Synthetic life.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-03-2013, 09:04 PM
RE: Synthetic life.
(31-03-2013 08:31 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(31-03-2013 08:03 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  You do realize that abiogenesis is not evolution. Evolution only exists once life is there. When you want life to come into existence from some sort of emergent simulated process you are testing abiogenesis.

They are different processes but part of the same system.

Suppose you programmed a law of physics and matter, let it run and started having evolution. What you observe would be all part of one system.

This is also funny because man christians want from the big bang to us today version of evolution. It seems that want a computer simulation to do that as well.

Yet neglecting the limitations of computers, the lack of a unifying theory of everything, and the immense time scales necessary for these things to happen.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2013, 09:05 PM (This post was last modified: 31-03-2013 09:19 PM by fstratzero.)
RE: Synthetic life.
(31-03-2013 08:59 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(31-03-2013 08:41 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  There in lies the problem.

We don't have a mathematical theory that can be applied to everything. We have different systems that describe different natural phenomena. With out a the theory for everything we have to simulate the processes differently.

But if we had a computer powerful enough to simulate every interaction of matter, energy, time,space, and a theory that applies to everything. Then we might observe life naturally springing up on many planets of our computer universe.


However with out that theory, or computational power, we can only simulate theories on smaller scales.

We shouldn't have to simulate our universe to show that evolutionary systems can emerge.
Evolution happens after life starts.

With out life there is no evolution.

It still seems like you want an abiogenesis program.

I'm willing to play with this idea.

Lets say you program the environment, and the ability for life to arise, evolution would begin when life is able to replicate.

A video on abiogenesis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqPGOhXoprU

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2013, 09:25 PM (This post was last modified: 31-03-2013 09:35 PM by Chas.)
RE: Synthetic life.
(31-03-2013 08:25 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(31-03-2013 08:03 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  Sounds like you want a system that starts with out, life functions and then produces life functions? A from of programmed abiogenesis?

If I were to try to answer my challenge, that is the kind of direction I would take.


You are conflating abiogenesis with evolution. The theory of evolution does not encompass the beginning of life.

You made objections to Dawkins's statements on evolution. If you are including abiogenesis, you are no longer answering Dawkins, because he is talking about evolution.

Shall we restrict the discussion to evolution? If not, we're done here.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
31-03-2013, 09:30 PM
RE: Synthetic life.
So, how far have you gone in conveying the truth to him, Chas?

Is he learning? I gave up on this thread when my post went unnoticed.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2013, 09:36 PM (This post was last modified: 31-03-2013 09:43 PM by fstratzero.)
RE: Synthetic life.
(31-03-2013 09:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(31-03-2013 08:25 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  If I were to try to answer my challenge, that is the kind of direction I would take.


You are conflating abiogenesis with evolution. The theory of evolution does not encompass the beginning of life.

Shall we restrict the discussion to evolution? If not, we're done here.

Christians think evolution = big bang, formation of stars/galaxys, star explosions, planet formation, earth, abiogenesis, evolution, humans.

There are a lot of christian ass clowns out there misrepresenting the facts, attacking a strawman version of science.

The funny thing is even if a program produced a digital abiogenesis the same selection pressures would apply. They would adapt to their environment or die off.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2013, 12:41 AM
RE: Synthetic life.
(31-03-2013 09:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(31-03-2013 08:25 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  If I were to try to answer my challenge, that is the kind of direction I would take.


You are conflating abiogenesis with evolution. The theory of evolution does not encompass the beginning of life.

You made objections to Dawkins's statements on evolution. If you are including abiogenesis, you are no longer answering Dawkins, because he is talking about evolution.

Shall we restrict the discussion to evolution? If not, we're done here.

No I am not conflating the two. I understand they are two different processes. But because they are two different processes, that doesn't mean they can't belong to the same system. We got to abiogenesis in discussing how you would go about answering my challenge. How do goals get established without an intellect? The only thing I can think of is they would have to emerge from the system instead of being hard programmed. Even then you would need a means of change and selection otherwise you would not get cumulative selection. In my mind I can envision a simulation where self replicating things emerge, but a simple physics engine wouldn't cut it. You'd have to design some sort on environment in which the physics operated.

The more I ponder this the more contrived it seems.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2013, 12:54 AM
RE: Synthetic life.
(31-03-2013 09:30 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  So, how far have you gone in conveying the truth to him, Chas?

Is he learning? I gave up on this thread when my post went unnoticed.

I noticed it but didn't answer it because at best you were trying to move the goal back and make this a discussion about the judeochristian God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2013, 02:00 AM
RE: Synthetic life.



Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2013, 08:32 AM
RE: Synthetic life.
(01-04-2013 12:54 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(31-03-2013 09:30 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  So, how far have you gone in conveying the truth to him, Chas?

Is he learning? I gave up on this thread when my post went unnoticed.

I noticed it but didn't answer it because at best you were trying to move the goal back and make this a discussion about the judeochristian God.

Ha! No, I was bashing a God Concept of a theistic Deity, not a judeochristian God.

Any theistic god could be put in the quandary and the points would stay the same. Plus, if gods intervened by creating us through Intellegent Design, he/she/ it can only be those two.

Whether or not we have sufficient tech to create life, that doesn't indicate that it happened to us.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2013, 10:55 AM
RE: Synthetic life.
Life has no goals. Individual organisms may, but life has no consciousness to it as a collective entity to set any goals. In the same way that the Earth has no goals, and the universe has no goals.

Life did not originate with any goal and the very first "life" had no goals. It was a chemical process going through more chemical processes and natural selection acted upon it.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: