From: "Nowak, Martin" To: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 11:38:57 +0000 this is an exciting new idea. ultimately i always assume the payoff for the alliance is distributed over its members. we have to discuss this on the level of genes there might be a way to make progress there two genes, A and B, can form one string of DNA then (maybe) AB is the new "unit of selection" On Aug 4, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> wrote: i think the payoff matrix needs to be rethought. if we are in a game , and i cooperate, it is not me that gets the benefit. it is the combination of me and my cooperater. / a new group. not necessarily reducable into me and you. A cooperates with B. it is _"AB" that is now the beneficiary.. a new entity, it might not be a receiprocal group. it could be parasttic, it could be toxic in the future , I think we need to do more on what cooperation entails. time . cost to each, message it sends to environment. . change in surface area of combined, etc. On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Nowak, Martin < > wrote: i agree. i think this goes toward the cooperative game theory i am trying to construct. i am very much looking forward to seeing you at the ranch!! On Aug 3, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> wrote: when two entities communicate, do they automaticallly make a third. the combination. I think now that we are not what we eat but we are what we consume, including all types of inputs. sensory, etc. I think that the environment contains communications , and that interaction effects everythingk more when i see you The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of Jeffrey Epstein Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly proh