Kayra Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Hmm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/06/060629230929.htm InfiniteNow 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted July 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2006 Great article. Thanks Kayra! Basically, cheating works for the individual, but when measured in aggregate over the group, cooperation leads to greater chances of survival. I like it. It makes sense too. Cheers. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayra Posted July 1, 2006 Report Share Posted July 1, 2006 It certainly put a big dent in my theory. Mostly because theirs does not required conscious thought.. all life at any level is subject to it. It makes perfect sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted July 1, 2006 Report Share Posted July 1, 2006 Hmm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/06/060629230929.htmInteresting magazineWould you recommend it or is it a creationist front? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted July 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2006 Not all life decides to pass on genes.However, (practically) all life has evolved the opportunity to do so. Some virus and bacteria just spontaneously die out. Usually becase they are too efficientCan you further elucidate this point, and describe it's relevance to the thread? Homosexuals do not pass on their genes.None? :D Who'da thunk it? Bacteria can swap genetic material with any other bacteria, no sex involved. they do represent most of the life on the planet after all.Again, relevance to thread? Cheers. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted July 1, 2006 Report Share Posted July 1, 2006 Again, relevance to thread? Cheers. :DSorryposted on wrong threadMust take more pills Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted July 1, 2006 Report Share Posted July 1, 2006 It certainly put a big dent in my theory. Mostly because theirs does not required conscious thought.. all life at any level is subject to it. It makes perfect sense. Let's not forget tit-for-tat strategy; think of it as altruism to a draw>:hihi: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tatCooperatively Inclined,Turtler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayra Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Let's not forget tit-for-tat strategy; think of it as altruism to a draw>:hyper: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tatCooperatively Inclined,Turtler Interesting.... Does tit-for-tat regularly occur at the cellular level? Turtle 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted July 13, 2006 Report Share Posted July 13, 2006 Interesting.... Does tit-for-tat regularly occur at the cellular level? ;) Possibly. Do you have an experiment in mind to test such an hypothesis? :evil: :naughty: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted July 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 13, 2006 :) Possibly. Do you have an experiment in mind to test such an hypothesis? :) :cup:Perhaps an interpretation like the following would assist: Healthy cells add the health of those around them.Unhealthy cells tend to decrease the health of those around them.Kinda like a bad apple... makes the rest go bad. There ya go... tit for tat on a cellular level. Just a thought. Or... just a guess... or... speculation really... imagination even! :hihi: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.