Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #01299
To: JVernonM@aol.com, beam@corp.sgi.com
From: TurtleTek@aol.com
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 22:44:46 EST
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: plants
Greetings
As I said before, I see the BEAM plant to not be a bot on it's own. I see the
plant + the charging bot (the "cow") as one robot together. I'm exactly sure
what advantage this have to the usual solar powered BEAM bot. I suppose it's
just cool. By the by, have any of you ever actually build a plant and a bot to
go with it?
-TurtleTek
JVernonM@aol.com writes:
> Yes, I think that is the accepted definition. I have a tendency to
elaborate
> on the category. It seems to me that having a bot feed off the plant is a
> bonus feature of artificial plants. In nature, plants don't need the bot to
> feed. They exist on their own. The definition of a BEAM plant might just as
> well include solar powered, organically shaped, plant forms. Most plants
> tolerate or exploit the feeding of animals in order to gain some benefit.
> Usually reproduction. BEAM plants will likely never reproduce, so they
would
> require no need to participate in a symbiotic relationship. You are, in
> essence, simulating the relationship from the view of the animal. That is,
> plants only exist to feed animals, and that's not really true. From the
view
> of the plant a symbiotic relationship with a bot has no benefit. The bot
> would
> need to do something for the plant in order to call it a symbiosis. I think
> BEAM plants should be unique works of biomorph tech that function as the
> Bonsai, and ornamental shrub of the BEAM PARK. Works of beauty that can
> double
> as a charging station. That would mean my bouquets and the sketch mentioned
> online are plants. Electronic sculpture in the form and function of a
> biological creature. Isn't that what we mean when we are talking about the
B
> in BEAM?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
Home