Should we follow nature in our designs? On a physical level, yes and no. Animals have typically rotary DoFs in their limbs and fingers. If we are making a fluidically driven system, linear extensors are as easy as rotary ones. No good reason not to use a piston just because it isn't 'natural.' A peristaltic pump is quite 'natural,' but only situationally appropriate.
On the other hand, when I read about and meditate upon hormonal models of behavior, given the evolutionary context, often I have trouble imagining alternative structural possibilities.
I find modeling Turing's morphological models to be quite rewarding. Also, I am a big fan of Lindenmeyer grammars.
Should we follow nature in our designs? On a physical level, yes and no. Animals have typically rotary DoFs in their limbs and fingers. If we are making a fluidically driven system, linear extensors are as easy as rotary ones. No good reason not to use a piston just because it isn't 'natural.' A peristaltic pump is quite 'natural,' but only situationally appropriate.
On the other hand, when I read about and meditate upon hormonal models of behavior, given the evolutionary context, often I have trouble imagining alternative structural possibilities.
I find modeling Turing's morphological models to be quite rewarding. Also, I am a big fan of Lindenmeyer grammars.