[ExI] Binary proof of evolution

[ablainey at aol.com]

 Very true and I originally thought of adding a survival or fitness element to the test, but if people cannot understand evolution anyway when it's explained to them; They won't understand the experiment. So that is the reason for a single work of the Bard and totally random and non manipulated input. I am thinking in terms of a number crunching exercise rather than a model.

A

 


 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 3:54
Subject: Re: [ExI] Binary proof of evolution


On 9/25/2010 9:22 PM, ablainey at aol.com wrote: 
> Any takers? 
 
Dawkins and others before him did versions of this about 30 years ago. But your method omits a key element of evolution: selection, using a survival-test rachet to retain successful variants. Perhaps you mean something like: "Start with 'To be or not to be' and blindly generate alphanumerics until you get 'T', retain it, then go on until you get 'o' and retain that, etc." But this is not very like building a phenotype that's passingly well fitted to its environment. Oh, and unless you're cheating, by the time you get to "b" the "T" and "o" might have changed as well. 
 
Damien Broderick 
_______________________________________________ 
extropy-chat mailing list 
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org 
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat 

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100926/bc48d9de/attachment.html>