Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,871 Year: 4,128/9,624 Month: 999/974 Week: 326/286 Day: 47/40 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Extent of Mutational Capability
Percy
Member
Posts: 22502
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 137 of 279 (793477)
10-30-2016 7:59 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by RAZD
10-30-2016 12:29 AM


Re: A couple of quick points
RAZD writes:
This illustrates why a computer program is not a good analogy for DNA (it is actually more like a cooking recipe, where results vary).
Computer programs do not reproduce so there is no natural selection.
While many of the genetic evolution programs evolve design parameters, some evolve running programs that compete directly against one another.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by RAZD, posted 10-30-2016 12:29 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by RAZD, posted 10-30-2016 8:15 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22502
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.9


(2)
Message 139 of 279 (793485)
10-30-2016 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 138 by RAZD
10-30-2016 8:15 AM


Re: A couple of quick points
RAZD writes:
Question: is it the base program or subroutines that are evolved?
God, it's been years since I researched this. Take a look at my opening post in the thread Percy's Alife Project and then at Message 53. This thread reflects ideas I picked up from studying other genetic simulation programs. I think my plan was to invent a programming language that would control how objects behaved in an environment. An object's programming would evolve randomly by inserting, deleting or modifying a line of programming. An object could become food either by dying or by being "attacked" by another object. Its energy requirements and its value as food would be a function of its size (number of lines of code).
When I posted at the end of the thread that I was entering a busy period, it was just because it was the Thanksgiving to Christmas period. I fully expected to return to the effort in the new year, but my mother became ill just before the new year and I became her care giver for a few months into May. I never did return to this, but looking at this ancient thread now it looks it would be a lot of fun.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by RAZD, posted 10-30-2016 8:15 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by RAZD, posted 11-01-2016 11:32 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22502
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 230 of 279 (797489)
01-22-2017 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by CRR
01-21-2017 9:46 PM


Re: Look Sharp
CRR writes:
So even with those vast probabilistic resources the odds are fantastically small that a protein could have formed by chance.
I think you'll get broad agreement that "the odds are fantastically small that a protein could have formed by chance," regardless of whose calculation of the odds is correct. The odds of random formation aren't relevant because proteins don't form by chance They're constructed in cells according to the blueprint provided by DNA.
We don't know what the first proteins were like, but we don't think they came about by chance. We don't think life is some fantastically unlikely accident.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by CRR, posted 01-21-2017 9:46 PM CRR has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024