ve read, it seems likely that (in human brains) this property will mostly store an exponent rather than trying to determine an exact number.I expect this can get extremely complicated in a human brain! Evolution isn’t much for intra-system optimization just for efficiency’s sake, after all.