Is evolution a law or a process???

[Tarantism]

thats it really,

 

is evolution a law or a process???

[Queso]

there are certain adaptive laws that coexist with evolution, and it is most definitely a process. an amazing one at that!

[Tormod]

Evolution is a natural process. It is no more a "law" than, say, the structure of supernovae. :hihi: But like orb says, aspects of it depend on what we would call laws - for example typical tendencies as far as selection is concerned etc. But the use of law in this sense is a semantic issue.

[Guadalupe]

Hi! (((tartanism))). :)

 

 

thats it really,

 

 

Yes, there is a law called, “Law of Evolution”. This law is an alternative as another possibility.

 

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

 

The Basic Question: What is it to be a Law?

 

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/laws-of-nature/#1

 

I hope this information helps you to find what you are looking for.

 

 

:eek2:

[Tarantism]

essentially, then, wouldnt it be both? evolution seems to be inevitable for every species, becuase of natural selection, and also the law of evolution requires process, which would be the survivors spreading their genes.

[Guadalupe]

Hi! (((tartanism))). :)

 

Yes, the Law of Evolution does indeed states that “Evolution”, is in fact, an external process in altering any and all of the creations original design. Without the outside process of evolution, to alter the creations originals design, any and all things created will remain constant.

 

Note: By definition, Evolution is an external process and not an internal process.

 

I hope this helps with your resarch in finding understanding.

 

 

:eek2:

[HydrogenBond]

Evolution is like a law in the sense that it is socially acceptable for a scientisit to believe in it, but against the law of science not to believe in it. It is not yet a law like the laws of chemistry, which are reproduceable and above subjective debate. It is a process in the sense that it is logically consistent with simpler things leading to more complex things. When this occurs in chemistry (to form molecules), physics (to make atoms), astrophsyics (making stars and planets), sociology (birds of a feather flock together) it happens in a fairly orderly fashion. But contemporary evolution can not yet show order, so it assumes random which does not occur with the things below (foundation) and beyond it (social extension). The advancement of science itself has been a orderly progresssion tht builds upon itself not a bunch of idea mutations governed by the laws of survival of the fittest. That would be called politics.

[Pyrotex]

Evolution is like a law in the sense that it is socially acceptable for a scientisit to believe in it, but against the law of science not to believe in it... That would be called politics.

Gosh, HB,

I don't mean to be hostile or insulting or demeaning or offensive, but,

How would you know?

I roam the "halls of science" every day and your description just doesn't fit anything there. What you describe sounds more like the "back rooms of fundementalist theology". I've been there, too.

 

Evolution is several things:

It is a fact. The geological and fossil record proves conclusively that over geologic time, the animal and plant life on this planet have changed. Again and again and again and again... This fact, we call "evolution".

 

It is a theory. Given the fact above, scientists are hard-pressed to explain why we see what we see in the geological and fossil records. Darwin was the first to publish what several scientists of his era were groping towards. The simple idea that animals and plants do NOT breed true. And that the tiny differences we see between one generation and the next could plausibly accumulate over millions of generations.

 

It is a common process. We speak often of the slow changes we see in various natural and human processes as "evolving". Our legal system has evolved from English Common Law and the Magna Carta. Our weather patterns are evolving as global temperatures and CO2 fractions increase.

[HydrogenBond]

I am not a creationist, but believe in a logical progression of life. The fossil evidence shows changes over time from simplier to more complex and more adaptive creatures. Where I depart from contemporary theory is in the random changes within the DNA, theory. It does occur, but in the overall scheme of things maybe it is not as random as it looks. Instead of looking at the superfiscial remains of dead animals, one can see a logical progession in overall structure. Protein monomers (animo acids) become protein polymers. DNA monomers become DNA polymers. Single cellular becomes multicellular like atoms become molecules. Plants create the conditions needed for animals such as creating an oxygen potential for metabolism. Gills become lungs. The nervous tissue and brain continue to improve.

 

An analogy is burning H2 and O2. During this chain reaction there are a bunch of different free radicals but they all lead to H20. Water is the final goal of this chemical process, which is predefined by the laws of nature. Going from single cells to multicellular may be a logical result with the free radical analogy being the genetic trial balloons. But these trial balloons are an affect heading toward a natural result. If life forms on another planet the odds are it would follow the same overall scheme of progression found on the earth. Animals would not appear before plants. Standard theory would say that mutations led to this selective evolution, which is partially true, just like free radicals led to water. But the goal may already be defined by the laws of physics and chemistry.

[sergey500]

Evolution isn't exactly taken in as a law just yet, since there still so much debate wether it works or not, but if it does indeed work (as I would assume) then its a process that all living creatures follow to surivvie.

 

"Evolution is just a 'theory', just like gravity. if you don't like it, go jump off a bridge." - I forgot who said that.

[MagnetMan]

Can anyone explain how consciousness arose out of a chemical mix and allowed me to evolve to a point in which I know I am me because I think?

[HydrogenBond]

One possbile way to explain that, is that the living state is a naturally orderred state of chemicals. In other words, if one was to take a scoop from the surface of the sun and measure its components and then cool it down, one could pre-predict the blend of molecules and minerials that will result from chilling, because specific chemical patterns always form due to the energetic of chemistry. For example, if there is hydrogen and oxygen present I know there will be water. It is not a completely random thing but has a natural orderring due to laws of nature. Each time we heat and chill, some of the crystal stucture may be different but the same minerials would continue form.

 

Going from chemistry to life may already have predefined patterns. Water doesn't just randonly appear after billions of years of chemical mutation combinations. It is logical result of energetics. The cell is one of the life patterns. Nervous tissue and the brain is another natural pattern. Genetics allows for variety but the patterns, which include the DNA, simply follow the laws of chemistry and physics for such organic groupings.

 

In other words, if we could grow life from scatch we would end up with a cell and not some entirely random or crystal organization that is different than a cell. This is because the cell is the basic pattern of life, just like H2O is the basic pattern of water.