Computative Evolution.

[Ahmabeliever]

I didn't know where this belongs exactly so I put it here for moderators to decide. I also do not know if this idea is being developed at any level already, so excuse my ignorance if I am repeating others thoughts.

 

In the short video - Evolution is a blind watchmaker - a computer code is written to utilise clock parts. The clock parts are given some properties of bacteria to allow attraction and then allowed to undergo many generations of random selection. The end result is clocks.

 

I only have the video downloaded on my comp and forgot where the source is, could someone chime in with this please.

 

My premise is this.

 

Utilising this basic code structure or similar a program could be developed to 'find' the pieces missing in the evolutionary puzzle. Of course the program would be vast in comparison to the blind watchmaker code, and utilise to me unknown processing capacity, but I think the basics are there to start with.

 

A data bank of, instead of clock parts, the compounds proposed to have initiated life. Running through billions of years of random chance including portions affected by randomly occuring fire flood lightning meteors etc.

 

A huge undertaking to program, but not impossible, methinks.

 

Then have a diagnostic program that seeks out what would be determined as 'markers' for changes that still puzzle us as to their processes.

 

Another possibility is to enter a human dna databank and then run it many times through while throwing in scenarios with more CO2 less CO2 insecticides diet changes you name it, see what may happen to our own evolution when we change our own inputs.

 

Imagine a program that mapped all known life and could be accelerated in simulation. - COOL! :hihi: Do elephants get wings? Stay tuned :hihi:

[jedaisoul]

In the short video - Evolution is a blind watchmaker - a computer code is written to utilise clock parts. The clock parts are given some properties of bacteria to allow attraction and then allowed to undergo many generations of random selection. The end result is clocks.

I think you are taking the video too literally. I do not think the "blind watchmaker" program could make a clock in reality. The reason is that, until you reach the end, the clock does not work. It's a useless collection of parts. What makes one useless collection of parts "fitter" to survive than another?

 

This does not mean that I support ID, it just means it's a bad example. Real evolution deals with entities that are complete in themselves, but less able to survive than the entities they evolve into. A better example, would be a clock the size of Big Ben, that evolves into a carriage clock, then a pocket watch, and then a wrist watch. Each entity functions as a clock, but they become smaller, easier to carry, and hence more useful. This is not perfect metaphor, but it is a lot better than the "blind watchmaker" idea!!!

[HydrogenBond]

One of the problems with the blind watch maker scenario is that it is random with respect to arranging pristine parts, but ignores the affect of random changes to the part themselves. It is half ordered and half random. For example, say one of the essential gears gets rusty waiting for the final random build. One may get a watch this is perfectly assembled, but unable to work.

 

This is the problem with the random event assumption for the inception of life in evolutionary models. If the parts were encased in gold to keep them pristine, then a random fitting session may result in life. But nature is going to be constantly altering the parts, during the long random wait, moving the parts to lower energy states. So once they all fit together, the parts are not the same and the machine may not work due to rust.

 

For example, say an enzyme formed randomly, that could assist the replication of the DNA, but there are yet not enough precursors for the DNA to make much DNA. As we wait for these precursors to randomly appear, our enzyme sees wear and tear due to minerals in the water. So when the stage is finally set, it doesn't work quite right like in the beginning. So now we have to wait for another random event to make the enzyme again. But in the mean time, the precursors are diffusing, oxidizing, and seeing all other types of random wear and tear.

 

To make that program more accurate to reality, we need the parts to also undergo their own version of random change, at the same time we are trying to assemble them randomly. The result will never be a good watch that works unless we hit it right away. The blind watch maker may be part of the evolutionary approach, but it needs to make glasses instead, so it can see random assumptions work both on assembly as well as on the parts to make a final watch that is a misfit toy.

[Ahmabeliever]

Thank you that was an excellent explanation.

[jedaisoul]

To make that program more accurate to reality, we need the parts to also undergo their own version of random change, at the same time we are trying to assemble them randomly. The result will never be a good watch that works unless we hit it right away.

We also need to take away the assumption that what we are assembling is a watch. What we end up with is a watch. That is not necessarily what it started out as. It might have been a very simple peep-hole camera that evolved into a watch. It might have been anything. The point is, it must have been a working something all the time, and not necessarily a watch.