Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8961 total)
267 online now:
caffeine, Coragyps, Faith, PaulK, RAZD, ringo, vimesey (7 members, 260 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 869,373 Year: 1,121/23,288 Month: 1,121/1,851 Week: 245/320 Day: 17/87 Hour: 8/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution as an Algorithm
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2478 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 20 of 74 (345354)
08-31-2006 5:17 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by nwr
08-30-2006 9:29 PM


Re: Not an algorithm
For me, this mutual interaction is an essential part of evolution (and of a computer operating system). So it is not just a quibble that I claim it is not an algorithm.

Is it perhaps cybernetic then given the importance of mutual interaction, i.e. feedback (Is there a gaian in the house?).

An algorithm is deterministic, so it leads directly to the kind of determinism that JAD assumes in his hypothesis.

Is this neccessarily the case? Aren't there algorithms which accept inputs from random sources? Why could an evolutionary algorithm not be a probabilistic Turing machine?

TTFN,

WK

Edited by Wounded King, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by nwr, posted 08-30-2006 9:29 PM nwr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by nwr, posted 08-31-2006 9:18 AM Wounded King has not yet responded

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2478 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 51 of 74 (345500)
08-31-2006 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by nwr
08-31-2006 1:28 PM


Not in the DNA
If correct, then the structure of that symbiotic union is part of what is passed on to the next generation, and the way that structure is passed on is not as part of the DNA specification.

I'm not sure quite how you work this out. All the information required to produce the various components for any structure you care to mention, mitochondria, chloroplasts, nuclear membranes or cilia are all encoded in the DNA either in the nucleus or between the nucleus and the discrete genetic complements of the organelles in the case of mitochondria and chloroplasts. Apart from the initial cytoplasmically or membrane inherited organelles any organelle is going to be a product of the DNA specification shared between the nuclear and organellar DNA.

Are you saying that any protein inherited cytoplasmically during mitosis is not 'part of the DNA specification'?

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by nwr, posted 08-31-2006 1:28 PM nwr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by nwr, posted 08-31-2006 8:23 PM Wounded King has responded
 Message 68 by nwr, posted 09-01-2006 12:26 PM Wounded King has not yet responded

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2478 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 55 of 74 (345631)
09-01-2006 2:35 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by nwr
08-31-2006 8:23 PM


Re: Not in the DNA
But the persistence of the mitochondria in the cell is a result of the genetic complement involved in the synthesis of new mitochondria. A mitochondrion is not an autonomous genetic unit. While mitochondrial division resembles bacterial division it requires the input of a number of exogenous compounds from the host cell including proteins synthesised from nuclear genes of the host.

In what way is the persistence of the mitochodria in the cytoplasm not a result of the shared genetics of that organelle and the resulting structure and molecular character of the mitochondria a product of those genes.

The initial engulfment of the proto-mitochondrial bacteria and subsequent generations of solely cytoplasmic inheritance might fit your example but the current situation does not as far as I can see.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by nwr, posted 08-31-2006 8:23 PM nwr has acknowledged this reply

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2478 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 70 of 74 (345750)
09-01-2006 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Woodsy
09-01-2006 1:37 PM


Re: Not in the DNA
I assumed NWR was replying to me, what with him replying to me and all.

TTFN,

wK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Woodsy, posted 09-01-2006 1:37 PM Woodsy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Woodsy, posted 09-01-2006 3:13 PM Wounded King has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020