How did Evolution produce Symmetry?

quote:

---

How could a random process of evolution produce animals that are completely and perfectly symmetrical, instead of having two heads with three eyes on one and none on the other...

---

Download and run Framsticks for a while, and you'll understand.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Right. Unlike our body, there are no Framsticks genes that effect both the left and right side of the body. And yet, if you leave them for long enough, you still tend to get rough symmetry - final forms often end up like spiders, snakes, or "fast crawling" creatures. I've got a speed one going right now, and my fastest creature is an "inchworm" (a fork, with a long body ahead of it; it uses the fork to push itself along). It's a bit curved, but as you mentioned, in Framsticks you can go in circles and still get credit for velocity.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 10-24-2003]

You probably use Windows; I use Linux, so I haven't used any of the windows ones. It is really fun to play around with, though ------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

In linux, I use framsview.- Karen------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

meaning that the animals that aren't symmetrical would die, also meaning that the dead animals would leave behind skeletons, most of which would become fossils,

---

Wrong. Very, very few animals leave behind fossils. Fossilization requires rapid burial, something that does not occur to most species. You have to get the organism down to where there's almost no oxygen before it fully decomposes.We're talking an individual verses an entire worldwide population. The worldwide population is vastly more likely to have a member fossilize.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

well, the creature that is non-symmetrical, (the individual) WOULD be part of a worldwide population if they hadn't died bc of "natural selection,"

---

No, there would be one of them, and it would die. One, compared to a population of millions, billions, or even trillions, is virtually insignificant. Also, the nature of HOX genes (genes that determine where things go on the body) make asymmetrical features less likely (although still possible).Also, another thing that has not been brought up is issues of rate of change. I think you have a mental image of, say, a wolf having a pup that has giant legs on one side of its body, and stubby ones on the other. It doesn't work that way. Even punctuated equilibrium changes, at the base level, still work through gradualistic change. Mutations - by and large - cause very small changes individually. Only the accumulation of tiny changes, as a general rule, produces significant differences. There are many processes which actually facilitate the aforementioned accumulation, such as the ability of genes to copy themselves across DNA and the nature of protein expression.

quote:

---

I'm sure that just as many of the non-symmetrical would have been buried quickly, probably even more, since they wouldn't be able to move as quickly.

---

For most animals, "getting buried quickly" has nothing to do with the animal itself. It takes a mudslide, a cave-in, or other such phenomina. If you can't move well, your most likely outcome is not to be buried alive, but to be eaten by a predator - it increases your odds of death by most methods equally.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."