Re: more evolution theorizing

Susan,

 

You are pulling an old trick that you are fond of. I give an example that refutes one of your claims, and you respond by pointing out I have not managed to defend every last argument of the vast theory of evolution. I pointed out that these programs that show increasing complexity based on simple rules goes against your wrong conception of entropy. That is all I claimed.

 

As for your response to my point about entropy, I agree with everything you said. But you did not mention the point that you are wrong about. The point that you are wrong about is that you believe due to entropy, increasing complexity cannot happen. At least this is what you used to believe. Perhaps you've since modified your stance.

 

If your new stance is: "complexity can happen spontaneously, but complexity cannot happen to the extent that you see on earth," then that is an argument that we can discuss, but you should at least lay it down as such.

 

Once again, I think our discussion about evolution is boiling down to: to what extent is something possible? For instance, to what extent is adaptation possible? We agree that adaptation happens, but can a land mammal adapt its way to becoming a sea mammal? For instance, to what extent can entropy be overcome? We both agree that spontaneous short-term complexity can occur in spite of entropy (right?), but what do we mean by "short-term" and "complexity"? And can complexity occur long enough for a land mammal to adapt to be a sea mammal?

 

You see? They're the same problem! Do you agree?

 

Yours,

Brandon

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Susan  wrote:

Hey Brandon,

The Wired article on digital creatures doesn't support Darwinian evolution as much as you might think.  Darwinian evolution requires that living organisms develop from non-living substances, and then increase in complexity, with no input or direction from a higher intelligence. The computer didn't create itself.  The original software didn't create itself.  The very existence of the computer and original software required intelligence—without the input of intelligent, creative human beings, there could be no computers, no software with the ability to develop the 'digital creatures' in the first place.  

The article also wasn't clear about what kind of complexity the program was developing.  In living organisms, there is specified complexity—specific genes/enzymes have specific functions—amino acids are arranged in such a way that they carry specific information to do a specific job.  In these digital creatures, what is the function of the increasingly complex codes that are developed?  Do they serve specific purposes?  Do their flashes actually mean something?

As far as entropy, it is in force in all systems, open or closed.  There is really no such thing as a truly isolated system.  The fact that the earth receives energy from the sun does not mean that entropy never occurs on the earth.  

Susan